Pelosi Reacts To WH Letter: ‘Further Evidence Of Obstruction’

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) reacted to a Tuesday letter from White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, saying that further efforts to hide President Donald Trump’s “abuse of power” would be considered “further evidence of obstruction.”


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1254751
1 Like

Ah…a sternly worded letter if I ever saw one.

6 Likes

Even the Brits had to take time off from their Brexit woes to take note of this.

5 Likes

Direct and to the point. As compared to 8 pages of Trumpian bloviation,

20 Likes

Would be nice to have the two letters side by side to see thoughtful, reasoned statements by Pelosi and off the wall crazy from one of the WH’s lunatic fringed lawyer.

7 Likes

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) reacted to a Tuesday letter from White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, saying that further efforts to hide President Donald Trump’s “abuse of power” would be considered “further evidence of obstruction.”

Trump can commit a thousand new, verifiable, witnessed crimes and it won’t matter. So Pelosi and Schiff add obstruction to the ledger. So what? All this falderol may wound him a bit in the election, but none of it is getting him booted from office. Trump knows that, and so do the Democrats. Trump is betting on a confluence of emotions taking over the electorate in the fall of 2020, all to his benefit. Outrage, sympathy, fatigue over all of it. Some foreign help. Some state help at the polling places, chasing away minorities and ex-felons from voting. Maybe start some small war that generates a “Rally to the President” wave. Trump is placing a bet he can ride this out and steal another win.

13 Likes

Which had they taken the time to actually read that “Constitution thing” might have had some startling revelations.
“unconstitutional” That word does not mean what you think it means

18 Likes

The House Democrats should call Trump’s bluff:
Cast a formal vote initiating an impeachment inquiry.
Assign all impeachment proceedings to Judiciary or to a special committee.
Allow the Ranking Member as well as the Chairman to issue subpoenas.
Allow the President to have counsel present at all hearings and to question witnesses.
And go full speed ahead.

5 Likes

What did you want? Profanity?

7 Likes

“Aint nothing going to happen”

4 Likes

Seriously
One of the parties has to be an adult
By the book

8 Likes

Which all boils down to IOKIYAR.

Oh, and Socrates was a schmuck.

3 Likes

It seems to me that if Republicans are getting away with “yes, what he did was illegal, but that doesn’t rise to impeachment” it’s only a short step to “since it doesn’t rise to impeachment, the obstruction doesn’t matter.” The question of whether the POTUS can be investigated may have to be litigated by SCOTUS, which which isn’t comforting at all. I don’t have much confidence that John Roberts cares about his legacy that much.
One step that they do need to take, however, is to start warning that the longer the obstruction goes on, the greater the chance that the process will last into election season.

6 Likes

How silly…why would you think I want that?

1 Like

Past hearings on matters of great consequence could be counted upon to proceed with a modicum of civility and reasoned conduct. We’re in a new era. Once the GOP gets a whack at the ball in impeachment hearings I can see everything really going off the rails. Devin Nunes will ask a witness why Joe Biden’s role in having Seth Rich whacked is being ignored. Go ahead, think of a hundred truly tinfoil queries that will get thrown out there. The GOP will turn an impeachment investigation into nothing more than an explosion of chaff, on an houly basis. They’ll float so much inane bullshit nothing of substance will get accomplished.
Maybe Pelosi and the Dems should just put together everything they have now, vote on it, and ship it straight to the Senate for trial. Skip the damned hearings. Hold a presser and announce they aren’t necessary, Trump’s words and what’s been released by him, or discovered by Dems, stand as their evidence of unfitness for office and the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors.The Senate is killing it in the crib anyway, and at least Trump will have the stain of impeachment hanging over him going into the election.

7 Likes

Responding to lawful subpoenas by appearing to testify or producing documents is not “cooperation.” It’s doing what the Constitution and law requires.

Keep fighting, Democrats.

21 Likes

This is going to evolve exponentially. At the end of the day, we’ll know where the country stands with respect to the separation of powers once SCOTUS rules on disclosure of the full Ukraine memo, who must testify, etc. We can only hope that SCOTUS will hearken to the founders’ principle that no one can be a king.

To those who are flummoxed by all this, one thing that can help in dealing with people on all sides of the political spectrum is to advocate for sunshine. We can’t have a democracy without everything being out in the open (with the exception of national security, under careful strictures and oversight). We keep secret someone’s tax returns, transcripts and recordings of discussions with foreign leaders, and on and on, at our peril.

14 Likes

Barr is the law, and as long as he’s willing to throw out House contempt charges everyone is free to ignore House demands. If you have no enforcement mechanisms, and cannot impose penalty for violating a law, well, in effect you have no law. The Constitution and the law, for purposes of this episode in history, are null.

11 Likes

No reason for this: the House’s work is analogous to what a DA does when presented with evidence of a crime, investigating and recommending charges. The trial, where the prez’nent’s representation can speak and question the evidence, is in the Senate.
Empowering the current occupant to review the evidence now, and query witnesses, is enabling obstruction and misdirection. As it is, his interests have a voice through the members of his party in the House. They’re not shy of acting as his partisans.

17 Likes

Sorry for the silliness. But you failed to avoid sounding somewhat dismissive of her letter and I wondered what you wanted. Use longer sentences, I guess.

4 Likes