Letter from White House counsel Pat Cipollone to House leaders

[Moderate Right]

I just cited a process of impeachment happening during an election and reaching into the 4 year mark. Why are you still complaining about these last 3 years?

Again, your arbritrary time frame for valid impeachment isn't relevant to existing impeachment proceedings and never have been.

Why keep talking?

Sent from the Matrioshka in the WH Christmas tree.

So, you're saying that you believe Trump will win re-election in 2020.

 

[bubbabgone]

I know it goes without saying in this administration, but this letter is absolutely astounding. I'm flabbergasted that an actual lawyer would write a letter with such glaring falsehoods and with such an unprofessional phrasing. It reads like a very poorly worded op-ed piece of an obscure blog with no editor.

I mean, right off the bat he begins talking about due process and "the right to be informed of the law, of the charges against you, the right to confront the witnesses against you, to call your own witnesses, and to have the assistance of counsel." None of this has to do with an impeachment inquiry. If they pass articles of impeachment and it goes to the senate, that's the actual trial. But complaining about not being able to call your own witnesses during the investigative stage is like trying to stop the cops from investigating you for a crime because you haven't called your own witnesses yet. You don't do that til trial. If the white house believes there is evidence that the house of reps skipped over during the inquiry, they can bring it up during the trial in the senate. It's just unbelievable that the white house counsel either doesn't understand that or is so dishonest and willing to tarnish his name by putting out something that someone even vaguely familiar with the law would know is wrong.

Actually ...

Both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate have the right to make their own rules governing their procedure, and to change those rules. Under current rules, the actual impeachment inquiry begins in the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives. That Committee holds hearings, takes evidence, and hears testimony of witnesses concerning matters relevant to the inquiry. Typically, as occurred in the case of President Nixon, there will also be a Minority Counsel who serves the interest of the party not controlling Congress.

Witnesses are interrogated by the Committee Counsel, the Minority Counsel, and each of the members of the House Judiciary Committee. The Committee formulates Articles of Impeachment which could contain multiple counts. The Committee votes on the Articles of Impeachment and the results of the vote are reported to the House as a whole. The matter is then referred to the whole House which debates the matter and votes on the Articles of Impeachment, which may or may not be changed. If the Articles of Impeachment are approved, the matter is sent to the Senate for trial.
Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

So in House impeachment hearings there is that participation of the minority. Not allowed in this case.

Also, as the letter indicates ...
"The Supreme Court has recognized that due process protections apply to all congressional investigations."
This is certainly one of those, flawed as it is.

 

[Moderate Right]

He attempted to extort a foreign leader to violate the law and corrupt it to his own will and purpose. That is a crime.

That is YOUR OPINION where you connected your own dots.

 

[GDViking]

Actually, it does:



A ****ing op-ed doesn't change what The Constitution says.

Well put, trump is clearly guilty of all of the above.

Thank you for finally acting like an American...

 

[Athanasius68]

Let see the tradition and precedent that was set in the Andrew Johnson impeachment to start this process/ Please begin there.

Ok.
The House voted to impeach him, then drew up articles of impeachment.
Follow the precedent.

Vote to impeach and investigate what articles he should be impeached for.

 

[Moderate Right]

Mueller report: ten counts of proven obstruction...

Openly and secretively asking for foreign nations help to dig up dirt on a political opponent.

Not only that but using approved federal aid as incentive to force them to cooperate.

120 plus counts of collusion ( not a crime but absolutely rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors) not to mention emoluments violations, and so many more...

This is the most corrupt president In history and those that are ignoring actual facts are either too stupid to walk and chew gum at the same time, too partisan to care if they support a criminal or are just flat out gullible...

10 counts of POSSIBLE obstruction, not proven obstruction

Were did Trump ask anyone to dig up dirt on a political opponent?

There is no proven quid pro quo.

no proven collusion

 

[Athanasius68]

Exactly, and every time the trump administration refuses a house subpoena is another count of obstruction...

Clinton lied about a blowjob, can any honest Republican admit this is far,far more serious???

Not really. The law for congressional obstruction requires there to be an issue before the committee.
The Constitution is clear-- only the House had sole power of impeachment-- not commitees of the House and not the speaker.

 

[Moderate Right]

Hence all the obstruction...

So, when you can't find evidence you claim obstruction?

