Starting a new thread. Sensenbrenner one-upping Lofgren on impeachments. He does not look well.
Sensenbrenner disagrees with Gerald Ford on basis for impeachment, whatever a majority of the House could agree on.
Sensenbrenner Claims inquiry arose out of Trump saying “do me a favor.” Um. No. It came out of the context of that.
Sensenbrenner now wondering why Biden is not impeached for something he said in 2018, and not impeached for doing what EVERYONE agreed, which was to fire corrupt people.
Again, Sensenbrenner wondering why the House did not impeach someone who was not in office and did not personally benefit.
Sensenbrenner now says we should have all the evidence like we had under Nixon and Clinton. So … he’s calling or a Special Prosecutor?
Sheila Jackson Lee holding up binders. Do you think evidence is wafer thin? Strength of record? Karlan: Obviously it’s not wafer thin. How does it fin into pattern of behavior by President. Drawing inferences abt circumstantial and direct evidences.
Karlan: While the son’s name may be Barron he can’t make him a baron.
ackson Lee: Most compelling evidence? Feldman: Phone transcript most compelling. You hear the President asking for personal benefit.
Chabot wants to hear from fact witnesses like Adam Schiff or Hunter Biden but not Devin Nunes or — work with me here — Rudy Giuliani.
Chabot still filibustering. Apparently Turley has no wisdom he’s interested in, or maybe the Constitution generally.
Chabot now claiming for the second time that impeachment would overturn an election, then suggests over half the country would disagree when over half support impeaching the president.
Chabot now several minutes into a speech complaining about Democrats wasting time.
Chabot now saying Congress could work on infrastructure. Maybe he’ll let us impeach Trump on reneging on his campaign promise for infrastructure. No question, btw.
Cohen throws a definitional question to Feldman, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Feldman factchecking on what the definition of High Misdemeanor used before.
I think Turley is working on his next contrarian post.
Cohen now asking each for their key piece of evidence. Karlan: Announcement of investigation. Feldman: Holding up aid Gerhardt: Obstruction of Congress
Garhardt: Congress only uses the word “sole” twice. House and Senate on impeachment.
Cohen bravely addresses Turley, but doesn’t ask him a question. Which Democrat will be the first brave enough to question Turley? Swalwell?
Gohmert trying to complain about not having fact witnesses but stumbles on the word “fact.” Also complaining that there are 36 boxes of documents, which would seem to support demanding that DOJ turn over Mueller’s evidence.
Gohmert says this is hearsay on hearsay. I guess Sondland’s direct very loud call with Trump is not direct.
Gohmert complaining he didn’t have time to read. Names two people who worked on NSC, suggesting because they’ve worked with Democrats make them suspect.
According to Gohmert, people who weren’t in WH are direct witnesses but Rudy and Pompeo and Eisenberg are not.
Gohmert is apparently concerned abt NSC staffers who work on HPSCI, but NOT Derek Harvey, who was cuddling up to indicted fraudster Lev Parnas.
Sid Blumenthal! Drink! Now HE has expertise on impeachment.
Gohmert has listed about 5 witnesses, but says he’s asking for 3 because 2 + 2 ≠ 4.
Gohmert: Thanks for bringing down the gavel hard. That was nice.
Johnson: Trump twice asked for foreign influence. Turley calls this impulse buy. Karlan: You need to act now to prevent foreign influence like we had in the past.
Johnson: What did Randolph do to prevent corruption. Feldman: POTUS works for the people. POTUS who could not be impeached would be above the law.
Feldman: There’s nothing wrong for someone to ask for a favor to benefit the US. It’s wrong to ask for personal benefit.
Johnson: how did Vindman’s concern abt power dynamic? Feldman: When POTUS uses word favor, he’s applying tremendous power.
Johnson: Withhold meeting, why abuse power? Karlan: Asking for investigation, regardless of everything else. The rest of aggravating circumstance.
Whoo. An incredibly rich 5 minutes for Hank Johnson. Now … JIM JORDAN IS YELLING AGAIN.
Jordan complaining that 16 Democrats already voted for impeachment. Well, yeah, he was already shown to have committed crimes.
THE MOST UNFAIR PROCESS WE HAVE EVER SEEN BUNKER BUNKER BUNKER SCHIFF SCHIFF SCHIFF. Jordan claims that Schiff denied their witnesses. False. One of them even affirmed quid pro quo.
Jordan: REASON IT’S UNFAIR IS BC FACTS ARE NOT ON THEIR SIDE. Jordan still claiming Ukrainians didn’t know abt the hold. THey did.
Jordan is treating meetings between officials and Ukrainians as the important ones, not ones involving Rudy. Claiming that Ukraine would offer investigation for meeting with a Dem Senators, which is odd.
Jordan: Democrats have never accepted will of American people. [Meaning the majority who voted for Hillary?]
No question from Jim Jordan but that’s not surprising bc he’s not remotely curious about the Constitution.
Karlan: maybe when he was first running for POTUS, reality TV show, asking Russia if you’re listening, he didn’t know. But by the time he asked, Ukraine, are you listening, he had to have known violation of oath.
Deutsch: He cannot use that power [to set foreign policy] to cheat in elections.
Buck: The other three witnesses IDed amorphous standard for impeachment. If abuses power for personal gain. Turley: Not the way it’s been stated. [misrepresents what other witnesses have said]
Ken Buck appears to be trying to impeach LBJ.
He has gone through FDR, Kennedy, and now Obama for appointing recess appointments. Which is odd, bc Trump has tripled down on abuse of appointments.
Buck just argued for a
Buck’s case for impeaching on Benghazi, btw, amounts to impeaching a President for inaccurate talking points, which given how often Trump lies is remarkable.
Turley doesn’t want to measure national standard. I guess because the entire national security bureaucracy agreed on this.
Gerhardt: It becomes abuse of power when using authorities of office for own benefit.