AT: No longer an impeachment. Now, it’s a railroading

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/no_longer_an_impeachment_now_its_a_railroading.html

AT provides a brief survey of Republican reactions to Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment resolution.

The one criticism that stands out most for me: “The resolution keeps all of the previous Soviet-style basement hearing testimony still secret and non-transparent, with no new questions permitted from Republicans.”

30 thoughts on “AT: No longer an impeachment. Now, it’s a railroading

  1. You know this part is just the indictment, right?

    Discovery, cross examination, etc. comes later in the Republican-controlled Senate where he’ll be found not guilty. I can’t understand why you guys are getting so worked up over this.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. RE: “I can’t understand why you guys are getting so worked up over this.”

      For myself, I hate to see so much public attention being devoted to lies and lie telling.

      Like

        1. RE: “Are you new to politics?”

          Not at all. But I’d say politics today has reached a new and distressing level of unreality.

          Like

        1. RE: “What in the world do you think you are referring to?”

          It is a lie, for example, that the House is engaged in impeachment proceedings. Since there has been no vote to start an impeachment process, no impeachment process currently exists. Many other lies and deceptions flow from that.

          Like

          1. You have a VERY broad definition of a “Lie” if you think that the House is NOT engaged in impeachment proceedings because YOU do not like their Federal Court endorsed procedures. In fact, you simply demonstrate how completely unserious you have to be if you want to continue to support the Impeachee. Unserious or VERY easily horns-waggled.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. RE: “Federal Court endorsed procedures.”

            You mean the court endorsed procedures which are under appeal, meaning the endorsement is currently not applicable?

            Like

          3. The fact that a ruling is under appeal does not change the ruling. Duh.

            Trump attacked the legitimacy of the impeachment process being followed in Federal Court and lost. Period.

            With the vote in the House today, the “issue” will be resolved and the appeal will become moot and, as such, summarily dismissed.

            It still stands that you are egregiously expanding the meaning of the word “Lie.” Maybe you should save it for when lies are actually being told?

            Liked by 1 person

          4. RE: “The fact that a ruling is under appeal does not change the ruling.”

            Of course not. But it means that the ruling may not be constituionally valid.

            RE: “With the vote in the House today, the ‘issue’ will be resolved and the appeal will become moot and, as such, summarily dismissed.”

            That remains to be seen. Some have argued that Pelosi introduced her resolution because the court case you put so much faith in is doomed to fail at the Supreme Court.

            Like

          5. If the Court of Appeals or later SCOTUS overturns the decision issued by the Federal Court THEN you can say that the process so far has been somehow unConstitutional. Until then … this remains a TRUE statement . . .

            “The fact that a ruling is under appeal does not change the ruling.”

            And, in any case, calling the impeachment process a “lie” is simply childish.

            I have already acknowledged that one motive for the vote which passed the House today would be to defang this fake “issue.” Given the politicization of SCOTUS and lacking the sound judicial thinking of a Merrick Garland, it is possible that it would affirm an imperial Presidency without effective Congressional oversight out of loyalty to Dear Leader. This House vote heads off that unlikely but possible disaster by making the issue moot.

            Like

    2. Comparing impeachment to the Grand Jury process of indictment misses a few things.

      Grand Jury proceedings are secret.because the rules of evidence are different, and releasing the proceedings could prejudice a future trial and damage the reputations of people not indicted.

      But Schiff is releasing and leaking tidbits harmful to Trump and Republicans but not allowing exculpatory evidence to reach the press.

      As it is being done, it is a smear campaign under color of authority.

      Either release EVERYTHING or nothing.

      Like

        1. Source please.

          He just made it up. Schiff is a highly disciplined and honorable man who takes his duties very seriously.

          Besides, IF there were ANY exculpatory evidence in any of the depositions and supporting testimony it is a certainty that the Republicans would be shouting it to the high heavens as they came out the door.

          Why would ANYONE be so silly as to think that Trump would order people not to cooperate with the inquiry if they had exculpatory evidence to share?

          Liked by 3 people

          1. I’d hardly consider a House Republican’s (who has bet his career on trump) accusation with zero proof to be a credible source..

            Stating opinions as facts do not make them true.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. Laughably over-the-top nonsense. “Soviet Style?” Really?

    Since the Whistle Blower complaint the Democrats have followed the procedures and rules that the House GOP established in 2015 and used extensively in their “investigations” of the Obama administration.

    Yes, they have been taking depositions and supporting testimony in private. They are trying to keep the content confidential until all the witnesses have been heard from which is SOP to avoid the coordination of evidence. Forty-seven GOP House members are entitled to participate in this “Soviet Style” process and ARE allowed to question the witnesses and will be able to do so again during the public phase of the process.

    They are in the “basement” because that is where the House has a secure facility suitable for discussing matters that may be classified. There is no better example of how GOP plays on weak minds that this constant allusion to the “basement” as if the location of the secure facility means something when it means NOTHING.

