The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (2 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

 

[BobE]

The reported story has been that to take actual control over the Ukraine funds, the White House (probably by Mulvaney) pulled the funds in from State to OMB, which is a White House agency with budgetary and policy functions. Mulvaney was OMB Director before he was made WH Chief if Staff, so it’s an agency that he’s very familiar with.

I suspect that Sandy’s testimony will conform those facts and the timeline. Not sure what else he might offer. Perhaps he had some knowledge of Trump’s Ukraine play or perhaps he didn’t at all - because OMB’s only role was handling the funds and awaiting instructions from Mulvaney. They might also ask him about whether OMB had a position about holding the funds beyond September 30 - as a matter of federal appropriations law, a topic OMB is competent to evaluate.

Isn't Mulvaney still in charge of OMB?

 

[superchuck500]

Isn't Mulvaney still in charge of OMB?

I believe that technically the president is in charge of OMB and the OMB Director reports directly to the president. The WH Chief of Staff isn’t on that org tree as far as I know. But as a practical matter the CoS is pretty much the president’s proxy for that kind of administrative agency. I could be wrong but that’s how I think it is set up.

 

[Beach Friends]

The reported story has been that to take actual control over the Ukraine funds, the White House (probably by Mulvaney) pulled the funds in from State to OMB, which is a White House agency with budgetary and policy functions. Mulvaney was OMB Director before he was made WH Chief if Staff, so it’s an agency that he’s very familiar with.

I suspect that Sandy’s testimony will conform those facts and the timeline. Not sure what else he might offer. Perhaps he had some knowledge of Trump’s Ukraine play or perhaps he didn’t at all - because OMB’s only role was handling the funds and awaiting instructions from Mulvaney. They might also ask him about whether OMB had a position about holding the funds beyond September 30 - as a matter of federal appropriations law, a topic OMB is competent to evaluate.

It would be hilarious if he had to admit that the payment was actually delayed as part of a practice to hold on to money as long as possible for the interest.

(No, I don't think that is what the testimony will be. But you gotta know insurance companies, for example, do that).

 

[BobE]

I believe that technically the president is in charge of OMB and the OMB Director reports directly to the president. The WH Chief of Staff isn’t on that org tree as far as I know. But as a practical matter the CoS is pretty much the president’s proxy for that kind of administrative agency. I could be wrong but that’s how I think it is set up.

Well I guess what I meant that Mulvaney was acting CoS and Director of OMB.

 

[superchuck500]

It would be hilarious if he had to admit that the payment was actually delayed as part of a practice to hold on to money as long as possible for the interest.

(No, I don't think that is what the testimony will be. But you gotta know insurance companies, for example, do that).

I don’t think those accounts are net positive interest. It’s all borrowed money anyway.

 

[superchuck500]

Well I guess what I meant that Mulvaney was acting CoS and Director of OMB.

Is he only acting CoS? Either way, I think there has to be an acting OMB Director in his stead - he probably can’t be both. I guess we’ll have to do some research. Thanks a lot Bob.

 

[BobE]

Is he only acting CoS? Either way, I think there has to be an acting OMB Director in his stead - he probably can’t be both. I guess we’ll have to do some research. Thanks a lot Bob.

Found this for us

While the current OMB Director is Mick Mulvaney, he became the acting White House Chief of Staff in January 2019. Many of his duties and responsibilities have been assigned to Deputy Director Russell Vought. The OMB Director reports to the President, Vice President and the White House Chief of Staff.

Office of Management and Budget - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Lazybones]

Ok so you really think everyone in the us government that told us it was Russian interference is wrong?

All of them cia FBI all of them?

So that [Mod Edit ] now wants to come up with some sort of scheme to make his election results not look tainted and you buy it hook line and sinker? Oh and while he is doing that he is trying to get a fake investigation on his political rival.

Have you not noticed he has serious problems with the truth?

Home on guys read news from everyone please not just Fox news.

I’m not sure what orange arse hat is supposed to mean. I will happily converse with you, but not with this type of adhom.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

I think a lot of people overplay their hand when it comes to insulting Rudy, he may be the worlds most technically illiterate ordained “cyber security expert,” but while people were dunking on him for some seemingly faux pas statements that further illicit questions about Trump’s criminality recently, that seems to be much more strategic than unintentional. Letting the president know, if you don’t reciprocate the loyalty I’ve shown, I know where the skeletons are and won’t hesitate to expose them should you try and turn on me or distance yourself.

Of course if it gets really bad for Rudy, there is also the question of whether Rudy would even be willing to go to jail for up to 5 years awaiting a Trump pardon. Or even take Trump on his word that he will. As Rudy knows as well as anyone that Trump’s loyalty is a waning phenomenon predicated on whether that loyalty is in his own self interest, and when it came to Manafort, the moment it appeared he had Manafort’s cooperation, based on all this testimony, he almost immediately switched his focus in Ukraine from trying to gin up support for counter-narratives built on conspiracy theories to discredit the Mueller charges about Manafort, to telling Sondland only a couple months later all he really cares about is investigating the Biden’s. And the person on the ground facilitating that abrupt pivot and seemingly overnight apathy toward defending Manafort anymore was Rudy.

 

[insidejob]

Well, here we go again. It looks like it's going to be a slow day at the office today, so I'll probably watch more of this than I really want to.

 

[insidejob]

"MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!"

 

[insidejob]

I'm waiting for the point of that phone call being read...it was just two guys stroking each others' egos.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

I think what frustrates me at this point about people like Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan is not that they are corrupt vassals defending and boosting the worst aspects of American politics and behavior, eroding the norms that are required for a functioning and healthy democratic system, but that there will ultimately be zero consequences for people like him.

