U.S. House Democrat says support lacking for Trump impeachment inquiry

[webfact]

U.S. House Democrat says support lacking for Trump impeachment inquiry

By David Morgan

 

FILE PHOTO - House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) arrives at a House Judiciary Committee hearing titled "Oversight of the Report by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III," at which witness former White House Counsel Donald McGahn was subpoened to testify at on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., May 21, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top U.S. House Democratic committee chairman on Wednesday appeared to rule out any imminent impeachment probe of President Donald Trump, but vowed quick court action to obtain the full, unredacted Mueller report on Russian election interference.

 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler told reporters that he could ultimately pursue a formal impeachment inquiry against Trump, a move that progressive Democrats and outside groups have increasingly sought since the release of a redacted version of U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report in April.

 

But he later told CNN that there is not currently enough backing among Democrats in the House of Representatives.

 

"There does not appear to be support for it now. And we will see. The support may develop," said Nadler, whose committee has jurisdiction over impeachment-related matters.

 

House Democratic leaders have sought repeatedly to dampen enthusiasm for impeachment, fearing that a rushed action could become a political liability for Democrats at a time when polls show voters sharply divided over the question.

 

"I'm not feeling any pressure," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a news conference earlier on Wednesday, when asked about calls from progressives for impeachment proceedings.

 

"Make no mistake: we know exactly what path we're on. We know exactly what actions we need to take. And while that may take some more time than some people want it to take, I respect their impatience," she said.

 

Nadler told reporters he expects to ask a federal court to enforce his April 19 subpoena for the full unredacted Mueller report and underlying material soon after the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives votes next Tuesday on whether to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt of Congress.

 

He also predicted that House Democrats would succeed in court: "I anticipate that it will be very quick. There may be an appeal and we'll ask for an expedited appeal."

 

The Judiciary Committee approved a contempt citation against Barr on May 8, on a party-line vote. That was after the attorney general defied the panel's subpoena and refused to appear for a hearing on Mueller's probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, contacts between Russians and the Trump campaign, and Trump's efforts to impede the probe.

 

With Democrats in control of the House, the contempt citation could be approved with no Republican support. But on its own, such a citation may have little impact on an administration that is stonewalling congressional inquiries.

 

On Tuesday, the Justice Department offered to negotiate for the release of material on condition that the House drop its contempt action against Barr, an offer that Nadler rejected.

 

"We're not fools," he said. "We've seen this movie before, where they negotiate in bad faith. They make ridiculous offers, they waste time. We negotiate in good faith."

 

Justice Department officials were not immediately available for comment.

 

The full House will also vote Tuesday on whether to hold former White House counsel Don McGahn in contempt for deferring to a White House direction that he not provide documents and testimony to Nadler's committee. Other former Trump aides could also face contempt citations.

 

Nadler told reporters that Mueller will ultimately appear before his committee, possibly as the result of a subpoena. "Let's just say that I'm confident he'll come in," he said.

 

(Reporting by David Morgan; additional reporting by Eric Beech, David Alexander and Susan Heavey; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, Leslie Adler and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-06

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[HuskerDo]

Yea, it's difficult to impeach a President when after 2 years of "thorough" investigations there is no evidence of doing anything wrong. Just speculation. Time to move on Democrats. 

[Tug]

Got to get the republicans on bord or else it’s a wasted exercise 

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, HuskerDo said:

Yea, it's difficult to impeach a President when after 2 years of "thorough" investigations there is no evidence of doing anything wrong. Just speculation. Time to move on Democrats. 

On what basis do you make that claim?

 

Large portions of the Mueller report are redacted and witnesses are being ordered by the President not to give testimony to Congress.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

[spidermike007]

If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation. When it comes to Trump, there is always alot to hide. Only Papuan cannibals have more skeletons in their closet than Trump. Only the most ardent of his devotees consider the man innocent. 

 

Lock him up!

[HuskerDo]

52 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

On what basis do you make that claim?

 

Large portions of the Mueller report are redacted and witnesses are being ordered by the President not to give testimony to Congress.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

I base it on the Mueller report itself along with common sense. The Mueller report was redacted (for obvious reasons) that's true BUT if there were obvious provable crimes  the report would have said so. Even Mueller's comments state he had/has "suspicions" yet no proof. Time to move on.

 

On your comment of "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" well..... I'll leave that discussion about previous administrations for another day. 

 

 

[HuskerDo]

47 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation. When it comes to Trump, there is always alot to hide. Only Papuan cannibals have more skeletons in their closet than Trump. Only the most ardent of his devotees consider the man innocent. 

 

Lock him up!

"If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation." 

 

Think about the person he defeated in the election and see if you still want to make that comment. LOTS of dirt to go around in politics. 

[Tug]

18 minutes ago, HuskerDo said:

"If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation." 

 

Think about the person he defeated in the election and see if you still want to make that comment. LOTS of dirt to go around in politics. 

