LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:42 pm Why is everyone so opposed to an inquiry into Burisma & US influence peddling ?
The govt of Ukraine gladly gave the DNC & Ms Chalupa the goods on Manafort.
Why the selective curiosity about Ukrainian lobbying & influence peddling ?

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review. In the court of public opinion, this means squat.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty?

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:42 pm Why is everyone so opposed to an inquiry into Burisma & US influence peddling ?
The govt of Ukraine gladly gave the DNC & Ms Chalupa the goods on Manafort.
Why the selective curiousty about Ukrainian lobbying & influence peddling ?

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty? I'm here all night.

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:34 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:32 pm Any of the guys like YouthAthletics want to tell us that this is still no big deal?

So Bill Taylor and Gordon Sondland and the whistleblower said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens, but OTOH Mick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens. Hard to know what to think.

The former ambassador Yovanovich had been treated poorly, caught in a political machinations both in Kyiv and Washington

Ambassador Sondland to me that he had recommended to President Zelenskyy that he use the phrase "I will leave no stone unturned" with regard to "investigations" When President Zelenskyy spoke with Trump

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty? I'm here all night.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:52 pm

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:34 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:32 pm Any of the guys like YouthAthletics want to tell us that this is still no big deal?

So Bill Taylor and Gordon Sondland and the whistleblower said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens, but OTOH Mick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens. Hard to know what to think.

Page 3 Paragraph 4

The former ambassador Yovanovich had been treated poorly, caught in a political machinations both in Kyiv and Washington

The 2nd paragraph on page 8 is also quite interesting, which happened on July 20th. Before the phone conversation.

Ambassador Sondland to me that he had recommended to President Zelenskyy that he use the phrase "I will leave no stone unturned" with regard to "investigations" When President Zelenskyy spoke with Trump

I honestly am torn. To me, we are witness to the cruelties of politics and certainly there is an argument for the legal portion of these events.

This entire sequence of events just seems like being in the trenches of political warfare. And if the argument that impeachment does not necessarily require a violation of a statute....well then political negotiations can also be crass.

Someone here made reference to being subjective. Mr. William Taylor came in this chaos right at the term of the the new Ukraine President, so he may also have also missed much of he backstory leg work that was already set in motion.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:53 pm John Podhoretz, republican commentator claims today is the worst day for Orange Duce's presidency.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:57 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:52 pm

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:34 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:32 pm Any of the guys like YouthAthletics want to tell us that this is still no big deal?

So Bill Taylor and Gordon Sondland and the whistleblower said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens, but OTOH Mick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens. Hard to know what to think.

Page 3 Paragraph 4

The former ambassador Yovanovich had been treated poorly, caught in a political machinations both in Kyiv and Washington

The 2nd paragraph on page 8 is also quite interesting, which happened on July 20th. Before the phone conversation.

Ambassador Sondland to me that he had recommended to President Zelenskyy that he use the phrase "I will leave no stone unturned" with regard to "investigations" When President Zelenskyy spoke with Trump

I honestly am torn. To me, we are witness to the cruelties of politics and certainly there is an argument for the legal portion of these events.

This entire sequence of events just seems like being in the trenches of political warfare. And if the argument that impeachment does not necessarily require a violation of a statute....well then political negotiations can also be crass.

Someone here made reference to being subjective. Mr. William Taylor came in this chaos right at the term of the the new Ukraine President, so he may also have also missed much of he backstory leg work that was already set in motion.

You're really going to hang your hat on that?

tech37 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:58 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:53 pm John Podhoretz, republican commentator claims today is the worst day for Orange Duce's presidency.

Have any fellatio jokes for us tonight 72?

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:52 pm I honestly am torn. To me, we are witness to the cruelties of politics and certainly there is an argument for the legal portion of these events.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:57 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:52 pm

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:34 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:32 pm Any of the guys like YouthAthletics want to tell us that this is still no big deal?

So Bill Taylor and Gordon Sondland and the whistleblower said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens, but OTOH Mick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump said aid to Ukraine was conditioned on investigating the Bidens. Hard to know what to think.

Page 3 Paragraph 4

The former ambassador Yovanovich had been treated poorly, caught in a political machinations both in Kyiv and Washington

The 2nd paragraph on page 8 is also quite interesting, which happened on July 20th. Before the phone conversation.

