# 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:** 3
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/41 "2019-09-24T23:36:11Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > … it was obvious that the Republicans were just trying to create something out of nothing, playing partisan games, and trying to overreact to minor thing they found over him. … This perfectly-describes a common view of what the dems have been doing to President Trump ever since he won the election. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/42 "2019-09-24T23:37:16Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > You mean ‘minority’, right? I’m pretty sure a solid majority of the public is against impeaching Trump: No, I mean the majority of the country that didn’t vote for him and hate his orange guts. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/43 "2019-09-24T23:38:29Z")
> [@KarlGauss](#): > > or proceedings are stopped before that (in fact, Mitch could refuse to hold it) No he can’t. This canard has been repeatedly disproven in another impeachment thread. > [@McDeath\_the\_Mad](#): > > A couple thoughts from a Canadian: > > This is much different than Clinton’s impeachment. They wanted to impeach Clinton over lying about a BJ in the oval office. That’s pretty frivolous. Just to put it in a historical context, many of the Senators that voted to acquit Clinton also voted to convict Judge Walter Nixon on pretty much the same thing less than a decade earlier (perjury to a grand jury). And just before THAT Judge Harry Claiborne was convicted of perjury although his was more about filing false tax returns than the actual lying - but as pointed out in the Articles of Impeachment the tax returns were filed under penalty of perjury. So impeachment & conviction for perjury was very much a thing at the time. It wasn’t until Clinton’s impeachment that all of the sudden perjury was not an impeachable offense. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/44 "2019-09-24T23:39:58Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This perfectly-describes a common view of what the dems have been doing to President Trump ever since he won the election. You’re correct that common views are often dumb as shit and manufactured by those with vested interests, and I appreciate your pointing that out. ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/45 "2019-09-24T23:42:56Z")
Kudos to Pelosi for holding off those who wanted to start impeachment months ago. It’s a serious undertaking, and she has been properly thoughtful and thorough before announcing this, which suggests to me that there may be another smoking gun or two besides the Ukraine issue that have convinced her to move forward. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/46 "2019-09-24T23:44:11Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > No, I mean the majority of the country that didn’t vote for him and hate his orange guts. But the majority of the country does not want him impeached. ---
**Author:** ![steatopygia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steatopygia/32/3132_2.png) [@steatopygia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steatopygia)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/47 "2019-09-24T23:54:51Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Here’s my concern with this situation: > > If it seems like things finally might start turning on Trump, McConnel and all of the other Republicans who enabled him are probably going to try to cut a deal with Pelosi and the democratic leadership. “Okay, so we’ll help you get rid of Trump, but leave us out of it.” > > And I fear that the democratic leadership would be stupid enough and derelict in their duties enough to take such a deal. > > Trump is only one aspect of a larger problem - the radicalized Republican base and the corrupt Republican party that will do anything to enhance their own power, rig the system in their favor, and loot the country as hard as they can. Pretending that this is all just Trump, and if we get rid of him it all goes back to normal, would be a horrific mistake. > > If Trump was the only problem, then a responsible Republican party would’ve already been on board with getting rid of him 200 scandals ago. Their corruption and complicity is what kept him protected no matter how badly he fucked up. If those same people remain in power after this, the situation gets worse. > > The Republicans now know that their radicalized, hateful base will support absolutely anything Fox News tells them to support, anything that anyone who isn’t part of their in-group thinks is bad, they’re all for it. So the next Republican president isn’t going to be a senile clown who can’t speak a sentence or two - he’s going to be a smooth operator who knows full well how to take advantage of his radicalized base, who can sound like a relatively normal politician while also using the dog whistles to throw the republican base a bone while much more effectively executing an evil agenda like coordinating foreign rigging of our election in their favor, continuing naked power grabs (like in North Carolina), domestic rigging and manipulation of elections (like in Georgia), stacking the courts with radical right wing judges, obstructing the democrats no matter what, like under Obama, etc. > > It’s not enough to just get rid of Trump. And in fact, getting rid of Trump alone might be the most dangerous of all options. There has to be a reckoning, a purge. We have to acknowledge that what has gone on in recent years is way outside the norm, and way outside of what can be acceptable from an American political party. I agree with this wholeheartedly. If America has any chance of regaining its stature and not devolving into a has been banana republic, we need to prosecute this administration for every crime it has committed. Let the republicans explain how they went along with it. If republican voters want to keep this charade up, let’s get it out in the open and call a racist a racist, a religious zealot a zealot, a criminal a criminal. