Republicans secretly study their coming hell

Since this didn't seem to get any attention here, I thought I'd share it.

"
Congressional Republicans are getting ready for hell. Axios has obtained a spreadsheet that's circulated through Republican circles on and off Capitol Hill — including at least one leadership office — that meticulously previews the investigations Democrats will likely launch if they flip the House.

Why this matters: Publicly, House Republicans are putting on a brave face about the midterms. But privately, they are scrambling to prepare for the worst. This document, which catalogs requests Democrats have already made, is part of that effort.

It has churned Republican stomachs. Here are some of the probes it predicts:

• President Trump’s tax returns
• Trump family businesses — and whether they comply with the Constitution's emoluments clause, including the Chinese trademark grant to the Trump Organization
• Trump's dealings with Russia, including the president's preparation for his meeting with Vladimir Putin
• The payment to Stephanie Clifford — a.k.a. Stormy Daniels
• James Comey's firing
• Trump's firing of U.S. attorneys
• Trump's proposed transgender ban for the military
• Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin's business dealings
• White House staff's personal email use
• Cabinet secretary travel, office expenses, and other misused perks
• Discussion of classified information at Mar-a-Lago
• Jared Kushner's ethics law compliance
• Dismissal of members of the EPA board of scientific counselors
• The travel ban
• Family separation policy
• Hurricane response in Puerto Rico
• Election security and hacking attempts
• White House security clearances

The spreadsheet — which I'm told originated in a senior House Republican office — catalogs more than 100 formal requests from House Democrats this Congress, spanning nearly every committee.

• The spreadsheet includes requests for administration officials to be grilled by committee staff, requests for hearings to obtain sworn testimony, efforts to seize communications about controversial policies and personnel decisions, and subpoena threats.
• These demands would turn the Trump White House into a 24/7 legal defense operation.

The bottom line: Thanks to their control of Congress, Republicans have blocked most of the Democrats’ investigative requests. But if the House flips, the GOP loses its power to stymie. Lawyers close to the White House tell me the Trump administration is nowhere near prepared for the investigatory onslaught that awaits them, and they consider it among the greatest threats to his presidency."

Since the Republican Congress has almost completely disregarded its oversight function in the last two years, this is a telling article.

It makes clear that the GOP is scared stiff.

With a record that runs from the lickspittle performance of Devin Nunes, to the foot dragging of Grassley, there has been no effective attempt to review or police this openly corrupt and serially incompetent Administration. There hasn't been a public hearing on the Russia probe in over a year. Even the GOP witchhunts over Strozk and Ohr retreated behind closed doors for fear that public scrutiny would wind up making them look bad.

All the Republcians have to do is lose either house of Congress to open up this Pandora
s Box of self inflicted scandals.

 

So you think an avalanche of investigatory overreach would make the Democrats look good?

 

"White House staff's personal email use"

 

Not sure why R Congresspeople would care too much about this list... It's mostly Trump and his administration and his decisions... The only bad that will come out of these investigations to them is their failure to get this done when they were in charge.... ohhhhh...... I get ya.....

 

So it mattered when Hillary did it, but not White House staff?

 

Please specify what on that list you consider "overreach", and why.

 

Well, while none of this is probably overreach, if it's known (and I'm not sure how) that another investigatory body is looking into an issue as a possible criminal charge, I'm not sure I'd have Congress get involved... It did sort of bother me when there were 3 separate investigations into Russia at the same time... Once Mueller was appointed, I would have probably stopped the Senate and Congressional versions.

So basically, that probably means Stormy and election hacking... SDNY and Mueller seem to have those 2 covered

 

Ha! I heard the pot was going to investigate the kettle for being irresponsible with tax payer money!!!

Thanks for the laugh

 

I like Gop policies but cannot stand Trump ... but all this stuff I don't really care about. What I care about is Russia hacking the elections. Remember Iran Contra? Remember the Church hearings on the CIA? Remember hearing about focking Benganzi for YEARS. I'd like to see some congressmen on TV ass keeling social media and Russians on this ****, or seeing the Russians scruyying outta reach.

 

Typically Congress ratchets back its investigations when a special counsel gets involved. IIRC, they did that here, too. Didn't stop it completely, but ended stuff that might have conflicted with Mueller's probe. Which is why they're instead trying to prove the FBI is corrupt....

 

Better that than the kettle deciding not to investigate the kettle.

 

Please specify the criminal evidence you have that would justify each item on the list, and I will show you your overreach.

 

?? Since when do Congressional investigations require "criminal evidence"? It's part of Congress' oversight powers.

 

That's Awesome... Pissed I didn't think of that myself....

But wouldn't it be the kettle ordering others not to investigate the kettle?

 

So you have no evidence of criminality to investigate. That's what I thought.

 

I didn't say that. But that's like asking "please specify the ice cream flavors that would justify each investigation." You're demanding a criteria that isn't relevant.

 

For all of them, use Rocky Road....

 

Congressional oversight is not based on the prospect of criminal behavior.

 

These are republicans, its obviously vanilla

 

So you want the Democrats to launch an avalanche of investigatory overreach just for spite, without any evidence of wrongdoing?

 

""The role of Congress is not to protect the President," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "It's to hold the President and any President accountable to the American people." Nadler is the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, which would hold any impeachment hearings."

Congress does NOT oversee the President. They are coequal branches. The only thing they can do is enter into impeachment hearings based on high crimes and misdemeanors.

But what is quite clear is that the Democrats have no plans to do their job which is to legislate for the country if they take the White House.

 

I didn't say that, either. I happen to think most of the stuff on that list is long overdue and well within Congress' purview. You seem to disagree; I asked you to identify which of the proposed investigations you think is overreach, and why. You decline to do so, which suggests you can't.

 

So what would an avalanche of investigatory overreach be based upon?

 

That is their bottom line and will be their only efforts if the take the White House.

 

Um, you put together a garble of words that ended up being wrong.

It is true that Congress and the Executive are co-equal branches.

But Congress has a long-established oversight authority on how the Executive implements Congress' laws and spends Congress' money.

They also have the power to investigate pretty much anything not covered by Executive Privilege.

So no, impeachment is NOT the only thing Congress can do.

Meanwhile, I'll ask you the same question that pol meister refuses to answer. Which of the proposed investigations do you consider overreach, and why?