 

[GDViking]

This is petering out quickly just like the first fabricated Russian hoax, the last whistleblower disaster, and the future "whistelblowers" to come.

Democrats are looking at their sad field of candidates and swinging desperately for the fence with concocted attempts to get rid of him any way possible. Because the ballot box isn't possible.

Trump has the sympathy of Americans like me, who don't like his mannerisms or tact. I recognize the totally unfair and absurdly corrupt attacks he's had to endure. I do admire his will. Most would have cratered to this constant nonsense by now.

Consider him re-elected.

The IG reports forthcoming are going to be damning, and Democrats are panicking.

:lamo:lamo:lamo

You really have not been keeping up in real time have you???

 

[Athanasius68]

Actually ...


So in House impeachment hearings there is that participation of the minority. Not allowed in this case.

Also, as the letter indicates ...
"The Supreme Court has recognized that due process protections apply to all congressional investigations."
This is certainly one of those, flawed as it is.

The problem here is that the Constitution states the House has sole power of impeachment. The judiciary cannot interfere.

 

[bubbabgone]

The problem here is that the Constitution states the House has sole power of impeachment. The judiciary cannot interfere.

The judiciary can and have, as the letter indicated. Due process rights are retained.

 

[Athanasius68]

The judiciary can and have, as the letter indicated. Due process rights are retained.

It's a bad argument. The authority of courts are not absolute.
But when it comes to impeachment, the authority of the house is absolute. The courts have no role.

 

[GDViking]

The Constitution absolutely lays out guidelines for impeachment. It says it flat out. The House has sole power.
The Senate can't investigate for impeachment. Neither can the Judiciary. They lack the power.
Neither can the speaker or committee chairman.
Only the House can do that. And they have yet to do so.

They are in the process...

 

[GDViking]

Your projection is a sight to behold.

Your lack of perception is truly amazing...

 

[GDViking]

So, you're saying that you believe Trump will win re-election in 2020.

Not even Putin believes that at this point...

 

[akyron]

So the Republicans convened the Ken Starr inquiry and impeached Bill Clinton to "overturn the popular will of the voters"? Who knew. I wonder why they don't teach that in school. "Bill Clinton was impeached because the Republicans wanted to overturn the will of the voters". Someone needs to alert Betsy DeVos so she can require that all schools include that statement in their history classes.

Incorrect.

Explosive Starr report outlines case for impeachment-CNN (Before they were the crazed non news.)

"In an explosive report to Congress, Independent Counsel Ken Starr outlines a case for impeaching President Bill Clinton on 11 grounds, including perjury, obstruction of justice, witness-tampering and abuse of power, while providing graphic details of the sexual relationship between the president and former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

The report, released Friday afternoon on the Internet, claims that Clinton took actions "inconsistent with the president's constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws."

A House vote earlier in the day paved the way for release of the first 445 pages of Starr's report, with an estimated 2,600 pages of supporting materials still awaiting House Judiciary Committee review. "

"Clinton admits misleading testimony, avoids charges in Lewinsky probe
President's law license suspended for 5 years"

" Under an agreement with Independent Counsel Robert Ray, Clinton's law license will be suspended for five years and he will pay a $25,000 fine to Arkansas bar officials. He also gave up any claim to repayment of his legal fees in the matter. In return, Ray will end the 7-year-old Whitewater probe that has shadowed most of Clinton's two terms.

"I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish this goal and am certain my responses to questions about Ms. Lewinsky were false," Clinton said in a written statement released Friday by the White House.

The admission, which came on the president's last full day in office, stems from the same allegations that led to Clinton's 1998 impeachment by the House of Representatives, and the later acquittal by the Senate.

In a statement minutes later, Ray said "the nation's interest has been served" by Clinton's admission. "

 

[tres borrachos]

Incorrect.

Explosive Starr report outlines case for impeachment-CNN (Before they were the crazed non news.)

"In an explosive report to Congress, Independent Counsel Ken Starr outlines a case for impeaching President Bill Clinton on 11 grounds, including perjury, obstruction of justice, witness-tampering and abuse of power, while providing graphic details of the sexual relationship between the president and former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

The report, released Friday afternoon on the Internet, claims that Clinton took actions "inconsistent with the president's constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws."