Ambassador Sondland to me that he had recommended to President Zelenskyy that he use the phrase "I will leave no stone unturned" with regard to "investigations" When President Zelenskyy spoke with Trump

I honestly am torn. To me, we are witness to the cruelties of politics and certainly there is an argument for the legal portion of these events.

This entire sequence of events just seems like being in the trenches of political warfare. And if the argument that impeachment does not necessarily require a violation of a statute....well then political negotiations can also be crass.

Someone here made reference to being subjective. Mr. William Taylor came in this chaos right at the term of the the new Ukraine President, so he may also have also missed much of he backstory leg work that was already set in motion.

You're really going to hang your hat on that?

Troll

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:56 pm ...& precedent means nothing in your profession ? You see no long term implications or opportunity for abuse ?

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:00 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:58 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:53 pm John Podhoretz, republican commentator claims today is the worst day for Orange Duce's presidency.

Have any fellatio jokes for us tonight 72?

Just you.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:56 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty? I'm here all night.

...& precedent means nothing in your profession ? You see no long term implications or opportunity for abuse ?

What if your Banana Republicans regain a House majority ? I'm sure you'd be fine with this.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:00 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:52 pm I honestly am torn. To me, we are witness to the cruelties of politics and certainly there is an argument for the legal portion of these events.

Ok.

Maybe this will help. I think I can safely speak for the rest of the board, and see if I can help cut through the chaff....

If Trump had called the Ukr. President and said "I want you to investigate any corruption in your country that may have involved Americans"?

No one here would complain. Not only is that legal.... it's Trump's job. Further, as a secondary matter, none of us would have any issues with Trump withholding funds if Trump thought corruption was too severe, and those funds would be pointless.

But that's not what Trump did.


Trump waited until Biden was running for POTUS, and then he asked the Ukr. President to investigate Biden by name.


See the difference? One, he's doing his job. The other, he's using his power as President to go after a political rival.

And Trump TOLD YOU he did this. That fact is not up for debate.


Does that help?

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:06 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:56 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty? I'm here all night.

...& precedent means nothing in your profession ? You see no long term implications or opportunity for abuse ?

What if your Banana Republicans regain a House majority ? I'm sure you'd be fine with this.

Sure, why not. You have a problem with the Grand Jury mechanism? The republican House members are there, free to ask questions and observe just like the democrats. What they can't do is mug for the cameras, obstruct and distract for their base voters. Time enough for that when it goes to trial in the Senate - if Roberts will allow them to.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:06 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:56 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:45 pm

Where in the Constitution does it say that the House will act as a secret Grand Jury for Impeachment proceedings ?

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House is given the power and authority to proceed however it feels is best suited for the task. Which is what they are doing. Although never litigated, the unanimous view is that the House's sole power of impeachment is a political question and, therefore, not subject to judicial review.

The Senate then has the "sole power" to try impeachments. SCOTUS has ruled on this one -- the Senate's "sole power" to try impeachments is not justiciable. Nixon v. United States (1993).

Any other questions Salty? I'm here all night.

...& precedent means nothing in your profession ? You see no long term implications or opportunity for abuse ?

What if your Banana Republicans regain a House majority ? I'm sure you'd be fine with this.

Sure, why not. You have a problem with the Grand Jury mechanism? The republican House members are there, free to ask questions and observe just like the democrats. What they can't do is mug for the cameras, obstruct and distract for their base voters. Time enough for that when it goes to trial in the Senate - if Roberts will allow them to.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:48 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:42 pm Why is everyone so opposed to an inquiry into Burisma & US influence peddling ?
The govt of Ukraine gladly gave the DNC & Ms Chalupa the goods on Manafort.
Why the selective curiousty about Ukrainian lobbying & influence peddling ?

1. Trump "forgot" to do this until Joe Biden declared his candidacy. Got a reason for that? And is the Ukraine the only country where
there might be US influence peddling? Great. So show me those investigations first. Then I'll buy the idea that this is important work.

2. If the Ukraine is really this corrupt, you can't trust one single piece of "evidence" we turn up, good or bad. It's pointless to do this.

3. Putin is there. So anything that is reported will have his disinformation campaign all over it. That's bad.

4. That's not what Trump asked for. Trump didn't ask for an investigation into US corruption. He asked for an investigation into Joe Biden. As you and I discussed before, these are not the same things.