Republicans storm SCIF in violation of the rules

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that these documents are in a SCIF in the first place as the testimony is being hidden from the eyes of the American electorate reminds me of a Kings' Hawaiian commercial.

There are 40 GOP reps in the room as well as several GOP committee attorneys. They are using the same rules that, for example, the Benghazi committee used. Why was it okay then, but not now? I never saw the dems illegally storming the SCIF in protest.

At this point, most of the GOP is corrupt and complicit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Republicans are doing is showing how utterly terrified they are by the impeachment investigation.

You literally do not understand the nation's conscience when you think it's totally cool to disenfranchise millions of voters by attempting to impeach because of a narrative you refuse to show the public.

You are seeking to depose a duly elected President of the United States of America behind closed doors. What did you think was going to happen?

How is Impeachment - the CONSTITUTIONAL remedy for a president gone amuck, disenfranchisement? Please be specific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yesterday testimony was intentionally leaked and none of you cared to come on here and complain about that bastardization of the sacred house process.

The testimony wasn't "leaked" - just like with others, the written opening remarks were made public, likely by the subject testifying, as is their right. Were you outraged that Corey Lewandowski released his opening statement too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Republicans are doing is showing how utterly terrified they are by the impeachment investigation.

You literally do not understand the nation's conscience when you think it's totally cool to disenfranchise millions of voters by attempting to impeach because of a narrative you refuse to show the public.

You are seeking to depose a duly elected President of the United States of America behind closed doors. What did you think was going to happen?

How is Impeachment - the CONSTITUTIONAL remedy for a president gone amuck, disenfranchisement? Please be specific.

+1

Especially when done by a duly elected Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump knew about this in advance.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-10-23/poll-finds-highest-support-for-inquiry-yet-impeachment-update?__twitter_impression=true

Knew about it? He somehow got Gaetz to instigate this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump knew about this in advance.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-10-23/poll-finds-highest-support-for-inquiry-yet-impeachment-update?__twitter_impression=true

Knew about it? He somehow got Gaetz to instigate this.

So Trump is trying to delay and/or prohibit the investigation into his own impeachment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Republicans are doing is showing how utterly terrified they are by the impeachment investigation.

You are living in a dream world. Trump will not be removed from office. It is all a pointless exercise.

Right. It’s pointless because the Republicans will not do their constitutional duty, correct?

Impeachment and removal from office is a political and legal move. We have a year to the next election and that is when the voters will make a choice.

As it now stands, the Democrats know full well that Trump has an excellent chance of being reelected and impeachment is being used to damage Trump. I doubt it will work based on what we know now.

Trump himself chose to inappropriately withhold the military funds. The Democrats didn't do that to him.

Think about it. We live in a world where the Pentagon was seriously considering suing the White House to force them to release the funds. Trump's former Attorney General just said that abuse of office is not a crime.

Whitaker was wrong.

Illegally withhold. It was beyond "inappropriate"

[Anonymous]

Republicans interrupting democracy. Sad! Party of a dictator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope McConnell will comment on this soon. He seems finally to be growing a backbone. let's see if it is continuing

This is the House, not the Senate. Why would McConnell comment?

[Anonymous]

Pelosi will make an example of the leaders of the raid and refer felonies to DOJ to prosecute. This will put Barr on the hot seat, as the felony crimes are plain to see via video evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm the very first PP you're responding to. I didn't write either of the other two posts in this thread. Taking a cell phone into a secure location isn't pronouncing innocence or guilt on hysteria. It's a fact/event. It happened or it didn't happen.

The most damaging thing Trump has done is completely eliminate a lot of American's abilities to determine fact and fiction. Or fact and opinion. This incident is not like, 'oh we all see it a different way' type thing. Secure rooms are set up for a reason to protect national security and compromising them is a big deal. One that, as another pp has pointed out multiple times, would get a regular employee fired without much question.

As for your other point. I used to be like you. 2020 is the most important thing, eyes on the prize. But Trump has to be impeached for posterity. We cannot have allowed a president to do what he has done without consequence, allowing it will erode norms for generations. It is the duty of congress to investigate presidential malfeasance and to remove from office or censure a president who violates his duties of office. I believe that it would politically smarter to not pursue this, but it would be like letting one person get away with murder because its too hard or awkward to prosecute. It would be wrong. My libertarian used to be a Republican husband thinks this even more than I do FWIW.

Again, you make some fair points: I don't question that phones were taken to a secure location. But was national security jeopardized in a definitive manner?

Since you are talking about the longer terms ramifications let me tell you what I concerned about: will the impeachment play out to Trump's advantage in 2020? If so, then going through an impeachment that will contribute to his reelection is foolhardy. Pelosi saw that risk and did not want to take that chance. I think she got railroaded into going with it.

As far as fact/fiction, Trump has contributed to it but so have others and especially the media. I don't believe hardly anything that is published and opinion columns by either side are almost worthless. This reliance on anonymous sources is ridiculous and has contributed to the distrust.

