The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (5 Viewers)

[Andrus]

By Laura Bassett

After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

“Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

Read the Full Story - InStyle

 

[superchuck500]

So, now we have a whistle blower complaint against the whistleblower!
And, of course, it involves an entity headquartered in New Orleans.

Read: Complaint to ICIG regarding Ukraine whistleblower

Complaint to ICIG regarding Ukraine whistleblower

www.foxnews.com

ICIG complaint alleges Trump-Ukraine whistleblower may be soliciting illicit donations

EXCLUSIVE: A newly filed complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) alleges that the whistleblower whose allegations touched off the House Democrats' impeachment inquiry may have violated federal law by indirectly soliciting more than a quarter-million dollars from mostly...

www.foxnews.com

That's interesting - entirely beside the point regarding Trump/Zelensky, but interesting.

If you just spend a little time with the regulations, you can see that the prohibition on gifts relates to (1) gifts from prohibited sources, which are basically those in a position to need something from the agency or (2) gifts given "because of the employee's position." It's not just any gift for any purpose is prohibited.

So is this complaint valid on its face? I think there are two aspects of it that are relevant. First, the alleged recipient of the gifts is a "whistleblower aid" group that has been in existence and raising defense funds well before this whistleblower. Certainly this group has done its homework on when and how it can legally accept funds to be used for purposes such as counsel for a whistleblower. I suspect that if the aid organization does not disclose who the donors are, that would probably resolve the prohibited source question.

Also I think it is important that a whistleblower's need for counsel is a personal interest and not a government interest. After all, the attorney is a private attorney and not a government attorney - and there to protect the personal interests of the whistleblower, otherwise a government attorney would be provided (and that isn't the case). So for example, if a federal employee is on his/her own time on a weekend in his/her community and is the victim of a hit and run accident, it would not be prohibited for that person to have GoFundMe site to pay for medical bills or home care - like the kind you frequently see in that situation. At least not as long as contributors aren't prohibited sources. And that's because those gifts aren't given "because of the employee's position."

If the whistleblower aid organization is the one that does the fundraising and the funds are used for private counsel, that doesn't seem to be a 'gift problem' for the whistleblower.

5 CFR Part 2635 - PART 2635—STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Lazybones]

What a letdown and a sellout she turned out to be.

strong opinion

 

[B4YOU]

[Admin Edit -statement not conducive to meaningful discussion. Seek a higher level, or find a less inflammatory way to frame your thought.]

 

[MT15]

There is now a story that Trump is consistently talking about firing the Intelligence IG, saying he was “disloyal” because he investigated the WB complaint, found it credible and eventually passed it along. Which, of course, is his job. His job is not to be loyal to the President who appointed him.

If true, this is a good indication that Trump really doesn’t understand the way this country was designed by the Founding Fathers. He truly doesn’t get it. He seeks to undermine our system of checks and balances on power whenever they cross his autocratic instincts.

It reminds me of the other report that when his first Muslim ban was overturned by the courts, he asked aides why they couldn’t just get rid of all the judges. His comment was reported to be “there shouldn’t be all these judges anyway.”

It is alarming to me that our President displays these attitudes and a complete lack of awareness of the purpose of our style of government.

 

[superchuck500]

There is now a story that Trump is consistently talking about firing the Intelligence IG, saying he was “disloyal” because he investigated the WB complaint, found it credible and eventually passed it along. Which, of course, is his job. His job is not to be loyal to the President who appointed him.

If true, this is a good indication that Trump really doesn’t understand the way this country was designed by the Founding Fathers. He truly doesn’t get it. He seeks to undermine our system of checks and balances on power whenever they cross his autocratic instincts.

It reminds me of the other report that when his first Muslim ban was overturned by the courts, he asked aides why they couldn’t just get rid of all the judges. His comment was reported to be “there shouldn’t be all these judges anyway.”

It is alarming to me that our President displays these attitudes and a complete lack of awareness of the purpose of our style of government.