A House vote earlier in the day paved the way for release of the first 445 pages of Starr's report, with an estimated 2,600 pages of supporting materials still awaiting House Judiciary Committee review. "

"Clinton admits misleading testimony, avoids charges in Lewinsky probe
President's law license suspended for 5 years"

" Under an agreement with Independent Counsel Robert Ray, Clinton's law license will be suspended for five years and he will pay a $25,000 fine to Arkansas bar officials. He also gave up any claim to repayment of his legal fees in the matter. In return, Ray will end the 7-year-old Whitewater probe that has shadowed most of Clinton's two terms.

"I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish this goal and am certain my responses to questions about Ms. Lewinsky were false," Clinton said in a written statement released Friday by the White House.

The admission, which came on the president's last full day in office, stems from the same allegations that led to Clinton's 1998 impeachment by the House of Representatives, and the later acquittal by the Senate.

In a statement minutes later, Ray said "the nation's interest has been served" by Clinton's admission. "

Derp, and sorry, but no. Impeachment is only to overturn the popular will of the voters. That is the gospel according to Trump. Fail less. You will be barred from the Trump Fan Club meetings.

 

[gdgyva]

That is a stupid question. A dozen of the people indicted by Mueller (out of dozens) were Russian GRU agents.

I'll dismiss the rest of your post when you start off on a bad foot. Make your first sentences count or the rest won't..

Sent from the Matrioshka in the WH Christmas tree.

nice try

not one associated with Trump though

but nice try at a deflection when you really dont want to answer HONEST questions

 

[GDViking]

Ok.
The House voted to impeach him, then drew up articles of impeachment.
Follow the precedent.

Vote to impeach and investigate what articles he should be impeached for.

Ummm generally Investigations precede charges and indictments...

 

[trouble13]

I think many people are understsnding the point of the letter. It challenges tha validity and therefor the authority of congress to unofficially declare an offical impeachment inquiry.

Without s judge saying its it's legitimate they are formally telling the house that they will not voluntarily cooperate

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[GDViking]

10 counts of POSSIBLE obstruction, not proven obstruction

Were did Trump ask anyone to dig up dirt on a political opponent?

There is no proven quid pro quo.

no proven collusion

Collusion was absolutely proven as was quid pro quo (although not necessary as just the request was a crime).

If you have to ask about trump asking for foreign assistance you are either ignorant or playing an ignorant person on the internet.

Which is it???

 

[Visbek]

The Constitution absolutely lays out guidelines for impeachment.

lol

Read my post. I said the Constitution lays out no guidelines for an impeachment ***INQUIRY***, and I listed the few steps it does outline. In fact, there is so little said that I can easily post it here.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their
Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole
Power of Impeachment.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.
When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on
Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United
States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no
Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two
thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend
further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to
hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under
the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless
be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and
Punishment, according to Law.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the
United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment
for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other
high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

That's it. No due process rights. No rights to face an accuser. No requirement for a formal vote on an impeachment inquiry. No requirement for public proceedings at any point. No promise to give an opposition party the ability to issue subpoenas -- parties didn't even exist in the US at that time.

Pat Cipollone's letter might as well have been written in Comic Sans.

 

[GDViking]

I think many people are understsnding the point of the letter. It challenges tha validity and therefor the authority of congress to unofficially declare an offical impeachment inquiry.

Without s judge saying its it's legitimate they are formally telling the house that they will not voluntarily cooperate

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Subpoenas leave no wiggle room for " voluntary"...

 

[Athanasius68]

Ummm generally Investigations precede charges and indictments...

Yes. Sole power.
In the issue of Johnson, they voted to impeach and drew up the articles later and laid out their case.

 

[Athanasius68]

lol

Read my post. I said the Constitution lays out no guidelines for an impeachment ***INQUIRY***, and I listed the few steps it does outline. In fact, there is so little said that I can easily post it here.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their
Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole
Power of Impeachment.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.
When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on
Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United
States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no
Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two
thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend
further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to
hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under
the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless
be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and
Punishment, according to Law.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the
United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment
for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other
high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

That's it. No due process rights. No rights to face an accuser. No requirement for a formal vote on an impeachment inquiry. No requirement for public proceedings at any point. No promise to give an opposition party the ability to issue subpoenas -- parties didn't even exist in the US at that time.

Pat Cipollone's letter might as well have been written in Comic Sans.

I never made any claims to the contrary.
Except that the HOUSE, not the speaker of the House, not committee chairman of the House, the House itself has sole power of impeachment.
That part is clear.