Well folks, it looks like we have another fine mess going on here. We are in uncharted territory here. And like all uncharted territory, It is cause for quite the discussion. At the heart of it is Nancy Pelosi. And the question we have is, Since she did not send the articles to either the President or the Senate, Has the president actually been charged?
Let me start out by a simplistic definition of the word impeachment. Impeachment in the most simple of terms means to charge someone with a crime.
Now if we were to liken this to a civilian judicial procedure we would go thru this. The grand Jury(the house) votes to charge someone on the charges brought to them. At this point they are not yet indicted. This is the job of the prosecutor. The prosecutor (Nancy) would then formally charge by informing the accused and the court(senate) of the charges.
Now comes the baily wick we are in. The prosecutor has not formally informed the accused nor the judge(senate) of formal charges.(She has not sent them on).
Let us not forget also that this is also a bill from the house (hr 755). Does that add anything to the conversation? If a bill is not passed out of the house, is it still considered done? If the house votes in a bill but the speaker does not like it, does she actually have the power to hold a bill? To in effect, perform a pocket veto? Is she required to send it out of the house within a certain time period? There are more questions than answers. Again uncharted territory. when have you ever heard of a speaker holding a bill that was passed by the house? Interesting fact I found while attempting to research the above. The house can rescind the speakers signature on a bill. But I found nothing so far that tells me a time limit or if the speaker actually has the power to hold a bill. Although most of the reading I did see was to give the speaker only limited powers. In effect, If the house has voted on it she has to forward it. But I can find no corresponding precedents.
So here we are, stuck in the mud, attempting to figure out if it is , or is not.
Well folks, I have been looking at things and it don’t look good for the democrats on this impeachment. you see, Timing is everything.
Lets look at this starting from this past week as an example.
We had that charade of a judicial hearing with the 4 scholars on Tuesday. During which Nadler would not specify if there were going to be any more hearings or what the next step would be. The republicans asked for a minority day.(they wont get one obviously)
On Thursday Pelosi told the judiciary to draw up the articles of impeachment.
On Friday afternoon Nadler announces the Monday meeting to accept the intel committee report and start the articles.
Trump was not due to answer the committee until Friday at 5pm.(which he did).His response was all he could do. He saw that this was a fait accomplis. and that nothing he could say or do would sway them.
Saturday Nadler issues his letter (30 pages) that just had to have been written during the week. in it he gives all kinds of stuff and the possible charges.
on Saturday and sunday the democrats were in conference planning and rehearsing what would go on Monday.
Nadler has scheduled no further witness’s, no further witness hearings, and has scheduled the articles for release on Wednesday.
Nadler on Saturday dumped a load of documents that were requested by the democrats a month ago, leaving them little time to go thru them in time for Monday. Also on Saturday in that letter, Nadler changed the charges and everything else including how they were going to proceed and what rules were going to be used. He decided to use stuff all the way back to the bad Mueller report. Not just the call and the money.
oh guess what else happens next week? on Monday the fisa report comes out, and wed Barr goes before the committee to talk about it.
Still think this is fair? Still think this was not preplanned? Still think they are not doing this no matter what? Would they be doing this in this fashion if they actually had any evidence? The democrats said they wanted him impeached before CHRISTS mass, well they are doing it even if they get their timing all wrong. How sad for them. One would think after 30 years of doing this they could do it better?
Do we have a bigger problem than did trump hold the money for a statement?
I think we do. In the hearings that had a lot of the career diplomats testify about what was happening, If you listened you would hear some troubling things. Things like we Didn’t like Trumps agenda, He had no clue, he didn’t follow the talking points we laid out for him. A lot more like that from just about every witness. They were pretty much agahst that he would ask for an investigation into a crime, some saying that he did it wrong , we have procedures for that. We had ambassadors that were saying that the President, while he had the power to, was wrong for reassigning Yavonovich. It appeared that they were all annoyed that the President actually had an agenda that went against theirs, that they really did not support their leader.
Yes there is a lot of preparation to a Presidential call. A lot of things that are agreed to by both sides. But does that mean that the President has to stick to what one set of briefers tell him? For any call I am sure the President gets talking points and briefings by more than just one group. When the President talks about something different than the one group briefed him on, is that not his privilege? Yet here we have that one group mad because he did not follow the talking points. Is it not their job to provide him with their thoughts, then follow his lead? This is not what I saw, I saw a group of people that were mad that they now had to deal with what he said.
Does the President in fact have a major problem with the people that are supposed to support him? Not only in the diplomatic corp. but in other executive departments? Is it any wonder that the President might send out “civilians” to various places to investigate facts that he is being given? How can the President work in such an environment? And yet President Trump appears to be doing a pretty good job in my opinion.
