The Juggler said:

jeffbr said:

An interesting article from NBC News where Pelosi is still dancing around impeachment, but Nadler says they're already in-effect working the impeachment investigation.

Pelosi: I'm not slow-walking impeachment inquiry. Nadler: It's 'in effect' anyway
But soon after Pelosi spoke, Nadler said Friday that his committee has “in effect” already been conducting an impeachment inquiry of Trump.

Flanked by Judiciary Committee members who’ve voiced support for an impeachment inquiry, Nadler was asked by NBC News to clarify whether the Judiciary Committee has already initiated such an inquiry.

“Whether you call that an inquiry, or whatever you want to call that, that’s what we’ve been doing,” Nadler said, later adding that they have already been conducting one “in effect.”

“I think too much has been made of the phrase 'impeachment inquiry,'” he said.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a constitutional law expert who has voiced support for such an inquiry, also said an effort of some kind was essentially underway. “A lot of people believe that we have been in an impeachment inquiry ..." he said. "I would say we are in an impeachment investigation.”

Nadler announced during the press conference that he would be going to court later in the day to ask for the grand jury information within the 448-page Mueller report, which he said will help determine whether they decide to impeach Trump. In the filing, the committee planned to say that “articles of impeachment are under consideration as part of the Committee’s investigation, although no final determination has been made.”

“Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting president, the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the federal government that can now hold President Trump accountable for these actions,” Nadler said, reading directly from the petition he was filing in court. “To do so, the House must have access to all of the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full Article I powers including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity — recommendation of the articles of impeachment.”

Saw this. Great news.

Anyone know how the 6 week recess plays into things though?

We are finally on the path to Trump impeachment and saving what our Founders gave us

Don’t let anybody fool you: We are engaged in an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” to quote the Constitution. The inquiry began on Friday, July 26. No fireworks, no fanfare — omitted for fear of frightening the natives. But the message was loud and clear in the House Judiciary Committee’s court petition for access to redacted material in the Mueller report, and its intention to compel testimony from relevant witnesses.

Articles of impeachment have been formally referred to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration, House counsel Douglas Letter said in the Friday filing to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That consideration, the committee has now informed the court, is underway, as is consideration of whether to recommend its own articles of impeachment.

jeffbr said:

We are finally on the path to Trump impeachment and saving what our Founders gave us

Don’t let anybody fool you: We are engaged in an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” to quote the Constitution. The inquiry began on Friday, July 26. No fireworks, no fanfare — omitted for fear of frightening the natives. But the message was loud and clear in the House Judiciary Committee’s court petition for access to redacted material in the Mueller report, and its intention to compel testimony from relevant witnesses.

Articles of impeachment have been formally referred to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration, House counsel Douglas Letter said in the Friday filing to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That consideration, the committee has now informed the court, is underway, as is consideration of whether to recommend its own articles of impeachment.

The Juggler said:

jeffbr said:

We are finally on the path to Trump impeachment and saving what our Founders gave us

Don’t let anybody fool you: We are engaged in an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” to quote the Constitution. The inquiry began on Friday, July 26. No fireworks, no fanfare — omitted for fear of frightening the natives. But the message was loud and clear in the House Judiciary Committee’s court petition for access to redacted material in the Mueller report, and its intention to compel testimony from relevant witnesses.

Articles of impeachment have been formally referred to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration, House counsel Douglas Letter said in the Friday filing to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That consideration, the committee has now informed the court, is underway, as is consideration of whether to recommend its own articles of impeachment.

Just saw an interview with Nadler talking about this. 

Only a matter of time at this point...

Ledbetterman10 said:

I still think impeachment, politically speaking, isn't in the best interest of the Dems. We know he won't be convicted in the Senate. And I personally don't think it would hurt him in the 2020 election because I think the undecided voters will look at it as just more bureaucratic attempts to get rid of him (Mueller report -> Mueller testimony -> Impeachment). I know a lot of you guys are of the belief "So what if he's not convicted? He should be impeached so impeach him." Hey, have it your way. It'll certainly be an entertaining shit show. 

jeffbr said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

I still think impeachment, politically speaking, isn't in the best interest of the Dems. We know he won't be convicted in the Senate. And I personally don't think it would hurt him in the 2020 election because I think the undecided voters will look at it as just more bureaucratic attempts to get rid of him (Mueller report -> Mueller testimony -> Impeachment). I know a lot of you guys are of the belief "So what if he's not convicted? He should be impeached so impeach him." Hey, have it your way. It'll certainly be an entertaining shit show. 

I understand that the Senate would acquit him, but that is how things have historically happened. Only 2 previous presidents have been impeached by the House - Andrew Jackson & Bill Clinton. In both cases, they were acquitted by the Senate. Nixon's impeachment was still in the investigation stage when he resigned. I would be fine with whatever the outcome is (Senate acquittal as expected, resignation prior to vote, or a miraculous Senate conviction and removal). But I want all of the congresscritters on record. In the face of overwhelming evidence of misconduct those who vote against are complicit and that vote should be used against them in any future campaigns. 

Ledbetterman10 said:

jeffbr said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

I still think impeachment, politically speaking, isn't in the best interest of the Dems. We know he won't be convicted in the Senate. And I personally don't think it would hurt him in the 2020 election because I think the undecided voters will look at it as just more bureaucratic attempts to get rid of him (Mueller report -> Mueller testimony -> Impeachment). I know a lot of you guys are of the belief "So what if he's not convicted? He should be impeached so impeach him." Hey, have it your way. It'll certainly be an entertaining shit show. 

I understand that the Senate would acquit him, but that is how things have historically happened. Only 2 previous presidents have been impeached by the House - Andrew Jackson & Bill Clinton. In both cases, they were acquitted by the Senate. Nixon's impeachment was still in the investigation stage when he resigned. I would be fine with whatever the outcome is (Senate acquittal as expected, resignation prior to vote, or a miraculous Senate conviction and removal). But I want all of the congresscritters on record. In the face of overwhelming evidence of misconduct those who vote against are complicit and that vote should be used against them in any future campaigns. 

Seems like a lot of people share that opinion. Fair enough. To each their own. 

Ledbetterman10 said:

josevolution said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

jeffbr said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

I still think impeachment, politically speaking, isn't in the best interest of the Dems. We know he won't be convicted in the Senate. And I personally don't think it would hurt him in the 2020 election because I think the undecided voters will look at it as just more bureaucratic attempts to get rid of him (Mueller report -> Mueller testimony -> Impeachment). I know a lot of you guys are of the belief "So what if he's not convicted? He should be impeached so impeach him." Hey, have it your way. It'll certainly be an entertaining shit show. 

I understand that the Senate would acquit him, but that is how things have historically happened. Only 2 previous presidents have been impeached by the House - Andrew Jackson & Bill Clinton. In both cases, they were acquitted by the Senate. Nixon's impeachment was still in the investigation stage when he resigned. I would be fine with whatever the outcome is (Senate acquittal as expected, resignation prior to vote, or a miraculous Senate conviction and removal). But I want all of the congresscritters on record. In the face of overwhelming evidence of misconduct those who vote against are complicit and that vote should be used against them in any future campaigns. 

Seems like a lot of people share that opinion. Fair enough. To each their own. 

To let him get away with everything is no way to uphold any future presidents in check , I’d rather Democrats go for it than play nice nice with the Baffoon ..

They wouldn't be playing "nice nice" by not impeaching him. If they don't impeach him, they're doing it under the belief (that I share) that he'll be acquitted in the Senate trial and undecided voters might gravitate to him in 2020 because of it. You seem to share jeffbr's belief, which as I said, is fair enough.