    I will note again that all this whinging about the process only shows how the President’s sycophants have neither the facts not the law on their side.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. RE: “Forty-seven GOP House members are entitled to participate in this ‘Soviet Style’ process and ARE allowed to question the witnesses and will be able to do so again during the public phase of the process.”

      Michael McCaul’s tweet speaks to this issue:

      “Before Pelosi’s partisan resolution = 110 Members allowed to participate in investigation

      “After Pelosi’s partisan resolution = 22 Members allowed to participate in investigation

      “Fewer members involved = fewer voices of the American people in this serious matter of impeachment.”

      Overall, I’m inclined to think of impeachment as the public’s business, meaning there are no excuses for secrecy.

      Like

      1. That is a very silly tweet by a very silly partisan. Of course their will be fewer members immediately participating when the investigations by four committees are done. their findings reported and the Judiciary Committee takes over the process. Your latching on to this numerically accurate tweet is a good example of how a easily some people are mislead. Their are 435 members of the House. Should they ALL get five minutes to ask what they want?

        “No excuses for secrecy?”
        Actually there are. One is to avoid cross pollination of the evidence which is always a concern when deposing people. Another is to shield the witnesses from intimidation and retribution. Given the ugly characterizations and threats directed at the people coming forward, this is a genuine concern. GOP House members and their staff have already been trying to out the Whistle Blower by name – an egregiously illegal act in its own right.

        As for an end to the secret proceedings, that will soon be the case. And, the first thought that comes to mind is . . . Be careful what you wish for. The secrecy of the deposition process has shielded Trump from a public airing of very damaging evidence. If there was ANY exculpatory evidence in those depositions and testimony, it is a certainty that the GOP would already be spreading it.

        The secrecy will soon be over and patriotic Americans will be testifying in public about the scurrilous behavior that has lead them to risk their careers – and more – by defying Trump’s impeachable stonewalling orders. Things are only going to get worse for this criminal President and he is dragging the GOP down with him.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. RE: “The secrecy will soon be over and patriotic Americans will be testifying in public about the scurrilous behavior that has lead them to risk their careers – and more – by defying Trump’s impeachable stonewalling orders.”

        I remember hearing the same kind of bold predictions about the Mueller investigation before it fizzled. And about Hillary’s campaign before she lost. And about the election recounts before they confirmed Trump’s victory. Maybe you’ll have better luck this time.

        Like

        1. My “prediction” is a statement of fact – no luck required. The secrecy soon WILL be over and patriotic Americans will be testifying publicly to what they have witnessed that lead them to come forward as a matter of duty.

          You seem to be predicting that such visible and damning evidence will not move the needle toward removing this clown from office. You may be right since you demonstrate that there are indeed many people who care not one whit about the evidence. We will see what happens.

          Liked by 2 people

  3. Whining. Nothing but whining from the Republicans in Congress who don’t get . . . what they want, RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW, dang it! The day-care in the Oval Office is bad enough; now, we get to deal with another day-care set up in the Congress? Give me a break.

    Perhaps had they not joined good old Mitch in 2016 when he refused to allow the Democratic president (as mentioned below) to bring a nomination for the Supreme Court to the floor for a vote, I might feel some grief for the GOP boys and girls. But, sorry, I just can’t.

    They get to have their chance later. Whining nonstop now won’t make them or their dear leader look one bit better.

    As Mr. Obama said a couple days ago, albeit, about an entirely different topic, but which works perfectly here . . . ” . . . [they, the GOP] should get over that quickly.”

    Why would legislators NOT on certain committees, anyway, get to sit in on those committees’ investigations and hearings, anyway? They’re not leading the impeachment inquiry and haven’t supported it in any way, shape or form.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. RE: “Why would legislators NOT on certain committees, anyway, get to sit in on those committees’ investigations and hearings, anyway?”

      One possibility is that the House has a written rule book. One of the general rules is that any Congressman may attend any hearing. Committees can write their own rules of proceeding, but the principle of transparency is the default in the top-level manual.

      Like

      1. BULL! The rules were written by the GOP in 2015 and members not on committees do NOT have a “top-level” right to attend closed meetings of committees taking depositions that they do not sit on. That is something that you or somebody who has fooled you just made up.

        There is a fine historical example of this FACT when none other than Trey Gowdy removed fellow Republican Darryl Issa from a closed meeting for the Benghazi deposition of Sidney Blumenthal.

        https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/watch-trey-gowdy-on-why-he-had-to-give-darrell-issa-the-boot

        Liked by 3 people

  4. The GOP in Congress with the aid of ‘djt’ have withheld all documents the House has asked for and thumbed their nose at supoenas.

    So, you’re going to do better than throw around ‘rules’ and ‘regs’ at this point.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s