Impeachment strategies: Let's help Nancy!

Politics & Elections
21

[QUOTE=pool;2190122… I feel like this is all just political theater when that will accomplish nothing of real substance, better to just suck it up for one more year, he hasn’t done anything that can’t be undone, win the next election, and if appropriate let him face charges from the state level if crimes occurred.

I think Trump being impeached, removed from office, and being imprisoned or something by the Feds is nothing but pure fantasy.[/QUOTE]

Your path is pragmatic and might be the best from that perspective. Seems like we need to lay down a marker, though, to show that *some *things are out of bounds. Basically I think trump must pay a price for his publicly acknowledged evil deeds.

22

What is your squik level? How many high crimes can he freely commit? How much blatant bribery can you ignore? He has bragged of obstruction; of conspiring with foreign agents violating federal election laws before and during his term; of dealing with (sucking up to) mafiyas foreign and domestic; and so much more. How much is enough? Inciting violence against Americans - are you okay with more of that?

What makes you think he would willingly quit the Oval Office without blanket amnesty? Defeated, he’ll immediately be indicted and jailed without bail by state and federal prosecutors; convicted, he’ll rot and die in prison. Do you think he would go quietly?

Do you think no vile evidence could be enough to flip ~20 GOP senators? How about financials revealing his ownership by unfriendly powers and his explicit treason? I fear he’ll stage an emergency and declare martial law if such revelations seem imminent. So yes, he may indeed escape conviction by the Senate. But expect blood.

23

Going by this argument - the president has free rein (reign?) now and forever to do whatever he wishes.

Shouldn’t action be taken to prove that your system works, that America is a ruled by laws?

24

One way Democrats could make impeachment more palatable to Republicans would be to sell it as, “We are after Trump and Trump only - once we get him out of office together, we’ll be peaceful and cooperate with the next president (be it Pence or some Gerald Ford-like new VP.)”

If the GOP believes that the Democrats are out to get any president with ® attached to his name, Trump or not, then there is much less, if any, incentive to cooperate.

25

How does that work post merrick garland?

It’s good for democracy if the dems don’t fight and the repubs cheat?

26

Stick around.

27

Velocity wasn’t suggesting what the Democrats should do, just what they should “sell it as.”

28

One strategy may be that when whomever decides to ignore a subpoena, call the cops on them. Like we do every day in every state of this country.

29

Yes. Over in another thread, HurricaneDitka posted a link to a letter from Trump lawyers to Pelosi et al., demanding the impeachment investigation be conducted according to rules of “due process” (Trump gets to interrogate witnesses, etc.).

I don’t they they really want to go there…do they really want this to be like a real-world criminal investigation and trial?

30

Yes, and make sure the press is there to capture the arrests.

31

But that’s not happening. Why? Why the hell not? It’s a federal subpoena, I suppose, so call the local police where the person lives and have them taken in by FBI if necessary. I do not see why the hell this is so hard.

32

If it were an actual option, it would be extremely foolish for President Trump to not avail himself of it. Our criminal proceedings have substantial protections built into them for the accused. An incomplete list would be:
Requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt
A chance to face one’s accuser(s)
Protections against double jeopardy
Warrant requirements for (most / some) searches
A right against self-incrimination
A (supposedly) impartial judge and jury
Etc

33

IANAL, but I think the short answer is that there are some fairly substantial executive privilege issues at play.

34

Oh yes, I’m glad you mentioned this right alongside your post of Trump’s rights under criminal proceedings.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from watching Law and Order, the accused always gets to remain silent, have his lawyers ask questions during the consideration of indictments, can’t be compelled to provide any evidence, and can prohibit the testimony of witnesses if they were going to talk about private conversations. You know, the very standard and totally perfect trial procedures that should apply to the House.

35

So we can give up the “President cannot be indicted” decision? I’m in.

36

That might be the talking point of the moment, but you don’t really believe this is how it works, right? You don’t have to be a lawyer to see how awfully convenient that idea is to a law-breaking president.

37

Perhaps you can at least try expanding upon that view, so it’s distinguishable from Individual-1’s use of the term to mean “fuck off”.

38

Yes this would be deeply satisfying but it could backfire. In terms of dictatorial actions, jailing political enemies is a step above what Trump has done so far. Highly publicized arrests could be viewed by some as evidence that the Democrats are even worse than Trump.

That said, there needs to be some punishment for failing to accede to court ordered disclosures, and I suspect that for Trump’s lakeys their loyalty relies entirely on their personal interests, and won’t extend to cooling their heels in jail for a significant period. So, yes threaten them with jail if they violate court orders, and grant it if they don’t comply, but keep it on the down low, and hope they come to their senses soon.

39

OK let’s start with a simple one. How are Trumps tax returns covered by executive privilege?

40

I think it’s an open question whether they are or not. We’ll have to wait and see what the courts decide. The arguments President Trump’s lawyers advanced is available here.