It's true - it's also been that way since before the election. It's not surprising that he would find himself in trouble for not being able to properly navigate within the system that he doesn't understand or respect. It's also not surprising that a great many of those who elected such a person would fail to see the problem.

 

[superchuck500]

Very thorough Summation

 

[wardorican]

There is now a story that Trump is consistently talking about firing the Intelligence IG, saying he was “disloyal” because he investigated the WB complaint, found it credible and eventually passed it along. Which, of course, is his job. His job is not to be loyal to the President who appointed him.

If true, this is a good indication that Trump really doesn’t understand the way this country was designed by the Founding Fathers. He truly doesn’t get it. He seeks to undermine our system of checks and balances on power whenever they cross his autocratic instincts.

It reminds me of the other report that when his first Muslim ban was overturned by the courts, he asked aides why they couldn’t just get rid of all the judges. His comment was reported to be “there shouldn’t be all these judges anyway.”

It is alarming to me that our President displays these attitudes and a complete lack of awareness of the purpose of our style of government.

If you find it, please link it.

 

[wardorican]

So, get your popcorn ready?

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

So, get your popcorn ready?

Nunes is a really special person.

 

[MT15]

If you find it, please link it.

On my phone at work. Widely reported, originally from NYT. I can link it this evening.

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[cuddlemonkey]

If you find it, please link it.

Trump Has Considered Firing Intelligence Community Inspector General (Published 2019)

The president blames Michael Atkinson, whom he appointed, for finding the anonymous whistle-blower’s complaint on his interactions with Ukraine to be credible.

www.nytimes.com

 

[bdb13]

Imo Taylor's testimony has been devastating for Trump so far.

 

[Beach Friends]

What strikes me is just how ineffective testimony based on hearsay actually is. It's been just a few minutes, and all I can think of with respect to Taylor's testimony is, "I heard, I came to understand, I learned...."

And that other guy, Kent ... he had only just heard of Crowdstrike? And we are going to ask for his opinion on interference?

 

[SaintForLife]

What strikes me is just how ineffective testimony based on hearsay actually is. It's been just a few minutes, and all I can think of with respect to Taylor's testimony is, "I heard, I came to understand, I learned...."

And that other guy, Kent ... he had only just heard of Crowdstrike? And we are going to ask for his opinion on interference?

Also, Schiff lied in his opening statement saying that he didn't know the identity of the whistleblower when it's known that his staff met with Ciaramella. This is the guy that the Democrats are letting lead the impeachment because Nadler proved incompetent investigating Russia/Trump.

 

[Ayo]

Not that I expect Enjeti to treat the testimony any other way, but that particular tweet seems to disregard some very important information about the balance of the agreement. It's a deliberate attempt to re-frame the discussion in such a way that ignores a very central, crucial issue at the heart of the inquiry is how and why the aid was leveraged in the first place. The question isn't the legitimacy of the aid (despite the insistence on the corruption angle, which is really toothless at this point - even by GOP standards and concessions), really, but rather holding the aid hostage (which we learn later he was not legally able to do and something the second part of his tweet even gets at, though I suppose that's lost on Enjeti) in return for the public declaration of an investigation into a political opponent.

 

[Nebaghead]

Also, Schiff lied in his opening statement saying that he didn't know the identity of the whistleblower when it's known that his staff met with Ciaramella. This is the guy that the Democrats are letting lead the impeachment because Nadler proved incompetent investigating Russia/Trump.

You guys just use Ciaramella's name as fact. Until its released it isn't a fact.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

Imo Taylor's testimony has been devastating for Trump so far.

it has, and I hope future discussions don’t end up how I suspect which is mired in the spin people gravitate toward after not listening to the actual testimony or reading the transcripts.

Sondland in particular is going to be in a tough position. As he seemingly has a corroborating witness we have not heard from that pins him as stating Trump valued dirt on Biden above all else.

Nunez on the other hand can basically be summed up as: look at all this awful stuff Hillary supposedly did trying to get dirt on Trump, therefore Trump using his office to do the same is a-ok....Sad thing is the logical inconsistency will be set aside when presented to the average Fox viewer.