People ask why the base has given Trump a pass repeatedly: it is not because they are dumb or uneducated or any of that nonsense. It is because for years before Trump the bias in the media was so pronounced against conservatives that it was viewed as the norm. This was so drummed into them by talk radio - with some legitimacy - that they just don't trust hardly anything the media says. I am not a conservative but I don't watch CNN or MSNBC or Fox because those sources are just outright biased.

I have friend who is a former colonel in the army - and he is a Trump supporter. He does not believe most of what the media says. The only difference is that he does watch Fox. FWIW, he views me as a misguided but reasonable liberal!

My fear with impeaching Trump without any chance of his removal is that when we have a Democratic president and a Republican controlled House, we will likely see the same thing happen and the Republicans will argue that it is something that needs to be done as a matter of principle, etc.

Fundamentally, elections should not be overturned by impeachment except in rare instances and where there is a likely possibility of removal. Clinton was impeached - it is there for posterity - but most people don't even remember it. Memories are short and that has nothing to do with whether one is a Democrat or Republican.

Focus on what needs to be done to win the next election ...... not futile exercises that have no chance of success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pelosi will make an example of the leaders of the raid and refer felonies to DOJ to prosecute. This will put Barr on the hot seat, as the felony crimes are plain to see via video evidence.

Barr will not prosecute ......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm the very first PP you're responding to. I didn't write either of the other two posts in this thread. Taking a cell phone into a secure location isn't pronouncing innocence or guilt on hysteria. It's a fact/event. It happened or it didn't happen.

The most damaging thing Trump has done is completely eliminate a lot of American's abilities to determine fact and fiction. Or fact and opinion. This incident is not like, 'oh we all see it a different way' type thing. Secure rooms are set up for a reason to protect national security and compromising them is a big deal. One that, as another pp has pointed out multiple times, would get a regular employee fired without much question.

As for your other point. I used to be like you. 2020 is the most important thing, eyes on the prize. But Trump has to be impeached for posterity. We cannot have allowed a president to do what he has done without consequence, allowing it will erode norms for generations. It is the duty of congress to investigate presidential malfeasance and to remove from office or censure a president who violates his duties of office. I believe that it would politically smarter to not pursue this, but it would be like letting one person get away with murder because its too hard or awkward to prosecute. It would be wrong. My libertarian used to be a Republican husband thinks this even more than I do FWIW.

Again, you make some fair points: I don't question that phones were taken to a secure location. But was national security jeopardized in a definitive manner?

Since you are talking about the longer terms ramifications let me tell you what I concerned about: will the impeachment play out to Trump's advantage in 2020? If so, then going through an impeachment that will contribute to his reelection is foolhardy. Pelosi saw that risk and did not want to take that chance. I think she got railroaded into going with it.

As far as fact/fiction, Trump has contributed to it but so have others and especially the media. I don't believe hardly anything that is published and opinion columns by either side are almost worthless. This reliance on anonymous sources is ridiculous and has contributed to the distrust.

People ask why the base has given Trump a pass repeatedly: it is not because they are dumb or uneducated or any of that nonsense. It is because for years before Trump the bias in the media was so pronounced against conservatives that it was viewed as the norm. This was so drummed into them by talk radio - with some legitimacy - that they just don't trust hardly anything the media says. I am not a conservative but I don't watch CNN or MSNBC or Fox because those sources are just outright biased.

I have friend who is a former colonel in the army - and he is a Trump supporter. He does not believe most of what the media says. The only difference is that he does watch Fox. FWIW, he views me as a misguided but reasonable liberal!

My fear with impeaching Trump without any chance of his removal is that when we have a Democratic president and a Republican controlled House, we will likely see the same thing happen and the Republicans will argue that it is something that needs to be done as a matter of principle, etc.

Fundamentally, elections should not be overturned by impeachment except in rare instances and where there is a likely possibility of removal. Clinton was impeached - it is there for posterity - but most people don't even remember it. Memories are short and that has nothing to do with whether one is a Democrat or Republican.

Focus on what needs to be done to win the next election ...... not futile exercises that have no chance of success.

Bringing ANY electronic devices into a SCIF is a violation of Federal law. Are you saying those who violated the law should not face prosecution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pelosi will make an example of the leaders of the raid and refer felonies to DOJ to prosecute. This will put Barr on the hot seat, as the felony crimes are plain to see via video evidence.

Barr will not prosecute ......

That's the point: show the American public over and over again in an general election year that a bunch of criminals are trying to cover for each other. Hypocrisy leaves a disgusting taste with the voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope McConnell will comment on this soon. He seems finally to be growing a backbone. let's see if it is continuing

This is the House, not the Senate. Why would McConnell comment?

so when the reporters ask him what he thinks of what his fellow republicans did, he'll just say "no comment"? If he does, I guess the small embryo spine got aborted.