Articles of impeachment.........so far.

No....you don't. We've read your posts. And the fact that you can't document your claims is not unusual...for you

 

I am well aware of your continued denial that only the OLC prohibition against indicting a sitting prez stopped Mueller from pursuing the multiple instances of obstruction he provides granular details of on his report.

 

Capt. Chaos has added to the likelihood obstructing a congressional investigation will be an article of impeachment by blocking testimony from Sondland.

 

Yes, she hasn't yet introduced a formal resolution. She hasn't voted. There is nothing official at this point....

 

Um like where pray tell can one find these Articles of Impeachment.
Or is this another classic example of Democrat Beer Talk.
In Late November of 2017 the Minority House Democrats submitted
5 articles of Impeachment c/o Steve Cohen { D-Tenn. }.
The guy who got attention recently by bringing into a Committee
hearing a Bucket of Fried Chicken.Sans Beer,naturally.

 

Not so. Trump refused to sit down and be questioned, and Mueller caved, allowing him to answer written questions. His answers included 39 versions of "I don't remember."

Which other presidents solicited foreign assistance for their campaigns?

 

Epic failure to back up your claim then. Noted.

 

......and without an actual impeachment proceeding

 

But there is Precedent.Which is almost always established procedure.
That past Impeachment efforts used a Full { Recorded } House member
vote.Why are Democrats so belligerently accustomed with tinkering around
when in Control.Like Harry Reid pulled with use of the Nuclear Option.

 

And yet, the questions were still answered. Just because you don't like the answers does not mean that they were not answered. And ANY lawyer out there makes sure that their clients do not answer any questions by investigators. That is standard practice. And when they do direct their clients to answer they always direct the answers that puts their client in as little of harms way as possible. And they always try to avoid sit downs with investigators. That is their job.

Do you complain about all defendants similarly? Or is it just Trump?

None. And neither has Trump. Whether you want to believe it or not the questions about the Biden's started long before Trump talked about them. And those were brought up by the Media. In fact it was the NYTimes that first brought up Biden's and Ukraine on May 1st. The Executive Branch has every right to investigate those allegations regardless if Biden is running for President or not. In fact they are mandated to. And they have every right to ask foreign leaders to do such when the questions center around those foreign leaders countries. It is literally part of the Job of the Executive branch to investigate any possible federal crime. That is a fact. Remember, Trump did not initially bring up the Biden's and Ukraine or China. The News Media did. If Trump had then that would be a different story. But he didn't. The News Media did.

Oh and btw, the DNC used a Ukraine Embassy to dig up whatever dirt they could find on Trump. Admittedly they deny doing such. But even the Ukrainian Ambassador admits that such did happen. Ukrainian Embassy confirms DNC contractor solicited Trump dirt in 2016

 

That may change quickly... Doug Collins has filed an Amicus Curiae

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/10/03/doug.collins.amicus.pdf

The DC circuit has very little to go on other than the Supreme Court ruling in 1997.

This is really a due process issue and the Constitutional principles of a balanced investigation should easily prevail.

 

Which other presidents solicited foreign assistance for their campaigns?

If you count presidential candidates, Ted Kennedy made a concerted effort to get the USSR's direct help for the 1984 election. When that became known in the early 1990s the Dems and the media gave it big ho-hum.

 

Doug Collins is spot on, but I don't think a federal court will touch it with a 100-foot pole.

 

There were no referrals of OOJ out of that investigation and in fact even the Office of Legal Counsel found no OOJ. And Presidential claims of Executive Privilege are Constitution.

Requesting assistance, as required by treaty with a foreign government, in an investigation into government corruption is well within his role as President. Protecting the taxpayer dollars from being used by corrupt persons and governments is his DUTY.

 

The Democrats gave them two working days to produce all the documents and have Sondland before them, that's absurd. As normally happens with such request for members of the Cabinet or other officials the Committee can meet with the DoS legal counsel and they can come to an agreement on the testimony and documents and give time for the legal counsel to consult with Sondland before he testifies.

 

So go ahead and take the leap...

Trump is calling Pelosi's bluff...

Pompeo is calling Schiff's bluff...

It is time.......... now just waiting for the vote !!!

 

Actually, they weren't. Trump refused to answer questions about obstruction, even in written form. The answers he gave on the questions pertaining to conspiracy were so vague as to be useless, or as Mueller called them, "inadequate."
So let's not pretend Trump did anything but stonewall Mueller from start to finish.

 

But, you know that's just a talking point, right? The WH has already signaled it has no intention of cooperating in any way with Congress' investigation. Just as they have refused to cooperate with any investigation for months.

 

No it's a fact and the Democrats need to stop tossing out subpoena's like confetti with their witch hunt to find something anything on which to impeach a duly elected President. The White House is clear, have the whole House vote to start an impeachment and given it it's co-equal branch rights in that impeachment.

 

Mueller also said that by that time they didn't need Trumps testimony. The "We also assessed..............."

 

And as Mueller also admitted, Trump did not impeded his investigation in any way. If you're going to be quoting him then you should use all his quotes and not just those that appear to fit your narrative.

 

None of these investigations were or are lawful without, "probable cause."

The Dems in the House have nothing to take to the Senate for an actual trial except for their word on it that Trump must have done something illegal.

The phone conversation shows no such thing and Kurt Volker completely exonerated Trump.

Go ahead and vote on this in the House and see what happens !

Bring it Dem Impeachment Mongers !

 

This is really a biggie.No wonder All things Kennedyesque
Chris Matthews is no where to be found on - Hardball -.
He is feversishly attempting to denounce while delineating in his skewed
Kennedy way what The Lion of the Senate did back then.
Kennedy " Secretly asked the Soviets To Intervene
in the 1984 Election. "

 

Thus helping to establish what I have been preaching ever since
I got to these hear boards.That Democrats Lie,Cheat and Smear at will.
They try as they might to steal elections.Then of course cast blame
on their rivals.It's not just a pattern.Its rooted in Political science.
It's Proveable,Obvious and in Plain sight.Which exemplifies perfectly
why Obama was selected.A Black Liberal Democrat.
No way he will ever be allowed to be critcized or even slightly vetted.
We went thru that ordeal.It's usually important for Grown-ups to
learn from their mistakes.No so with Democrats.They just keep
doubling down.They ... " Stuck on Stupid "
and wish upon a star a majority of americans fall under that spell.

 

This is getting real interesting. The following could only happen with a President named Trump.

The White House sent a letter to the House of Representatives telling them to vote on impeachment of the President! Unbelievable! Surreal!

Fox News put it this way, "The White House outlined in a defiant eight-page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top Democrats on Tuesday why it will not participate in their “illegitimate and unconstitutional” impeachment inquiry, charging that the proceedings have run roughshod over congressional norms and the president's due-process rights.

"Trump administration officials called the letter, which was written by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and obtained by Fox News, perhaps the most historic letter the White House has sent."

Well, Mr. Cipollone apparently does not know what impeachment is. IF Trump is impeached, that is an indictment, much like a grand jury when it hands down an indictment. IF Trump is impeached, he will received every one of his "due-process rights" in the trial which is held in the Senate. Cipollone didn't know this?

Or, he made complete fool of himself because the contents of the letter was meant only for Trump's base and Trump's soapboxes like the Sean Hannity show and much of Fox News with some notable exceptions. They will believe it.