Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

wesw wrote:jim, y0u l0st y0ur party.

it is g0ne.
Ain't that the truth:
The Republicans have become the party of Russia. This makes me sick.

Of all the changes that have occurred in our politics since the rise of Donald Trump, the most gut-wrenching for me personally is to see the Republican Party transformed into the Kremlin’s “useful idiots.” As a young refugee from the Soviet Union growing up in Southern California in the 1980s, I was attracted to the GOP because it was the party of moral clarity — the party willing to stand up to the “evil empire.” How far we have come — in the wrong direction.

Today, we have a Republican president who, while reluctantly acceding to sanctions against Russia, incessantly praises its dictator, Vladimir Putin (“a terrific person”); tries to bring Putin back to the Group of Seven; conceals the details of their meetings; undermines Ukraine, a victim of Russian aggression, by harping on its corruption while ignoring Russia’s own kleptocracy; allows the Russians to take possession of U.S. bases in Syria; and propagates Russian propaganda blaming Ukraine for 2016 election interference. Trump is joined in spreading Russian disinformation by his secretary of state and other supporters, such as Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.), even though the U.S. intelligence community has exposed claims of Ukrainian election interference as a “fictional narrative.”

Fox News host Tucker Carlson, one of the biggest stars on the president’s favorite television network and an informal adviser to the president, goes even further in expressing his admiration for Russia. Last week, he said: “Why do I care what is going on in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia?! And I’m serious. Why do I care? Why shouldn’t I root for Russia? Which I am.” Carlson claimed to be joking. But then this week, he said: “We should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine. That’s my view.”

How did we get to the point where a “conservative” TV star openly sides with an anti-American dictatorship over a pro-American democracy? Most, but not all, of the blame lies with Trump. His affinity for Russia is as deep as it is mysterious. Has he been compromised by Russian intelligence? Is he financially dependent on Russian business partners? Or does he simply admire the way that Putin has destroyed Russian democracy? We still don’t know, because special counsel Robert S. Mueller III did not release any findings from the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation.

But while Trump’s motives remain murky, his admiration for Russia has been clear from the start. Almost exactly four years ago — on Dec. 18, 2015 — Trump was asked by MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough about Putin’s habit of killing journalists and invading neighboring countries. Trump defended Putin as “a leader, unlike what we have in this country,” and said, “Our country does plenty of killing, too, Joe.”

Republicans knew this but nominated Trump anyway. Then, during the summer of 2016, came the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee, a social media blitz, and other actions designed to change the outcome of the U.S. election. Trump made full use of the stolen DNC emails and he invited Russian intelligence to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails, too (“Russia, if you’re listening”). He also hired a campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, who had a long history of corrupt dealings with Russian oligarchs, and gutted the language concerning Russia in the Republican platform.

The Republican Party could not have cared less. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) refused to join the Obama administration in condemning Russia’s attack on our election. The GOP thus became complicit in Russian election interference.

In for a kopek, in for a ruble: The Republicans continued defending Trump even after it emerged that he had tried to build a Trump Tower in Moscow while running for president and that members of his campaign’s high command had met with Russian emissaries promising dirt on Clinton. Republicans were not even fazed when Trump fired FBI Director James B. Comey in May 2017 to stop the investigation of “this Russia thing,” or when in July 2018 he was utterly supine before Putin in Helsinki.

While Republicans are primarily motivated by Trump toadyism, there is also an element of ideological affinity for Russia. While all Republicans were staunchly opposed to the “godless” Soviet regime, some of them admire Putin’s fascist regime, which combines crony capitalism with ultra-nationalism. Putin has marketed himself to credulous conservatives as a champion of Christianity, traditional values and the white race. As my Post colleague Christian Caryl noted, this propaganda has no basis in fact: To take but two examples, Russia has much stricter gun control laws than the United States and a much higher rate of abortion. But Republican Russophilia is so strong that a Russian agent had no difficulty in infiltrating the National Rifle Association. A high-level NRA delegation visited Moscow in 2015 and a group of Republican lawmakers visited Moscow on the Fourth of July 2018.

The percentage of Republicans who view Russia as an ally has nearly doubled since Trump took office. The party’s transformation into a Russian lickspittle makes me sick; “GOP” might as well stand for “Gang of Putin.”

That so many Republicans are just fine with it is yet another sign of how a once-grand party has lost its way. By turning into apologists and advocates for a Russian dictator, the Republican Party has become all that it once despised.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5733
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Chief Justice John Roberts will preside at the impeachment trial. It's unclear to me how much he runs it and how much McConnell is in charge (e.g., rules about calling witnesses) so we'll see how it goes.

Every year Roberts (a GW Bush appointee) does a year-end review of the judiciary. I don't know if this is a standard practice or Roberts' own idea. In this year's review was an interesting passage (I am quoting the NYT report): (You can access the report from the NYT link.)
The chief justice singled out, but did not name, a colleague, praising his exemplary educational work. “As just one example,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “the current chief judge of the District of Columbia Circuit has, over the past two decades, quietly volunteered as a tutor at a local elementary school, inspiring his court colleagues to join in the effort.”

That judge is Merrick B. Garland, who was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in 2016 but denied a hearing by Senate Republicans. Mr. Trump appointed Justice Neil M. Gorsuch to fill the vacancy.
I wonder if McConnell and Trump have read his review. (I'm guessing yes and no.) But even if they do there is no guarantee that they will get the reference.

The only current and recent Justices who get name checked in his review are Sandra Day O'Connor, William Kennedy (indirectly) and Sonya Sotomayor. Interesting.

