Pelosi to Announce Trump Impeachment Inquiry

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi late Tuesday said that she supports a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump, according to a Democratic lawmaker. The purported reason is the allegation that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden. No actual evidence has been released of any wrongdoing in this matter. From The Hill:

Pelosi is expected to make her announcement at 5 p.m. on the House floor after meetings with Democratic chairmen of six committees investigating Trump and his administration and with the full Democratic Caucus.

“As soon as we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday at The Atlantic Festival. “Now we have the facts, we’re ready … for later today.”

More than two-thirds of House Democrats publicly support launching an impeachment inquiry. Pelosi has not been among those backing an inquiry.

On Tuesday alone, more than a dozen lawmakers — including close Pelosi ally Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) — have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry in the aftermath of reports about the phone call with Zelensky.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump acknowledged he had withheld about $400 million in U.S. military aid for Ukraine just days ahead of the July 25 phone call.

Democrats have demanded the release of the call’s transcript, which Trump already cleared for distribution. “You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call,” Trump said on Twitter Tuesday morning. “No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!” .

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 163 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. cirby Inactive
    cirby
    @cirby

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):
    If I were the Democrats, I would not go after all 86.

    But, despite your protests, you are one of the Democrats, in words at least.

    And the point of the exercise wasn’t that there are 86 offenses, it’s that the Democrats are flailing around so much that they’re claiming just about anything is an impeachable offense, including language that they would have celebrated from a Democrat.

     

    • #151
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):
    For reference:

    “At current count, Democrats have proffered 86 different reasons for impeaching Trump.”

    List at the link.

    If I were the Democrats, I would not go after all 86. I would go after the smoking gun, and push on that. What do you mean Mr. Trump, you withheld congressionally appropriated money to muscle the Ukrainian President for your own benefit?

    So you haven’t read the transcript yet, eh? You’ve had several hours now.

    I’ve been in Court today.

    Go read it before you make another comment.

    Also, why are you just reposting Comment #139?

    Opps.  It was on my iPod, and I didn’t realize that I had already commented on it.  Thanks.

    • #152
  3. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    cirby (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):
    If I were the Democrats, I would not go after all 86.

    But, despite your protests, you are one of the Democrats, in words at least.

    That is not what my voter registration says, or what my lifelong history of financial contributions says.  I have been a Republican Party Precinct Committee person, and have run for office as a Republican in a Democratic county.

    And the point of the exercise wasn’t that there are 86 offenses, it’s that the Democrats are flailing around so much that they’re claiming just about anything is an impeachable offense, including language that they would have celebrated from a Democrat.

    The Bulwark had a great post suggesting that the Democrats proceed, they should streamline the process, quoting from Lawfare who suggest only 5 areas of focus.  https://thebulwark.com/how-to-do-impeachment-right-and-how-the-dems-could-blow-it/  Those areas are as follows:

    (1) Obstruction of justice and abuse of law enforcement institutions and personnel. “This basket covers the president’s efforts to impede the special counsel investigation of Russian interference in the election and the campaign against the FBI those efforts entailed.”

    (2) Trump’s “attempts to leverage the power of the presidency to cause investigation and prosecution of political opponents.” This includes Trump’s request to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to—as the Mueller report describes—“reverse his recusal so that Sessions could direct the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute Hillary Clinton.”

    (3) Trump’s abuse of “foreign policy authorities and misuse of congressionally appropriated money to induce a foreign head of state to violate the civil liberties of U.S. persons and interfere in a presidential election.” In other words… Ukraine.

    (4) Trump’s efforts to obstruct or impede congressional investigations. This includes Trump’s “evident decision to frustrate congressional oversight of his conduct in general by refusing to comply with subpoenas.”

    (5) Trump’s lying to the American public. “The 1974 article of impeachment concerning Nixon’s obstruction of justice also noted his lies to the public about the Watergate investigation: Nixon, the Judiciary Committee charged, made ‘false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted’ on the Watergate matter and that White House and Nixon campaign officials had no involvement in the burglary.”

    For me, I would go only with probably #1 and #3.  And maybe #4.  I would likely not go forward on #2 or #5.  But the Democrats are not known for their restraint.

    • #153
  4. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Second Term Trump is going to be a whole lot of fun.

    • #154
  5. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    philo (View Comment):

    Second Term Trump is going to be a whole lot of fun.

    What is the phrase? He’ll “have more flexibility then”? Or was that someone else?

    • #155
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    philo (View Comment):

    Second Term Trump is going to be a whole lot of fun.