He will die a millionaire. He will leave congress and get a 6 figure salary to speak on an ever radicalizing Fox News, or a 7 figure one on K-street or in industry peddling influence and lobbying for even more abhorrent policy and corruption. Years from now a new Nunes will be propped up and all the "moderates" and armchair pundit class will bring on a freshly laundered Nunes and allow him to be presented as some elder statesman bringing wisdom to the current political environment. Like Karl Rove, John Bolton, W. Bush, or Bill Barr before him.

 

[The moose]

I’m not sure what orange arse hat is supposed to mean. I will happily converse with you, but not with this type of adhom.

I can see you are confused it could be an arse shaped hat for an orange persons head or a regular shaped hat for an orange persons arse. My bad.

I take it you understand everything else I posted.

So you think Russian interference is a crock?

So you think the deep state boogie monster it doing this? What great conspiracy theory ya got for me?

Oops might get in trouble for the boogie monster crap.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Public impeachment hearings for President Trump got underway Wednesday. The president stands accused of using his power to undermine democracy, and while these hearings might cover a lot of ground over the next few weeks — every day seems to bring some new report of wrongdoing by the president and his cronies — members of the House aren't likely to delve much, if at all, into how Trump's wrongdoing reflects the culture of the party he heads. And that's a shame, because if there is a story that defines the GOP in the 21st century, it's the willingness of its elected officials to use their power to undermine opponents and entrench themselves in office.

In other words, Trump's abuses of power mirror those of the GOP as a whole. Republicans can't turn on him, because doing so would be to indict their party's entire approach to politics.

At the state level, GOP legislatures across the country have passed numerous voter ID laws over the last decade or so — ostensibly to protect the sanctity of elections, but also with the intended effect of depressing turnout among Democratic constituencies. When voter suppression hasn't been enough — when Democrats managed to win elections anyway — Republicans have in recent years gone to extraordinary lengths to neutralize those wins. In North Carolina and Michigan, GOP-led legislatures neutered the governors' offices after Democrats won elections and replaced the Republican officeholders. In Utah, voters approved Medicaid expansion at the ballot box — and GOP legislators backtracked. In Florida, voters approved letting ex-felons vote — only to see Republican officials there create the 21st-century equivalent of a poll tax...…….

Republicans can't abandon Trump now because they're all guilty

To condemn his sins would be to condemn themselves

theweek.com

 

[Lazybones]

I can see you are confused it could be an arse shaped hat for an orange persons head or a regular shaped hat for an orange persons arse. My bad.

I take it you understand everything else I posted.

So you think Russian interference is a crock?

So you think the deep state boogie monster it doing this? What great conspiracy theory ya got for me?

Oops might get in trouble for the boogie monster crap.

I don’t have a conspiracy theory at all. What specifically are you talking about?

 

[N.O.Bronco]

Off the bat more holes in the pursuit of broad Ukrainian corruption narrative.

I think the problem with her testimony is it is not easily packaged for the way news is delivered in the hyper first-to-market sensational headline environment of today, but for places like this trying to achieve more substantive debate, there is a lot for people defending the Trump/Rudy line of investigating corruption to answer for in this testimony so far.

Overriding the department judgement to deny a convicted partner of Rudy a visa on the grounds of proven corruption. The president finding more empathy with people like Shokin, who was pushed out for not pursuing corruption and working on behalf of former Soviet kleptocrats, or Lusenko and Kholodnytsky, the latter who was caught on record coaching suspects on how to beat their corruption charges. Removing Yonakovitch shortly after she publicly questioned Lusenko's lack of corruption pursuits, Trump calling him a very good prosecutor and bemoaning Yanakovitch.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

Public impeachment hearings for President Trump got underway Wednesday. The president stands accused of using his power to undermine democracy, and while these hearings might cover a lot of ground over the next few weeks — every day seems to bring some new report of wrongdoing by the president and his cronies — members of the House aren't likely to delve much, if at all, into how Trump's wrongdoing reflects the culture of the party he heads. And that's a shame, because if there is a story that defines the GOP in the 21st century, it's the willingness of its elected officials to use their power to undermine opponents and entrench themselves in office.

In other words, Trump's abuses of power mirror those of the GOP as a whole. Republicans can't turn on him, because doing so would be to indict their party's entire approach to politics.

At the state level, GOP legislatures across the country have passed numerous voter ID laws over the last decade or so — ostensibly to protect the sanctity of elections, but also with the intended effect of depressing turnout among Democratic constituencies. When voter suppression hasn't been enough — when Democrats managed to win elections anyway — Republicans have in recent years gone to extraordinary lengths to neutralize those wins. In North Carolina and Michigan, GOP-led legislatures neutered the governors' offices after Democrats won elections and replaced the Republican officeholders. In Utah, voters approved Medicaid expansion at the ballot box — and GOP legislators backtracked. In Florida, voters approved letting ex-felons vote — only to see Republican officials there create the 21st-century equivalent of a poll tax...…….

Republicans can't abandon Trump now because they're all guilty

To condemn his sins would be to condemn themselves

theweek.com

Speaking to people that call other countries home, so aren't wrapped up in the American bubble, noted that they increasingly have a pretty hard time seeing much difference between Barr's use of the Justice Department and people like Nazar Kholodnytsky's use of the prosecutor general office in Ukraine.

And that is pretty alarming, and not totally incorrect. Much of the longstanding bi-partisan criticism we have leveled at prosecutors in Ukraine are increasingly appearing commonplace in the Barr Justice Department: acting not as an independent branch of justice, but as the president's personal lawyer and political hitman, pursuing matters in ways to help the domestic agenda of the president, even when needing to bend facts and framings to do so, and weaponizing the office to seek ways to punish political rivals. Applying the law disproportionately depending on political favor to the administration.