I am not the greatest writer so bear with me.
when you thank a vet and they shrink and shyly say your welcome, do not think it is you or that they have heard it too many times. It is not that. for some of us it is a feeling that we don’t deserve the praise you are giving us. some of us were peace time and did little more than our job, some in the states , some overseas. we feel that we did nothing spectacular. yes we signed the check, took the oath (which some of us still feel bound to), but feel we did so little for the country. It is not that our jobs weren’t needed or anything. But we feel we did nothing extraordinary. nothing special.
Then there were the men and women that did do that which deserves the thanks and did so much more than what you can imagine, that they want to forget the burden on their hearts. this is one of those tuff days as we remember our brothers and sisters many of whom never made it back.
So when you see us quietly say your welcome, it is not you, it is us. we have many reasons that we shyly say those 2 words and don’t want to take those gifts like free meals that you offer(that we do thank you for).
accepted procedures for impeachment in the house (not hard and fast rules but what is precedent and accepted)
this is the relevant part though that was NOT followed thru –
Under the modern practice, an impeachment is normally instituted
by the House by the adoption of a resolution calling for a committee
investigation of charges against the officer in question. This
committee may, after investigation, recommend the dismissal of charges
or it may recommend impeachment. Impeachment–Selected Materials,
Committee on the Judiciary, H. Doc. No. 93-7, Oct. 1973, p 699. A
resolution recommending impeachment is reported to the House
simultaneously with the articles of impeachment setting forth the
grounds for the proposed action. Sec. 8, infra. Following the adoption
of a resolution to impeach, the House appoints managers to conduct the
impeachment trial in the Senate. The Senate is then informed of these
facts by resolution. Manual Sec. 607; Deschler Ch 14 Sec. 9. When this
resolution reaches the Senate, the Senate advises the House as to when
the Senate will receive the managers appointed by the House. The
managers then present themselves and the impeachment articles to the
Senate, the House reserving the right to file additional articles
later. Manual Sec. 608a; Deschler Ch 14 Sec. Sec. 10, 11.
Initiation of Charges
In most cases, impeachment proceedings in the House have been
initiated either by introducing a resolution of impeachment through
the hopper or by offering a resolution of impeachment on the floor as
a question of the privileges of the House. Manual Sec. 603; Deschler
Ch 14 Sec. 5.
house rules specify that everything has to be brought to the floor and recorded by the clerk before it can be refered to the committee. the SOH has no authority to unilaterally initiate an inquiry.
as there are no official rules for impeachment, house rules and precedent apply.
The latest political flap has some very troubling reverberations if followed thru. There is a very big danger that the whole of the whistle blower legislation and trust could be broken like a twig IF the democratically controlled judiciary committee has it’s way. If they force the whistle blower to testify, then the whole of the anonaminity part of the program will be thrown out. There is a guarantee that when you report something at this level you will not be identified. I leave you to think about that for a bit.
In the mean time here is another thought. Just how is the media able to report that in this case, Trump asked the Ukraine Pres. 8 times to investigate Biden??????? I mean it was a secure call, transcripts never released, congress has not even seen it. And here we are to believe this stuff? and then there is the latest point that came out??? that the whistle blower was not directly involved in the phone call??? huh??? a 3rd person whistle blow? So just where is the media getting it’s information from? a better spy network than the cia???? Or a planted release by the left?
So a recap of where we are at?
Biden’s son gets a give me job with a gas company, making a LOT of money for doing nothing. the gas company comes under investigation by the Ukraine govt. at or about the same time, as the VP Biden calls for the ouster of the prosecutor and threatens to withhold a billion dollars. And we are told that other governments wanted the prosecutor gone too. Years later Biden boasts that he got the Ukraine prosecutor fired. fast forward a bit, as President, Trump talks to the Ukraine President and supposedly (we don’t know we haven’t seen the tapes yet) asks him to look into the bit with Biden getting the Prosecutor fired due to his son. He claims no quid pro quo. six months later we hear of a whistle blower complaint(where did that leak start???) that never made it to congress like they think it should have? Now hearing that DOJ determined that it did not meet the criteria for a congressional notification. And now we have the left calling for impeachment of the President for him simply asking(did he or didn’t he?) the Ukraine Pres. to look into it, claiming that Trump was doing this as a political ploy against Biden. It seems that is the big outrage we are hearing, nothing about the possible underhanded and maybe unlawful threat by Biden.
And all of this, based on top secret information?
This seems to be a pattern. Trump will hear about something, will ask for an investigation, the dems get outraged, call for his impeachment. The original investigation gets sidelined and its all about how Trump did something that may have been wrong.