Compare Hillary’s life experience to Donald’s?i understand not liking Hillary but comparing what each has done with their lives with what they had to work with absolutely Donald belongs in prison bigly that dude has been bilking rubes for years don’t be a mark

[Jingthing]

Yea, it's difficult to impeach a President when after 2 years of "thorough" investigations there is no evidence of doing anything wrong. Just speculation. Time to move on Democrats. 

That would be a good point if it was true.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[HuskerDo]

16 minutes ago, Tug said:

Compare Hillary’s life experience to Donald’s?i understand not liking Hillary but comparing what each has done with their lives with what they had to work with absolutely Donald belongs in prison bigly that dude has been bilking rubes for years don’t be a mark

You just stated enough for me to not ever respond to another post of yours. I never said I didn't like Hillary did I? 

[HuskerDo]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That would be a good point if it was true.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Please tell me "factually" how it isn't true. If it's your opinion that's fine. Everyone has an opinion as do I but if you have absolute proof that Trump did something that rises to the level of impeachment please share. Too much speculation and hatred these days.

[bristolboy]

55 minutes ago, HuskerDo said:

Please tell me "factually" how it isn't true. If it's your opinion that's fine. Everyone has an opinion as do I but if you have absolute proof that Trump did something that rises to the level of impeachment please share. Too much speculation and hatred these days.

Mueller clearly believes he provided enough evidence. And in what court is "absolute proof" the criterion for conviction?

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, HuskerDo said:

I base it on the Mueller report itself along with common sense. The Mueller report was redacted (for obvious reasons) that's true BUT if there were obvious provable crimes  the report would have said so. Even Mueller's comments state he had/has "suspicions" yet no proof. Time to move on.

 

On your comment of "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" well..... I'll leave that discussion about previous administrations for another day. 

 

 

"Even Mueller's comments state he had/has "suspicions" yet no proof. "

 

Not true. Muller states that he can't be charged due to his position.

[bristolboy]

24 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"Even Mueller's comments state he had/has "suspicions" yet no proof. "

 

Not true. Muller states that he can't be charged due to his position.

Putting suspicions in quotes was interesting since that wasn't a word that Mueller used. I'm guessing HuskerDo is another rightwing mind reader.

[Dumbastheycome]

It would seem that the Dems  are proceeding  with  caution instead of  rushing to attempting impeachment.

As they rightfully require the end to stonewalling requests  for full information in determining cause for that  outcome it is the  very evident determination by Trump and his agencies to deny those requests that give the lie to claims of no wrongdoing.

There have been so many people who , in association with Trump in his attaining the position of Potus, have been prosecuted and sacrificed due to defiance of law in protecting him or for criminal offenses discovered  as part of the investigations surrounding that tenure.

Waving biblical type references to the  almighty "Constitution" and due process  is starting to look ridiculous in light of the intent of it being waived in application by disregarding it.

 

[Spike1938]

2 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

"If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation." 

 

Think about the person he defeated in the election and see if you still want to make that comment. LOTS of dirt to go around in politics. 

Even if I allow that Hillary is not above reproach, what has that to do with the Orange One's actions? He is obviously hiding something (plural) or he would just be open. No excuses or subterfuge allowed. Finally, please tell me what crimes Hillary is guilty of? And don't say Benghazi or Uranium One as both have been proven to be non criminal.

[elmrfudd]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

4 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Yea, it's difficult to impeach a President when after 2 years of "thorough" investigations there is no evidence of doing anything wrong. Just speculation. Time to move on Democrats. 

On what basis do you make that claim?

 

Large portions of the Mueller report are redacted and witnesses are being ordered by the President not to give testimony to Congress.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

well, this seems like you have decided guilt regardless, not surprising.

 

Of the 448 pages that comprise the document, roughly 6% of the text was redacted, according to the investigative journalism nonprofit ProPublica.

 

but not to worry, there will still be a steady stream of leftist cries for impeachment regardless of the validity of it. party on!

 

the more you try, the more likely you get another 4 years, great result.

[elmrfudd]

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

If there was nothing to hide, there would be cooperation. When it comes to Trump, there is always alot to hide. Only Papuan cannibals have more skeletons in their closet than Trump. Only the most ardent of his devotees consider the man innocent. 

 

Lock him up!

glad to know your opinion is the final version of reality in your world. but those who disagree simply must

be inferior, in your opinion.

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

well, this seems like you have decided guilt regardless, not surprising.

 

Of the 448 pages that comprise the document, roughly 6% of the text was redacted, according to the investigative journalism nonprofit ProPublica.

 

but not to worry, there will still be a steady stream of leftist cries for impeachment regardless of the validity of it. party on!

 

the more you try, the more likely you get another 4 years, great result.

"this seems like you have decided guilt regardless"

As did the investigator, mr. Muller.

[spidermike007]

16 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

glad to know your opinion is the final version of reality in your world. but those who disagree simply must

be inferior, in your opinion.