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/48 "2019-09-24T23:55:12Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > But the majority of the country does not want him impeached. Yet. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/49 "2019-09-24T23:55:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This perfectly-describes a common view of what the dems have been doing to President Trump ever since he won the election. You’re so absurdly partisan that you’re incapable of having an informed opinion on this issue. The Republicans were desperate to run powerful investigations into minor stuff, and the democrats are loathe to do anything despite massive scandals on the part of the Trump administration. What you think is exactly the opposite of true. Your thought goes as deep as “okay, so the Republicans were hostile to thinks that Clinton did, and democrats are hostile to the things Trump does, so it’s all the same” and ignoring the fact that the Republicans launched every extremely partisan investigation into Clinton’s minor corruptions as they could find, whereas the democrats are reluctant to launch any investigations into huge, gaping corruptions. Do you think the Benghazi hearings and the Mueller report were equally partisan? Trump has committed at least 100 acts that if Obama had done them instead, there would be the loudest screeching you’ve ever heard out of any political party in addition to right wing violence and calls for violent revolution. In comparison, the cowardly democrats are massively under-responding to everything Trump does, pretending that it’s just politics as usual. No one with a shred of objectivity could honestly think that these situations are equivalent - they are, in fact, almost exactly as opposite as you can get in politics. ---
**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:** [September 25, 2019, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/50 "2019-09-25T00:00:19Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > …and the Trumpites will refuse to comply with those court orders much more quickly, too. > > Why wouldn’t they? Who would be enforcing any court orders? Why, William Barr’s Justice Department. Guess how he’s going to handle this…just guess. > > I can see that Pelosi had to move. The activist base was trending toward giving Trump a complete pass while declaring Pelosi to be History’s Greatest Villain. > > But, what, exactly, is going to be different now? The witnesses are going to go on refusing to comply, and facing no consequences for that refusal. The American people aren’t going to learn any more about Trump’s misdeeds than they’ve learned up until now (which is to say that some fraction of them may hear a few rumors here or there, but nothing that will convince them that Trump should be removed). > > I’m curious as to what you see those rules as being…? I think Speaker Pelosi would have preferred to delay for another month or so if possible, in order to get the rulings from the various circuit courts/SCOTUS that are going to compel compliance with Congressional subpoenas and testimony. However, she also knows the value of striking while the iron is hot. The trade-off is worth it to catch both Trump and Barr off guard. They did _not_ get the jump on the narrative this time. I think we’re a little ahead of her schedule, but not much. Rulings in the case addressing subpoenas for Trump bank and tax records from Deutsche Bank and his tax advisors, Mazars, are expected in November. Deutsche Bank and Mazars have both indicated they will comply with the subpoenas already issued by the House if ordered by the courts. The documents are expected to reveal a long, extensive history of Trump fraud and money laundering on behalf of both Russia and Saudi Arabia. Rulings in the case to compel testimony by Don McGahn are also expected before the end of the year. The final ruling on this case will have far reaching implications for all Trump witnesses. McGahn has said he will testify if ordered by the courts. The defenses mounted by DOJ in these cases are weak, weak sauce. Barr & Co. know it. They’re just playing for time. It’s unlikely even Trump-appointed judges will rule in his favor, any more than the Trump-appointed whistle blower did, or the Trump-appointed inspector general who alerted the House about the whistle blower’s complaint – or even the Trump-appointed SCOTUS justices. It’s one thing to ignore “Demoncrats” in the House. It’s another to ignore a SCOTUS ruling. Some Trump Republicans may be willing to do it, but not many. Hope this helps. And what **Chefguy** said. ---
**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:** [September 25, 2019, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/51 "2019-09-25T00:01:33Z")
The number of Democrats calling for impeachment just [hit 200 on politico](https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/house-reps-who-would-vote-for-trump-impeachment-our-latest-list/) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/52 "2019-09-25T00:09:54Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > You’re so absurdly partisan that you’re incapable of having an informed opinion on this issue. > > The Republicans were desperate to run powerful investigations into minor stuff, and the democrats are loathe to do anything despite massive scandals on the part of the Trump administration. What you think is exactly the opposite of true. Keep in mind he didn’t say he believed that; he just described it as “a common view.” Which is fortunate for me, because if he actually did hold that view, I’d probably get warned for describing it as dumb as shit. But if he’s unwilling to take responsibility for the view, I can hardly be blamed for describing it accurately :). That sort of “some people say” nonsense should be reviled and mocked, and has no place in a reasonable discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/53 "2019-09-25T00:12:48Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > I’m curious as to what you see those rules as being…? My understanding–and I can dig up a cite if necessary–is that congressional oversight in an impeachment proceeding is near-absolute and stems from the heart of a constitutional duty. It’d be extraordinarily unlikely for a court, even one as partisan as the current Supreme Court, to rule against congress’s oversight requests made as part of impeachment proceedings. