# The Trump Impeachment Inquiry **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 24, 2019, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771 "2019-09-24T20:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 140
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2781 "2019-10-15T20:25:26Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > As George Conway noted today: “Someone calls 911 because they hear shots down the street at the bank. The cops show up at the bank, and sure enough, it’s been robbed, and there are numerous witnesses there who saw the crime. The suspect confesses. Normally, at this point, no one cares about who called 911.” Well, the mob boss who sent the guy to rob the bank certainly does want to know who called 911. Because the mob boss might just want to send some of his business associates around to have a little chat with this witness… ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Colossus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.colossus/32/9423_2.png) [@Dr.Colossus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Colossus)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2782 "2019-10-15T20:34:34Z")
> [@MulderMuffin](#): > > And, it’s confirmed. > > [https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/15/politics/rudy-giuliani-jon-sale-impeachment/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F](https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/15/politics/rudy-giuliani-jon-sale-impeachment/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F) > > His lawyer apparently delivered the letter and quit. Huh. The article implies that Rudy can’t afford the estimated $1m retainer for a lawyer. > [@](#): > > “Taking on a criminal attorney would likely cost Giuliani something close to $1 million, according to people in New York legal circles. That could be difficult for Giuliani, who admitted earlier this year that he had to take a $100,000 loan from another of Trump’s lawyers Marc Mukasey as a result of his ongoing divorce proceedings, according to a report from Bloomberg.” Could Orange Daddy Warbucks pay for his lawyer’s lawyer out of his campaign donations? Would that violate campaign finance laws? ---
**Author:** ![Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b487fb/32.png) [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walken_After_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2783 "2019-10-15T20:39:21Z")
_[The Hill](https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1184188825783996416)_: > [@](#): > > Reporter: “20 years ago, you said not complying with a subpoena was an impeachable offense.” > > Sen. Lindsey Graham: “Nothing’s changed.” ---
**Author:** ![MulderMuffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldermuffin/32/2862_2.png) [@MulderMuffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MulderMuffin)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2784 "2019-10-15T20:41:44Z")
> [@Dr.Colossus](#): > > Huh. The article implies that Rudy can’t afford the estimated $1m retainer for a lawyer. > > Could Orange Daddy Warbucks pay for his lawyer’s lawyer out of his campaign donations? Would that violate campaign finance laws? Of course! He can do anything he wants to. Haven’t you heard him say so? /s ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2785 "2019-10-15T21:05:01Z")
> [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](#): > > _[The Hill](https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1184188825783996416)_: When I read the quote I thought: Hmm. Does that mean that he’d consider voting appropriately? Then I clicked the link and saw how fast he got-the-fuck-outta-there’d after that question. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2786 "2019-10-15T21:15:59Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > 1. Trump asked his personal attorney to engage in official state business. > 2. Trump used his official position to ask heads of state to work with his personal attorney. > 3. Trump’s personal attorney has no official role in the executive branch and is therefore not subject to any of the usual checks and balances on foreign policy activities. > 4. The official state business involved persuading foreign governments to investigate the family of Trump’s political rival. > 5. A pro-Trump PAC received funds from Ukrainian businessmen who are now in jail on charges of election fraud. > 6. Trump’s personal attorney received half a million dollars from these Ukrainian businessmen during the time that he was in Ukraine unofficially conducting US government business. > > Is that right? Answer the question whichever way you see fit. I have a lot of catching up to do, but if we assume _arguendo_ that points 4-6 are fine, points 1-3 are also fine. There is a rich, rich history of Presidents appointing so-called “personal representatives” to do official state business, with hundreds if not thousands of instances and many of them quite important to the history of the world. I believe the first instance was David Humphreys, a personal friend and private citizen appointed by Mr. Washington without advice or consent of the Senate, and empowered to negotiate the Treaty of Tripoli. President Cleveland famously sent retired Senator James Henderson Blount to Hawaii to investigate the recent coup there, without Senate approval, despite the Senate being in session and the availability of John Stevens, American Minister to Hawaii (who was later fired at Blount’s recommendation). Colonel House, a private citizen and personal friend of Woodrow