# 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:** 251
**Author:** ![tripthicket](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripthicket/32/297_2.png) [@tripthicket](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tripthicket)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5001 "2019-11-18T19:55:30Z")
If 45 were called to testify, I imagine he’d fight it all the way to the SC. Would it benefit the inquiry in any way to call him, aside from the notion of fairness? Also, I haven’t seen it discussed, but isn’t 45’s direct testimony almost inevitable? I mean, the inquiry wouldn’t close without him being given a chance to tell his side, no? Not a thousand Republican obfuscators, but _him_. ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5002 "2019-11-18T20:02:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It doesn’t matter what the judge says about Trump’s financial records-[because they are _ **NEVER** _ going to be turned over.](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/house-agrees-short-halt-fight-trump-records-67106729) Is anyone here gullible enough to think the hold will be for just a few days or weeks? Congress only agreed to a 10 day hold, out of respect for the court, after which the scotus will have to agree to take the case or honor the previous judgments. At least that’s what I read. ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5003 "2019-11-18T20:10:20Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It doesn’t matter what the judge says about Trump’s financial records-[because they are _ **NEVER** _ going to be turned over.](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/house-agrees-short-halt-fight-trump-records-67106729) Is anyone here gullible enough to think the hold will be for just a few days or weeks? Oh, I might be that gullible. I can’t become so jaded yet – that SCOTUS is already corrupt to the point that they disregard rules that have been in place since 1924 meant to prevent corruption, and in contradiction to the very, very clear legal understanding of the word, “shall,” as it applies to oversight responsibilities of the House. The House indicated they are agreeable to a short stay. AIUI, SCOTUS moved up the briefing schedule a little. The House asked leave to submit their pleadings by November 22nd. SCOTUS said no, we want them by the 21st at 3:00 p.m. It would be odd for them to expedite a briefing schedule but then sit on their decision of whether to take up the case. I’ll surely allow I may be wrong. But if I am, then we’ve been a banana republic for awhile, and we should all wake up to this new reality. ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5004 "2019-11-18T20:23:46Z")
I am also that gullible. My guess would be that they only even intervened and are giving any mild consideration to the topic out of deference to the Executive Branch. But there’s really no argument to be made in Trump’s favor. And even if we believe (which we do) that Kavanaugh is little more than a partisan toady, he’s a toady to the RNC not Trump and he’s one man not five. ---
**Author:** ![Running\_with\_Scissors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Running\_with\_Scissors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Running_with_Scissors)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5005 "2019-11-18T20:28:25Z")
> [@tripthicket](#): > > If 45 were called to testify, I imagine he’d fight it all the way to the SC. Would it benefit the inquiry in any way to call him, aside from the notion of fairness? Also, I haven’t seen it discussed, but isn’t 45’s direct testimony almost inevitable? I mean, the inquiry wouldn’t close without him being given a chance to tell his side, no? Not a thousand Republican obfuscators, but _him_. Well, it’s not a criminal case, so the fifth amendment doesn’t apply. They can subpoena him, but what are the odds he’d honor it? I’d say my odds of winning the Powerball are higher, and I don’t even play. ETA: Hmm, and this raises an interesting question. If the CIC is impeached, subpoenaed and questioned, assuming he doesn’t perjure himself, can answers to self-incriminating questions asked during the impeachment hearing be used in a criminal trial, even if said CIC doesn’t appear as a witness in said trial? ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5006 "2019-11-18T20:34:34Z")
FWIW, I don’t think Congress can force the President to testify as simply a matter of separation of powers. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5007 "2019-11-18T20:38:14Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > And he will never testify before Congress or anywhere else, except maybe at his own criminal trail (someday). Insh’allah. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5008 "2019-11-18T20:53:17Z")
> [@tripthicket](#): > > If 45 were called to testify, I imagine he’d fight it all the way to the SC. Would it benefit the inquiry in any way to call him, aside from the notion of fairness? Also, I haven’t seen it discussed, but isn’t 45’s direct testimony almost inevitable? I mean, the inquiry wouldn’t close **without him being given a chance to tell his side** , no? Not a thousand Republican obfuscators, but _him_. He’ll be GIVEN the chance, but he won’t do it. ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5009 "2019-11-18T20:54:11Z")
> [@Defensive\_Indifference](#): > > The House is now investigating whether Trump lied to Mueller. > > [House investigating whether Trump lied to Robert Mueller - CNNPolitics](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/18/politics/house-investigating-trump-lying-to-mueller/index.html?__twitter_impression=true) > > This seems like a notable development. Heck, there are certain times, when a Republican actually told the truth. Just ask Stephanie Grisham! According to her, Trump never lies, people should just not take what he says literally. ---
**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:** [November 18, 2019, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5010 "2019-11-18T21:01:13Z")
I’d be remiss not to add; Stephanie Grisham has also assured us that "“I’ve given plenty of on-the-record statements that were truthful and accurate” Plenty. That’s a nice round number of truthful statements. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5011 "2019-11-18T21:01:33Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > You are correct. It will never happen. > > And he will never testify before Congress or anywhere else, except maybe at his own criminal \*\*trail \*\*(someday). Oops. That should be **trial** , although he is leaving an impressive \*\*trail \*\*of criminal activity, too. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5012 "2019-11-18T21:39:37Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > FWIW, I don’t think Congress can force the President to testify as simply a matter of separation of powers. I agree with that. But it is amusing that the Republicans in Congress are going, “nobody’s testified who’s talked directly with Trump,” while Trump’s doing his damnedest to make sure nobody who’s talked with him testifies. Let alone himself. