Start impeachment on Barr. Start impeachment on Chump. Grab the narrative.
There are dozens of sealed criminal indictments on the DC docket. Are they from Mueller?
"Nadler implied that the revelations around the obstruction question are striking enough to renew the option of impeachment, telling a reporter “that’s one possibility.”
DAMN IT!
As a co-equal branch of government Congress which represents more of the American public than the Executive branch so it needs to see the entire report. The Presidency does not rule by Divine Right, no matter what the GOP thinks.
Barr = Epic Fail Deserves to be impeached more so than the orange slimeball.
Why did Barr do this ? Money, Power, or just a great opportunity to go down in history as a really bad magician.
If Nadler said the “i” word, the Dem leadership is probably serious about digging deeper. This isn’t an eager, rookie Representative speaking. This is a senior party leader. He would not use that word unless other leaders are willing to go there too. I think the Dems are really pissed off at Barr’s attempts to shade this in Trump’s favor for the past 3.5 weeks.
I’m pissed off that big, brave Bobby Three Sticks didn’t pull the trigger. Instead, he chose to hide behind OLC norms, etc. These are not normal times. Therefore the norms that worked in the past do not apply. My respect for him has greatly diminished in the past 3.5 weeks.
The House leadership needs to follow the leads littered throughout the redacted report - and get the unredacted report - as is their right, and keep digging out the Republican rot that is trying to destroy our country. This cannot stand. I will be writing to my Congressman and Senators to let them know that I expect them to respond strongly to this bullshit.
ETA: @spiderpig I was writing my comment when you posted yours. All I can say is that the Dems better follow Nadler’s lead and continue investigating the shit out of this stuff.
Nadler implied that the revelations around the obstruction question are striking enough to renew the option of impeachment, telling a reporter “that’s one possibility.”
At this point that is the only possibility. DoJ policy does not allow indictment of a sitting president, and Barr has made it abundantly clear that regardless of DoJ policy he would not prosecute Trump. The House can either begin impeachment hearings or tacitly endorse Trump, his “collusion,” his obstruction, and his overriding corruption.
By all means … and I imagine you’re not surprised by Hoyer’s words, but are you seeing them as more than just his?
Nadler implied that the revelations around the obstruction question are striking enough to renew the option of impeachment, telling a reporter “that’s one possibility.”
The other much more likely possibility is more slow-walking. Nadler still hasn’t issued a subpoena for the full report.
Exactly. Call Barr in, put him under oath, and grill him for a day on every misleading statement he made. Go into his contacts before getting the job. Go into his contacts with the White House after Mueller delivered is report. Use charts to show what Mueller said and what Barr lied about.
Then (a) refer him to DOJ for a perjury investigation, and (b) start the impeachment process.
and oh, P.S. refer him to his state bar association for an investigation.
Though I’m afraid /aware of her (repeated) answer,
She who welds the gavel will make the call.
That said, I’m (somewhat) good, either way.
That’s one heckuva big nutcracker.
all
I agree with Hoyer. No way that you will get Trump removed, best to bloody the hell out of him and those arround him (Barr, etc) with the Mueller report, then defeat him at the ballot box. No way the Senate votes to convict, and we don’t want to repeat the mistakes Newt made in 1998.
I was writing my comment when @spiderpig’s comment was posted. All I can say is that the Dems better not just roll over and just play one game - election politics - for the next 18 months. They can look to the elections, and they can conduct oversight at the same time. I expect them to do their job, which is not simply to get themselves elected and re-elected.
I don’t imagine that Hoyer would say that without knowing the Speaker’s mind on the subject. Also, the quote @inversion posted said that Nadler implied it was an option, so he didn’t outright say it, but responded to a question that used the I word.
We’re not going to get Trump removed, but we sure as hell can make his life even more hellish than it’s been to this point.