Not inferior. Just very gullible. I get the whole change thing. I get how bad the dems were. I don't get how populating the administration with Goldman Sacks and ex oil company executives cleans things up. That is way over my head, I guess. 

 

I also don't get how starting major trade wars and destroying alliances with allies help. Lastly, I don't get how daily bickering and petty insults on Twitter, benefit anyone. 

[metisdead]

An off topic trolling post has been removed. 

[elmrfudd]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

2 hours ago, elmrfudd said:

well, this seems like you have decided guilt regardless, not surprising.

 

Of the 448 pages that comprise the document, roughly 6% of the text was redacted, according to the investigative journalism nonprofit ProPublica.

 

but not to worry, there will still be a steady stream of leftist cries for impeachment regardless of the validity of it. party on!

 

the more you try, the more likely you get another 4 years, great result.

"this seems like you have decided guilt regardless"

As did the investigator, mr. Muller.

no, he did not, but you keep that thought alive as long as you need to.

[elmrfudd]

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

2 hours ago, elmrfudd said:

glad to know your opinion is the final version of reality in your world. but those who disagree simply must

be inferior, in your opinion.

Not inferior. Just very gullible. I get the whole change thing. I get how bad the dems were. I don't get how populating the administration with Goldman Sacks and ex oil company executives cleans things up. That is way over my head, I guess. 

 

I also don't get how starting major trade wars and destroying alliances with allies help. Lastly, I don't get how daily bickering and petty insults on Twitter, benefit anyone. 

right, disagreeing with your opinion is "gullible". good to know.

 

But you can keep the phony veneer of ideological and moral superiority as long as you need to.

 

anyway, this is about impeachment, which will never happen, you obviously think it should.

 

and:

"i get how bad the dems were"

 

were????? not are?

Edited June 6, 2019 by elmrfudd

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, elmrfudd said:

right, disagreeing with your opinion is "gullible". good to know.

 

But you can keep the phony veneer of ideological and moral superiority as long as you need to.

 

anyway, this is about impeachment, which will never happen, you obviously think it should.

 

and:

"i get how bad the dems were"

 

were????? not are?

Are. I agree. Just as I apply the same to the Republicans. Both parties are hopelessly lost. Both are morally and ethically bankrupt. Both parties are bought and paid for by lobbyists. 

 

However, I prefer the environmental, fiscal and social policies of the dems. And I prefer alliances with close allies over the coddling of dictators. Lastly,  I prefer 8 ft. alligators over 12 ft. crocodiles. 

[elmrfudd]

2 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Are. I agree. Just as I apply the same to the Republicans. Both parties are hopelessly lost. Both are morally and ethically bankrupt. Both parties are bought and paid for by lobbyists. 

 

However, I prefer the environmental, fiscal and social policies of the dems. And I prefer alliances with close allies over the coddling of dictators. Lastly,  I prefer 8 ft. alligators over 12 ft. crocodiles. 

yes, we can agree both parties are largely bought and paid for by lobbyists. Add to that the entire process in congress for appointing comittee chairs based on how much money you raise, to the ridiculous constant campaigning and fundraising will never produce useful legislation or legislators.

 

I don't see any good fiscal policies from the dems, or the republicans. But I think the ridiculous "tax the rich" emotions are very destructive. as are the give us "free" stuff policies that will never be able to be funded.

 

as far as "coddling" dictators, does that apply to Cuba, the muslim brotherhood too? and what constitutes this "coddling", just words or actions and deeds?

 

[mtls2005]

Flashback...

 

 

[rgraham]

The democrats have now spent over 3 years blasting Trump and spent millions of our tax dollars meanwhile accomplishing nothing related to their jobs. Time to get over the loss and get to work.

[rgraham]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

Flashback...

 

 

He kept me from getting my ass shot off!

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

9 hours ago, stevenl said:

 

Not true. Muller states that he can't be charged due to his position.

 

Just to clarify that a bit....  The Justice Department's policy is that the FEDs won't bring criminal charges against a sitting president, a policy that I think probably is deserving of review and revision.

 

However, that Justice Department policy only applies at the federal prosecution level. It doesn't apply at all at the state/states level, where state or local prosecutors can file criminal charges against whomever they wish.

 

So the bottom line is, a president can't be charged by the feds under the current rules. But a president certainly can face criminal charges elsewhere. Such as for state tax evasion, nonprofit foundation fraud, etc etc.

 

[Baerboxer]

13 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Yea, it's difficult to impeach a President when after 2 years of "thorough" investigations there is no evidence of doing anything wrong. Just speculation. Time to move on Democrats. 

 

They won't move on - too bitter, self opinionated and self entitled. Trump, for all his faults, beat their anointed (and fiddled!) choice for POTUS.

 

The left are now totally vindictive, spiteful and unwilling to accept democracy if the don't win and intolerant of different views.