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5013 "2019-11-18T21:57:45Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Heck, there are certain times, when a Republican actually told the truth. Just ask > Stephanie Grisham! > > According to her, Trump never lies, people should just not take what he says literally. She’s right. You just need to understand how to interpret Trumpspeak. Herewith some sample lessons, and the principles they teach us about properly understanding this strange lingo. _“… I don’t see any reason why it would be Russia [that hacked the 2016 US presidential election]”_ Just change the “would” to “wouldn’t” and you’re golden, as the Trumpster did himself after being widely condemned for the comment. Lesson: Creatively introducing negatives to contradict the original statement is a handy technique in the world of Trumpspeak. _“won the popular vote by a landslide”_ Same lesson. Throw in “didn’t” and there you go. _“[Trump got] raises for our military. First time in 10 years.”_ Ha ha! Just a little bit of levity there. It was their first raise since, like, last year, and every single year for the last 58 years. Like Stephanie says, don’t take it literally. “Every year”, “first time in 10 years” – what’s the difference? _“Family separations began under Obama”_ Just throw in “did not” to make it correct. This is sort of a recurring pattern. _“the biggest inauguration crowd ever”_ Add “was not”. You should be getting the hang of this by now. _“Polar ice caps are at the greatest extent ever”_ Here you just need to substitute “smallest” for “greatest”, they mean exactly the same thing in Trumpspeak. _“Climate change is a hoax”_ No need for a negation here. Trump was actually talking about healthy eating and made a reference to “diet change with artichokes”. Pay closer attention next time. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2019, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5014 "2019-11-18T22:07:03Z")
> [@Jim\_Peebles](#): > > Exactly! It would not make sense for Trump to knock the easiest candidate to beat out before the Democrat primaries. Therefore, Trump’s mention of Biden in the call was not for his own political gain. It was part of his effort to fight corruption. lol ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2019, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5015 "2019-11-19T01:05:40Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I am also that gullible. > > My guess would be that they only even intervened and are giving any mild consideration to the topic out of deference to the Executive Branch. > > But there’s really no argument to be made in Trump’s favor. And even if we believe (which we do) that Kavanaugh is little more than a partisan toady, he’s a toady to the RNC not Trump and he’s one man not five. Does Trump get 4th amendment relief when it comes to Congress asking for his taxes? I really don’t know why not. His lawyers are claiming congress can’t just ask for the tax records with no reason. I realize there is a law at play that says the tax records “SHALL” be provided, but it would seem the 4th amendment supersedes that law. Can anyone tell me why the 4th amendment won’t apply in this case? ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2019, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5016 "2019-11-19T01:28:15Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > Does Trump get 4th amendment relief when it comes to Congress asking for his taxes? I really don’t know why not. His lawyers are claiming congress can’t just ask for the tax records with no reason. I realize there is a law at play that says the tax records “SHALL” be provided, but it would seem the 4th amendment supersedes that law. > > Can anyone tell me why the 4th amendment won’t apply in this case? The forms they are asking for do not belong to Trump. They belong to the US government. Certain government employees are allowed to look at those forms. There’s a law that specifically says that the person in the position that Richard Neal holds is a person that can look at those forms. ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2019, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5017 "2019-11-19T01:35:21Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > The forms they are asking for do not belong to Trump. They belong to the US government. Certain government employees are allowed to look at those forms. There’s a law that specifically says that the person in the position that Richard Neal holds is a person that can look at those forms. That makes perfect sense. ---
**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:** [November 19, 2019, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5018 "2019-11-19T01:36:36Z")
The House Intelligence Committee has released the depositions of Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs David Hale and State Dept. official David Holmes. [Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs David Hale’s deposition](https://bit.ly/2NXzuHK) [State Dept. official David Holmes’ deposition](https://bit.ly/2NYvmXZ) ---
**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:** [November 19, 2019, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5019 "2019-11-19T01:45:05Z")
Some excerpts, via [Kyle Griffin](https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1), _MSNBC_: > [@](#): > > DAVID HALE on Yovanovitch: “[T]he implication was that this was a roundabout way the President was trying to get rid of the Ambassador through this smear campaign … I found it very hard to understand why a President of the United States would do it that way.” > … > DAVID HALE testimony: On March 28th and March 29th, Secretary Pompeo spoke with Rudy Giuliani about Ambassador Yovanovitch. After those calls, the State Department maintained its decision of not issuing a statement in support of her. > … > DAVID HOLMES: “The themes that Mr. Giuliani was promoting and his associates were promoting were in that basket, in my view … In my mind, those were—those were things—those were political things that were not related to the implementation of our policy.” > … > Q: What is your opinion of her performance as the Ambassador to Ukraine? > DAVID HOLMES: She’s one of the hardest working people I’ve ever met. I thought she was incredibly professional, dedicated, determined. ---
**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:** [November 19, 2019, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5020 "2019-11-19T01:52:14Z")
More: > [@](#): > > Q: Did that cause you any concern about the security of the [Sondland-Trump] phone call? > DAVID HOLMES: It was surprising to me that he—yes. In my experience, generally, phone calls with the President are very sensitive and handled accordingly. > … > Q: Making a cell phone call from Ukraine, is there a risk of Russians listening? > HOLMES: I believe at least two of the three, if not all three of the mobile networks are owned by Russian companies … We generally assume that mobile communications in Ukraine are being monitored. > … > HOLMES: “This was an extremely distinctive experience in my … career. I’ve never seen anything like this, someone calling the President from a mobile phone at a restaurant, and then having a conversation of this level of candor, colorful language … I remember it vividly.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=250) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=252)