Wilson, was not only sent out on diplomatic missions (eg: _the_ armistice) but even had living quarters in the White House. No official rank, post, commission, or confirmation accompanied Mr. House. Perhaps you may recognize the Henry Kissinger, who won a Nobel Peace prize for diplomatic work… as National Security Advisor, reporting directly to the president, before he was made Secretary of State, before he was confirmed by the Senate. The trick, or legal fiction, is that none of these people held “Office”. They were so-called “personal representatives” of the President, appointed “temporarily” and paid, if at all, out of the President’s discretionary foreign services funding. Sometimes they held official rank, such as National Security Advisor or Special Envoy, sometimes they do not. Sometimes they have staff, sometimes they do not. The point is, there is ample precedent for such unilateral appointments and use of private citizens and friends of the President in diplomacy. Mr. Trump sending Rudy Giuliani to do official state business is not, _ceteris paribus_, an issue. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2787 "2019-10-15T21:20:41Z")
Great, but it wasn’t official state business. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2788 "2019-10-15T21:23:12Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I have a lot of catching up to do, but if we assume _arguendo_ that points 4-6 are fine, points 1-3 are also fine. If I’m reading you right, you’re saying that, if we assume the following two points are "fine,’ then points 1-3 aren’t problems, either? > [@](#): > > 1. A pro-Trump PAC received funds from Ukrainian businessmen who are now in jail on charges of election fraud. > 2. Trump’s personal attorney received half a million dollars from these Ukrainian businessmen during the time that he was in Ukraine unofficially conducting US government business. Point 5 is a federal crime for which the two guys have already been arrested. Point 6 is sketchy as hell, especially given Guiliani’s alleged financial troubles, and the fact that his own lawyer just quit. How are these two “fine,” even for argument’s sake? ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2789 "2019-10-15T21:26:33Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I have a lot of catching up to do, but if we assume _arguendo_ that points 4-6 are fine, points 1-3 are also fine. … We could assume, for the sake of argument, that murder is fine, too. Back in the real world: (and I quote) 4) The official state business involved persuading foreign governments to investigate the family of Trump’s political rival. Official state business, simple unofficial request, whatever, is \*always \*all kinds of fucked up. And an elected official who does it should lose his job. ---
**Author:** ![Railer13](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/railer13/32/9742_2.png) [@Railer13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Railer13)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2790 "2019-10-15T21:27:25Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m not insinuating nor implying anything of the sort. I gave some factually-correct information about what the IOC dates represent. That’s why the post started out “Just as a point of information…” Oh, bullshit. Remember what you said in post #2707 when you first brought up the delay in delivery of the F-35s to Turkey: “And less than 10 weeks later that request was approved by the White House. That sounds pretty reasonable for the normal bureaucratic mess that is foreign military sales. **For comparison** , Turkey joined the F-35 program in 2002. It took them 16 years to get their first jet, and even now, over a year later, we won’t let them take it (or any of the other F-35s they ostensibly own) home to Turkey.” (bolding mine) It’s painfully obvious that you were implying that the F-35 delivery delay was analogous to the delay in the Ukrainian deal. It’s been established that is certainly not the case. But I’m quite sure you won’t admit to intentionally being misleading. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2791 "2019-10-15T21:33:30Z")
Any thoughts on whether impeachment proceedings allow Congress to subpoena the FBI for information related to crimes under investigation? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2792 "2019-10-15T21:44:35Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Great, but it wasn’t official state business. LOL, c’mon, now! It was _such_ official state business that the official State Department career folks who know a thing or two about official state business and are tasked with carrying out such state business, were horrified to the point of making a criminal referral to the Department of non-Justice (for this “administration”) when they learned of it!! Whereupon the Department of non-Justice immediately declared the action non-criminal (for this “administration”) and scrambled to bury it. Fortunately for us, without success. That’s totally normal. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2793 "2019-10-15T21:56:03Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > If I’m reading you right, you’re saying that, if we assume the following two points are "fine,’ then points 1-3 aren’t problems, either? Three points, but yes. > [@kenobi\_65](#): > > Point 5 is a federal crime for which the two guys have already been arrested. > > Point 6 is sketchy as hell, especially given Guiliani’s alleged financial troubles, and the fact that his own lawyer just quit. > > How are these two “fine,” even for argument’s sake? If you won’t make that assumption, the argument doesn’t apply. I posted because I remember **Left Hand of Dorkness** wondering how points 1-3, or their equivalents, would be okay. That was _before_ the Giuliani aides were arrested. I’m behind in the news cycle and haven’t had time to process that new development, but my initial hunch is that the absolute worst case for the president is that Giuliani takes the hit. For everything. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2794 "2019-10-15T21:58:00Z")
