House Speaker Pelosi to announce formal impeachment inquiry of Trump

[Teallaura]

According to an article I read recently, former politicians can be impeached and barred from holding office in the future.

They can also be prosecuted.

[Teallaura]

Under a formalized impeachment inquiry, the committee will get the whistleblower complaint and underlying evidence. It won't have to settle for just a transcript of the call.

It'll also get the Mueller investigation's grand jury documents and a good deal of other material.

The trigger has been pulled and releasing a transcript of the call won't reverse that.

--Sam

Never pull the trigger unless you know exactly where the bullet will end up - or what you're shooting at.

[rogue06]

Under a formalized impeachment inquiry, the committee will get the whistleblower complaint and underlying evidence. It won't have to settle for just a transcript of the call.

It'll also get the Mueller investigation's grand jury documents and a good deal of other material.

The trigger has been pulled and releasing a transcript of the call won't reverse that.

--Sam

The bolded may very well what this was about all along.

[Sam]

The bolded may very well what this was about all along.

Well, the straw that broke the camel's back was not the first one placed there, after all.

[Mountain Man]

The bolded may very well what this was about all along.

It's a safe bet that the grand jury documents will be no more damaging to Trump than Mueller's nothing-burger report.

[seanD]

Pelosi has completely lost control. I think she's just tired of the fight - or unable to keep it up. She's giving the freshmen the rope to hang themselves and the party.

Even if after the transcripts are released and there's something "juicy" there for the Dems to capitalize on, it still may not have any real effect on elections simply because of the boy crying wolf scenario in the public conscious. But if there's in fact nothing in the transcripts, this will irreparably cripple any and all Dem election chances in 2020. Pelosi can't possibly be the only one that sees that.

[Teallaura]

Even if after the transcripts are released and there's something "juicy" there for the Dems to capitalize on, it still may not have any real effect on elections simply because of the boy crying wolf scenario in the public conscious. But if there's in fact nothing in the transcripts, this will irreparably cripple any and all Dem election chances in 2020. Pelosi can't possibly be the only one that sees that.

One of my favorite YT commentators likened it to betting everything before knowing what anyone else has in their hands. The NYT published an article speculating that Trump wants an impeachment because of the damage it will do the Democrats.

And Dem support in the Rustbelt is declining...

I think the Dems are so self involved that they are unable to see straight.

[Mountain Man]

Interesting... (emphasis mine)

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...of-status-quo/

[Teallaura]

Interesting... (emphasis mine)

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...of-status-quo/

I REALLY think Pelosi has completely lost control of the House majority - which doesn't have enough votes to actually move anyway.

[rogue06]

It's a safe bet that the grand jury documents will be no more damaging to Trump than Mueller's nothing-burger report.

But a lot more unsubstantiated rumors and gossip that the left can treat as indisputable facts.

[rogue06]

I REALLY think Pelosi has completely lost control of the House majority - which doesn't have enough votes to actually move anyway.

I think they've been waiting for an excuse -- any excuse -- to start proceedings in a long shot gamble that the Mueller investigation grand jury documents hold juicy gossip that is worth the risk to obtain.

[Teallaura]

I think they've been waiting for an excuse -- any excuse -- to start proceedings in a long shot gamble that the Mueller investigation grand jury documents hold juicy gossip that is worth the risk to obtain.

Nadler and the squad, yeah. Not Pelosi, I don't think.

[Mountain Man]

But a lot more unsubstantiated rumors and gossip that the left can treat as indisputable facts.

But they're not going to have access to those documents until the House holds a formal vote to begin the impeachment process, and that hasn't happened.

[seer]

It'll also get the Mueller investigation's grand jury documents and a good deal of other material.

--Sam

Where did you get that info? This is not an actual impeachment inquiry, which first needs to be voted on. Nadler has been saying his previous investigation was too a formal impeachment hearing - that did not get him grand jury documents.

[Sam]

Where did you get that info? This is not an actual impeachment inquiry, which first needs to be voted on. Nadler has been saying his previous investigation was too a formal impeachment hearing - that did not get him grand jury documents.

Nadler is still in a court dispute to get those documents -- a dispute that now involves an explicit statement by the Speaker regarding impeachment.

There's no statute defining a "formal impeachment hearing". Recently, when the President is involved, there's been a vote directing an inquiry to investigate certain articles of impeachment. But there's no rule to make that a requirement. And if the Speaker of the House says that it's doing an impeachment inquiry, that compels the court to treat any relevant subpoenas as attached to an impeachment inquiry.

So the House will get the documents. And, if someone wants to get hard-nosed about that in court, Democrats (+Amash) will have the votes necessary. The Rubicon has been crossed.

--Sam