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/54 "2019-09-25T00:15:16Z")
I’m just afraid the whistleblower could turn out to be an idiot. Like, what if it’s Kato Kaelin? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/55 "2019-09-25T00:17:26Z")
If the WH is now releasing the whistleblower complaint, it means he and the Republicans have agreed to go the “there’s not enough evidence” route. Trump will be up 5pts next month. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/56 "2019-09-25T00:19:23Z")
> [@KidCharlemagne](#): > > If the WH is now releasing the whistleblower complaint, it means he and the Republicans have agreed to go the “there’s not enough evidence” route. Trump will be up 5pts next month. The WB is supposed to give a statement to congress this week. I think I’ll take their word over some piece of paper. (Unless it’s actually Kato, like I joked.) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/57 "2019-09-25T00:19:59Z")
> [@KidCharlemagne](#): > > If the WH is now releasing the whistleblower complaint, it means he and the Republicans have agreed to go the “there’s not enough evidence” route. Trump will be up 5pts next month. Is there an update that I’m missing? Last I heard, he was just releasing the call transcript, still keeping the complaint secret. [WaPo says that’s not enough](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/24/why-trump-releasing-transcript-his-call-with-ukraines-president-isnt-enough/): > [@Phillip Bump](#): > > In late July, Trump spoke on the phone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. During that call, the world has since learned, Trump pressed Zelensky to launch a probe into former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden related to the latter’s past work for a Ukrainian energy company. Trump sees in that work a line of attack against Joe Biden, the leading contender to face Trump in next year’s presidential election. > > That alone, though, wasn’t what was worrying the person who is believed to be an administration staffer. The staffer wasn’t privy to Trump’s call with Zelensky directly, according to a CNN report from last week. But Trump’s conversation with Zelensky fit with other actions that the staffer had observed. It was part of a pattern, in other words, prompting the staffer to file a whistleblower complaint with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. When the DNI’s office declined to provide the whistleblower’s complaint to congressional committees, the entire incident exploded into public view. > > What were the other actions that raised questions? It’s not clear. The whistleblower complaint remains under wraps, apparently part of a concerted effort by the administration to keep details of what is alleged out of sight. We’ve gotten possible glimpses, though. The Post reported on Monday that Trump’s team withheld aid to Ukraine shortly before that call with Zelensky, raising questions about that aid being used as leverage — and about whether that decision from the White House was part of the pattern observed by the whistleblower. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/58 "2019-09-25T00:20:07Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > You mean ‘minority’, right? I’m pretty sure a solid majority of the public is against impeaching Trump: 38.5% is over [twice the percentage](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/06/03/will-support-grow-impeaching-trump-data-nixon-offers-clue/) that were in favor of impeaching Nixon a year before he left office. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/59 "2019-09-25T00:21:27Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > My understanding–and I can dig up a cite if necessary–is that congressional oversight in an impeachment proceeding is near-absolute and stems from the heart of a constitutional duty. It’d be extraordinarily unlikely for a court, even one as partisan as the current Supreme Court, to rule against congress’s oversight requests made as part of impeachment proceedings. And what would stop the subjects of court rulings—even Supreme Court rulings—from simply ignoring the provisions of those rulings? You’re picturing William Barr using the resources of the Justice Department to force reluctant Trumpite witnesses to cooperate with the House impeachment-investigation? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/60 "2019-09-25T00:29:11Z")
> [@KidCharlemagne](#): > > If the WH is now releasing the whistleblower complaint, it means he and the Republicans have agreed to go the “there’s not enough evidence” route. Trump will be up 5pts next month. Doesn’t it just mean Trump has decided to go the “there’s not enough evidence” route? I mean, there’s likely multiple taped conversations and “the Republicans” probably haven’t heard them all. All they can be working with is “Trump doesn’t think he did anything wrong and Rudy agrees!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=4)