    I predict that Trump will be impeached but not convicted (and removed).

    Then in 2020, Trump will be voted out of office, and we will lose the Senate and a number of Legislative seats so that we will be unable to win back the House for a decade due to redistricting. 

    There will be one small silver lining.  The Trump legacy will end and he will be seen as a failed president.

    • #156
  7. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Second Term Trump is going to be a whole lot of fun.

    I predict that Trump will be impeached but not convicted (and removed).

    Then in 2020, Trump will be voted out of office, and we will lose the Senate and a number of Legislative seats so that we will be unable to win back the House for a decade due to redistricting.

    There will be one small silver lining. The Trump legacy will end and he will be seen as a failed president.

    In the last 24 hours Trump has raised $5 million and now leads sleepy Joe 47 to 43 in the latest Rasmussen poll. But don’t let reality get in the way of your fantasies.

    • #157
  8. cirby Inactive
    cirby
    @cirby

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    (3) Trump’s abuse of “foreign policy authorities and misuse of congressionally appropriated money to induce a foreign head of state to violate the civil liberties of U.S. persons and interfere in a presidential election.” In other words… Ukraine.

    Let’s just look at this one, since it’s the only one that bears on the current situation.

    The transcript says that’s a lie.

    The President of The Ukraine says that’s a lie.

    The only person who supposedly says they “heard” about this in person heard it second or third hand, and he’s still unidentified – but his legal representation is a Clinton flunky, who has bragged about his political dirty tricks before, so that tells you how probable it is that the guy’s just flat lying.

    …and that’s the best thing you’ve got. All of the other stuff has already been shot down, mostly through the Mueller Report.

    On the other hand, with this going forward, Joe Biden is toast. Those three Democrat Senators (who actually did what you accused Trump of doing) will be toast. And the Democrats will be stuck with their second string in 2020, as well as being deep in the dumpster in general for even trying to do this.

     

    (Edit: You really, REALLY need to stop trying to push The Bulwark off as a source. They’re terrible, and keep trying to push Democrat talking points off as fact.)

    • #158
  9. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    cirby (View Comment):(Edit: You really, REALLY need to stop trying to push The Bulwark off as a source. They’re terrible, and keep trying to push Democrat talking points off as fact.)

    Be careful…if you take away this toy they will probably just revert to polluting this neighborhood with repeated “Charlottesville” garbage again.  We already have to suffer at least one steaming pile of it on a monthly basis and that is more than enough.  At least the Bulwark and their ilk provide fresh pap with every news cycle, albeit a formulaic, predictable, and a-bit-too-persistent brand of intellectual dishonesty by now:

    We have seen this over and over again: Trump will say something perfectly sensible that would be understood by any person of normal intelligence, but Democratic Party reporters and spokesmen willfully pretend to misunderstand him, and then attack the faux interpretation that was theirs alone.

    That is a depressing phenomenon…

    But I fear by “Second Term Trump” they will have devolved to be completely self mocking and there will be no fun left for the rest of us.  So enjoy it while you can.

    • #159
  10. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    (3) Trump’s abuse of “foreign policy authorities and misuse of congressionally appropriated money to induce a foreign head of state to violate the civil liberties of U.S. persons and interfere in a presidential election.” In other words… Ukraine.

    Because another country’s investigation of an American’s activities in that country and in interaction with its own citizens necessarily violates that American’s civil liberties? Because presidential candidates should get a pass when exposed for gross corruption and/or criminal activity? 

    • #160
  11. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    philo (View Comment):

    cirby (View Comment):(Edit: You really, REALLY need to stop trying to push The Bulwark off as a source. They’re terrible, and keep trying to push Democrat talking points off as fact.)

    Be careful…if you take away this toy they will probably just revert to polluting this neighborhood with repeated “Charlottesville” garbage again. We already have to suffer at least one steaming pile of it on a monthly basis and that is more than enough. At least the Bulwark and their ilk provide fresh pap with every news cycle, albeit a formulaic, predictable, and a-bit-too-persistent brand of intellectual dishonesty by now:

    We have seen this over and over again: Trump will say something perfectly sensible that would be understood by any person of normal intelligence, but Democratic Party reporters and spokesmen willfully pretend to misunderstand him, and then attack the faux interpretation that was theirs alone.

    That is a depressing phenomenon…

    But I fear by “Second Term Trump” they will have devolved to be completely self mocking and there will be no fun left for the rest of us. So enjoy it while you can.

