I'm totally a "wait for all the evidence" kind of guy, but I honestly dont know how long that will be and the window will be closing in the matter of months. If I was Nadler, Pelosi, Cummings, and Schiff I would together draft a memo to Mueller asking for a possible progress report to the gang of 8, and any Congressional duties the special prosecutor recommends being taken at this time. Let him know he has the full support of Congress, etc. etc. I feel like if there are parts of the investigation he can compartmentalize like the Stormy payments, he's doing so as an indication to Congress honestly, but he has to know that it needs to be a little more of a directive to Congress rather than just the simple label of "individual 1". In this political climate of maximum propaganda from FoxNews etc. he has to know that the public needs him to tell us if we need to remove this president. We cannot find out he's a Russian asset in court filings in September of 2020. That would not bee good at all, and would cause a crisis. The Right needs time and evidence laid out over a span of months to agree to the decision. If its during the election season, the Right will just buckle down and cry that its a conspiracy to rig the election.
You don't need "proof to impeach". You need articles of impeachment adopted by the House of Representatives. See 1998. However you could and should convene hearings and subpoena documents and testimony (the House effectively skipped this in 1998 instead using the Starr report) The only bar you need, constitutionally, is a vote of the House adopting articles of impeachment. That's basically the Grand Jury/Indictment phase. The "proof" is to be considered before the Senate.
those hearings can be and I think will be done by the House, some are scheduled already like Cohen going before Congress. so what proof can be considered before the Senate at this point?
Whatever the House decides to present. There's no "rules of evidence" to my knowledge - but there is already a bevy of sworn testimony implicating the Prsident in high crimes & misdemeanors, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Even the publlcly known/unredacted parts are incredibly damning.
The job has already been outsourced to Muller. Now, if there is legitimate concern that Muller isn't able to do his job, complete it (in a timely manner), and present it fully to Congress, then that's reasons for Congress to pick it back fully. At present, although it's outsourced, the House can still investigate whatever it want to. It can do the full job of "impeachment" proceedings without actual impeachment proceedings and risking the political backlash.
I've got to think that Mueller is wise to all of the ramifications of this article as well. I wouldn't be surprised if he's wrapping up his investigation (as rumored) not just because he's afraid fo more meddling/sabotage by the Trump cabal, but because he knows it's time for the House to begin this process. Remember, Impeachement is a binary thing. There's probably dozens of potential articles to file against Trump, but Mueller/the House don't need or want to file/hold a vote on every single last one of them. The remedy is the same if you file 10 or 100 - a removal vote in the Senate after a trial.
No there is not a bevy of sworn testimony , please name some of this sworn testimony that has been made public. If the House had something concrete we would know about it already.
It could be a number of things. He has business dealings all over. The Comcast Sportsnet thing was one but not certain it would lead to the sell off off the team. Might’ve had enough skeletons in his closet for a DA or an enemy of his with ties to the DA to present the charges and give him the option: sell the team and pay what you need to, or face a potential indictment. The sell was too random and spontaneous for me to believe it was just Les being tired of owning one of the most lucrative businesses in the entire world with one of the 10 most recognizable athletes on the planet.
All of Cohen's public court statements are sworn and made under penalty of perjury. Everything at his sentencing hearing EVERYTHING. All of Comey's testimony is sworn on obstruction. All of it. Dude it was on TV! That's just some the sworn part off the top of my head. I'm sure there's more in the other public filings in the multiple criminal actions Frankly from even the unsworn part a credible set of articles cam be derived. Like I said, theres no hard requirement as to the type of evidence you need to begin the process. I'll say it again- impeachment is the investigative process. If you are waiting for the process to be done before you start it, you are not doing it right.
So you are just speculating, I see. The deal was not particularly random, NBA teams are at a all-time high value wise, there was much speculation that multiple teams would be changing ownership after the clippers deal. when he sold the team Harden was not one of the ten most recognizable athletes on the planet and if he was would that not be selling when the value is high? also what DA would care about him selling the rockets how does that benefit the DA or his office.
Comey's testimony is not proof of anything it's hearsay. It can be a piece of evidence but it is not proof of high crimes or misdemeanors. Like I have said there can be investigations without the impeach process and that investigation will be ramping up. I really don't understand why you think impeachment is needed when there are other means to get concrete evidence.
You don't understand what hearsay is and the article is the authors opinion. Anyway I want Trump removed as much as anybody but I want it to be above reproach and seen as a payback which will continue a gotcha cycle. It's funny that you claim I don't understand yet you think Comey's testimony is grounds for impeachment.
No...it's been awhile, true. But I do understand what hearsay is, at least according to the state of NY. It's about as relevant here as Melania's jacket. Read the article. It's good. I swear. .
I hate to be a pessimist, but as trump once said... Mueller could provide eyewitnesses supported by audio and video tape. And commodore, tallanver and others would come up with some explanation for why they still support the guy. The desire to be above approach is a good and righteous position, but in the end, there will still be people that will still claim "deep state" and say people were wearing black hats.
i did read the article and it's an opinion of how he interprets the law and what has been made public. yes they could start an impeachment proceeding but IMO it's still early considering don't have all the facts. if you don't think hearsay is relevant to what is currently going on I don't know what say.
I agree with that but there are about 25% of people in the U.S. Who don't have dog in this fight. everybody cannot be divided between Trump supporters and Trump enablers, there is a middle ground and those people are going to want some strong evidence. Impeachment can easily be seen by these people as piling on as it did with Clinton.are I am not worried about the deep state people but there are people who land in the middle.
What 25% "don't have a dog in the fight"? Are we not all Americans, all equally concerned about the legal and moral basis of our current leadership? At no point have I said evidence isn't needed. Heck, I am hoping the Mueller report is fully disclosed once completed. And I have argued that Mueller's investigation needs to be allowed to be completed. I do believe those that are worried that somehow that investigation will be stopped or the report will not be fully communicated have reasonable concerns though. btw, I don't think anyone "piled on" re: Clinton. Clinton did have an affair with Monica Lewinsky and did lie about. the debate with Clinton wasn't whether he was guilty or not... what people argued was whether it was enough of a crime to impeach him or not. The question re: trump... did he do things important enough to be impeached or not.