I disagree with a lot of what Roberts has done. (I think that Citizens United - for which Kennedy wrote the opinion and Roberts, as Chief Justice, assented, will be a long term misshaper of the country's politics.) But I think he will be fair at the impeachment trial.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Sue U »

ex-khobar Andy wrote:Chief Justice John Roberts will preside at the impeachment trial. It's unclear to me how much he runs it and how much McConnell is in charge (e.g., rules about calling witnesses) so we'll see how it goes.
Judges in any proceeding are bound by the rules of the forum; they do not operate as independent fact-finders or arbiters (unless the rules specifically provide for those functions). No rules have yet been written for Trump's Senate trial, and as the majority leader, McConnell is very much in charge of what rules are ultimately adopted (hence the current delay in transmitting the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate). In this respect, Roberts is pretty much the GOP's ideal presiding judge for the trial, with his view that judges are only supposed to "call balls and strikes" under the applicable rules, and not inject their own ideas of what justice may require. So you can be sure that whatever rules McConnell ultimately allows, Roberts will follow them to the letter.

Also, keep in mind that even though this proceeding is called a "trial," it has virtually nothing in common with trial proceedings as they are conducted in actual courts of law. In "real" courts, the judge's primary function is to rule on the admissibility of evidence to be presented to the jury, and to instruct the jury in how to consider that evidence (burden of proof, weight of evidence, direct vs. circumstantial, facts vs. argument, etc.) when applying the law. One thing that is certain is that there will be virtually none of that in the impeachment trial, since an impeachment trial is purely a political process to decide the President's fitness for continuing in office. The Senators' job as a "jury" is to make the judgment as to whether the offenses outlined by the House occurred and, more importantly, justify removal from office. And I don't think there are any rules that could be adopted that might affect any Senator's opinion on the issue.
GAH!

Big RR
Posts: 14657
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Big RR »

I agree impeachment is a political act; to that end, as I recall during the Clinton impeachment Senate hearings, the Senators could overrule any ruling of the Chief Justice by a majority vote.

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Econoline »

Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Sue U »

Impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump, Day 1:

"Impeachment? Sounds serious. We don't want to see any documents, hear any witnesses or consider any other actual evidence, though. Also, we're making up the rules as we go along."

Gah.
GAH!

Big RR
Posts: 14657
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Big RR »

Sadly, it's what I expected; but I did note that the Senate couldn't continue to refuse to admit the house record into evidence. Hardly a big victory to ensure a proper trial, but it is a victory for even a modicum of common sense.

User avatar
RayThom
Posts: 8604
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Longwood Gardens PA 19348

Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by RayThom »

This Senate Impeachment "TRIAL"... what a farce.

The way I understood the process is the House acts like a Grand Jury. They weigh copious amounts of evidence and once satisfied with all aspects of that evidence presented -- and agreed upon -- they then hand down the Articles of Impeachment which is ostensibly equal to a GJ indictment. And then a trial for the defense must commence.

Lawyers and witnesses are gathered and/or subpoenaed for BOTH sides and each side presents their case with any new evidence that will bolster their argument. This whole Senate trial breaks down due to no voir dire and no way to flush out tainted and/or biased jurors. Under the circumstances it's nothing more than an assumed "NOT GUILTY" herd mentality with no ability to change minds, or to prosecute a legal bona fide case.

The only way to rid ourselves of our Grifter-in-Chief is to vote him out of office which, at this moment, is going to be a steep, uphill, battle. I feel all my thoughts and prayers to somehow remove the Orange Menace have fallen to the wayside.

Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani.
Image
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.” 

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5733
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

I'm watching the impeachment trial. Unfortunately, in my view, Rep Sylvia Garcia is a poor manager. She reads her stuff with almost no emphasis and it is very difficult to follow her reasoning. Schiff is pretty good; and Jerry Nadler is almost as bad as Garcia.

It's surprising to me in many ways but you would think that the stock in trade of a politician would be to be persuasive. Many of the witnesses, such as Fiona Hill, Ambassador Volker - to cite only two - were far more able to talk in a cadenced way emphasizing the points of interest.

This is important.

Jason Crow is speaking now. I don't know if it's because he is better prepared but he is able to speak and get across the points he is making.

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Econoline »

Trump (saying the quiet part out loud)(again) confesses to brags about obstruction of justice (again):
“I thought our team did a very good job. But honestly, we have all the material. They don’t have the material.”
RayThom wrote:
Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani.
Yeah.Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by wesw »

well, 1 h0ur int0 the defense and the pr0secuti0ns case is destroyed already.

easy peasy.

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by wesw »

...and an extra h0ur f0r g00d measure, and enj0y y0ur lunches, we ll see ya m0nday.....

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

wesw wrote:well, 1 h0ur int0 the defense and the pr0secuti0ns case is destroyed already.

easy peasy.
Care to identify three arguments presented by the defense that you found compelling?
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 14975
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Joe Guy »

I think I can answer for wesw. Although I didn't watch or hear the testimony, the defense argued that Trump committed no crime, Biden is corrupt and this whole impeachment deal is a hoax.

Burning Petard
Posts: 4452
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Burning Petard »

I really wonder about the POTUS/Hannity/GOP rhetoric. So the whole impeachment thing is hoax? Are they telling me that Chief Justice Roberts and Midnite Mitchell are taking up all that prime tv time as a joke, jest, prank? Reminds me of the legend about PT Barnum and "This Way to the Egress"

Or is it another example of the contempt that same group has for their own 'base'?

snailgate

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17076
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

Post Reply