> [@Railer13](#): > > Oh, bullshit. Remember what you said in post #2707 when you first brought up the delay in delivery of the F-35s to Turkey: > > “And less than 10 weeks later that request was approved by the White House. That sounds pretty reasonable for the normal bureaucratic mess that is foreign military sales. **For comparison** , Turkey joined the F-35 program in 2002. It took them 16 years to get their first jet, and even now, over a year later, we won’t let them take it (or any of the other F-35s they ostensibly own) home to Turkey.” > > (bolding mine) > > It’s painfully obvious that you were implying that the F-35 delivery delay was analogous to the delay in the Ukrainian deal. It’s been established that is certainly not the case. But I’m quite sure you won’t admit to intentionally being misleading. Of course it’s bullshit. The only question is whether he thinks you and I are dumb enough to believe “he’s just putting out facts.” ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2795 "2019-10-15T22:06:10Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I’m behind in the news cycle and haven’t had time to process that new development, but my initial hunch is that the absolute worst case for the president is that Giuliani takes the hit. For everything. I don’t think that that’s even close to the “absolute worst case” for Trump. Hell, I think, at this point, that might be up there among the best-case scenarios for Trump. If Trump tries to throw Rudy under the bus, I think that there’s a high likelihood that Rudy starts implicating his boss – “I did all of this under the President’s direct orders.” And, _that_ would be closer to the “absolute worst case.” Also, if you’ve seen any of Rudy’s appearances on news talk shows over the past year, the guy has no ability to shut up. Even if he were to intend to take his secrets to his grave, I could totally see him starting to spill everything once he starts talking. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2796 "2019-10-15T22:11:40Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > I don’t think that that’s even close to the “absolute worst case” for Trump. Hell, I think, at this point, that might be up there among the best-case scenarios for Trump. Absolutely what I thought as well. Rudy being the fall guy is the dream scenario for Trump at this point. And you’re also correct - Rudy cannot shut his yap. I expect him to implicate himself, and even Trump in the near future. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2797 "2019-10-15T22:14:57Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Absolutely what I thought as well. Rudy being the fall guy is the dream scenario for Trump at this point. > > And you’re also correct - Rudy cannot shut his yap. I expect him to implicate himself, and even Trump in the near future. So, Trump just goes on TV and asks his friends in Russia to do something to shut him up. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2798 "2019-10-15T22:15:40Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > I don’t think that that’s even close to the “absolute worst case” for Trump. Hell, I think, at this point, that might be up there among the best-case scenarios for Trump. If Trump tries to throw Rudy under the bus, I think that there’s a high likelihood that Rudy starts implicating his boss – “I did all of this under the President’s direct orders.” And, _that_ would be closer to the “absolute worst case.” > > Also, if you’ve seen any of Rudy’s appearances on news talk shows over the past year, the guy has no ability to shut up. Even if he were to intend to take his secrets to his grave, I could totally see him starting to spill everything once he starts talking. Do you know if anybody reported white house sources saying Rudy knows where bodies are buried? Legitimately curious, I would expect Rudy to assert client-attorney privilege and possibly prevail on matters not directly related to criminal charges arising from the arrests. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2799 "2019-10-15T22:16:11Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > … > I’m behind in the news cycle and haven’t had time to process that new development, but my initial hunch is that the absolute worst case for the president is that Giuliani takes the hit. For everything. > … How is this bad for Trump at all, let alone thw worst case? Trump needs a patsy right about now. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2019, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/2800 "2019-10-15T22:24:00Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Absolutely what I thought as well. Rudy being the fall guy is the dream scenario for Trump at this point. > > And you’re also correct - Rudy cannot shut his yap. I expect him to implicate himself, and even Trump in the near future. Yikes, just realized that I wrote “worst” instead of “best”. ~Max [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=139) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=141)