    We all remember the joke Trump made about how the Russians might be able to provide those 30K+ emails from Hillary’s server. It was a slap at the press who weren’t doing their job, but then the Democrats ( and a few RINOs ) led by a bug-eyed, moon-faced, pencil-necked geek from southern CA claimed with straight faces that it was prima facie evidence of collusion. Are they stupid or do they think their supporters are stupid? OK, I’ll say it before someone else does: Why not both? 

    • #161
  12. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Django (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    cirby (View Comment):(Edit: You really, REALLY need to stop trying to push The Bulwark off as a source. They’re terrible, and keep trying to push Democrat talking points off as fact.)

    Be careful…if you take away this toy they will probably just revert to polluting this neighborhood with repeated “Charlottesville” garbage again. We already have to suffer at least one steaming pile of it on a monthly basis and that is more than enough. At least the Bulwark and their ilk provide fresh pap with every news cycle, albeit a formulaic, predictable, and a-bit-too-persistent brand of intellectual dishonesty by now:

    We have seen this over and over again: Trump will say something perfectly sensible that would be understood by any person of normal intelligence, but Democratic Party reporters and spokesmen willfully pretend to misunderstand him, and then attack the faux interpretation that was theirs alone.

    That is a depressing phenomenon…

    But I fear by “Second Term Trump” they will have devolved to be completely self mocking and there will be no fun left for the rest of us. So enjoy it while you can.

    We all remember the joke Trump made about how the Russians might be able to provide those 30K+ emails from Hillary’s server. It was a slap at the press who weren’t doing their job, but then the Democrats ( and a few RINOs ) led by a bug-eyed, moon-faced, pencil-necked geek from southern CA claimed with straight faces that it was prima facie evidence of collusion. Are they stupid or do they think their supporters are stupid? OK, I’ll say it before someone else does: Why not both?

    A very good point to raise @django! Both Rush Limbaugh and now Ann Coulter (who has been anti-Trump for a while now) have noted this interesting aspect to the now released transcript of the call between President Trump and President Zelensky. They also spoke about “Crowdstrike” which is likely to strike fear in the hearts of democrats and Hillary Clinton. Can you say email server? Sure you can.

    In any impeachment proceedings, there will be the opportunity for evidence collection and examination during the ‘discovery’ process. The GOP is salivating at this opportunity to talk about the hacked DNC server, Seth Rich, Crowdstrike, FBI, 30,000 emails from HRC, Clinton Foundation (sic) Cash, and a host of other scandals.

    Lindsey Graham is ready in the Senate …

     

    • #162
  13. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Matt Vespa @ Townhall.com chronicles the smackdown/’torching’ of the dems by the WSJ’s Kim Strassel via Op-ed and Twitter …

    1) Having read DOJ’s Trump-Ukraine release, here’s the real story: This is another internal attempt to take out a president, on the basis of another non-smoking-gun.

    2)As to call transcript itself: Trump’s actual “favor” is that Ukraine look backward, to what happened in the 2016 election. This is a legitimate ask, since election meddling looks to have come from both Russia and Ukraine.

    3)(Indeed, this is a big enough issue that we find out this morning that U.S. Attorney John Durham is looking at what role the Ukraine played in the FBI investigation.)

    4)It is actually Zelensky who brings up Rudy Giuliani—saying they can’t wait to “meet him.” And it is Zelensky who references “that investigation,” as he goes on to promise that “all investigations will be done openly and candidly.”

    5)Trump says “good” and expresses worries that a “good” prosecutor was “shut down.” Mentions “Biden’s son” and that Biden bragged he “stopped the prosecution.” Ends that bit with “It sounds horrible to me.”

    6)Trump’s several references to Giuliani are mostly to say what a great guy he is. He says he will have Giuliani and AG Barr call. He asks Zelensky to speak/work with both.

    7)And, never mind, because: DOJ in statement says the President has not spoken to AG about investigating Biden and has not asked the AG to contact the Ukraine. Also, Barr has not communicated with Ukraine—“on this or any subject.”

    8)Meanwhile, the IG back in August referred this to DOJ as potential violation of campaign finance law, based on whistleblower complaint. Criminal Division evaluated and determined no violation: “All relevant components of the Department agreed with this legal conclusion.”

    9) Whistleblower? Look at this nugget, referenced in the OLC opinion. The IG’s review found “some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.”

    10)Media got all this so wrong. And Democrats look all the more partisan and radical to have moved toward impeachment.

    Mr. Vespa’s parting line … “Cancer thy name is democrat.”

    • #163
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.