Impeachment proceedings against Trump

Rick wrote: What a perfect and accurate meme. It's almost like the biggest made up news story never even happened.

Every Trump hater in this country would pick a recession over another 4 years of Trump, regardless the damage and suffering a recession would bring. We really do have some very deranged people walking among us.

That is a lie. I'll make you a deal Rick: if you stop ascribing to every person who opposes Trump what the ridiculous, "deranged" extremists blather, then I won't call you a racist just because you continue to support him.

No, not every liberal wants a recession. No, not every Trump supporter is a racist. Do you see how ascribing to all what a few idiots say is stupid, inflammatory, and counter-productive? No normal person would want a recession, I sure AF don't want it, it hurts everyone. Stop putting what the crazies in the minority say onto the rest of us - you hate it when it's done to you, we hate it when it's done to us, and the behavior will only stop when each of us controls ourselves. Deal?

Also, no, it is not a made up news story. The impeachment inquiry continues, we still have Flynn's, Gates', and Sater's sentencings, there were hearings yesterday with Deutsch Bank about Trump's tax returns (are you truly alright with him hiding them, continuing to hold his businesses and blatantly profiting off of taxpayers?), and Julian Assange's trial will shed even more light on the wrong-doing done by Trump's administration (and quite likely him directly).

No FH, there's no "time limit" on an impeachment inquiry ending other than the man Congress is investigating being voted out of office. It's their job as spelled out in the Constitution and I can't believe you'd have a problem with that.

ScienceChic wrote: But he tried to fire Mueller, Rick, and even an attempt to obstruct justice is a crime. Just because his lawyer didn't follow through with it, and Sessions refused to un-recuse himself, doesn't mean that Trump's orders to do either doesn't mean he's not guilty of obstruction of justice. Mueller stated quite clearly: Were Trump not President of the Unites States, he'd be indicted already for his crimes. The fact that the highest office in our land is somehow exempt from justice is a travesty of justice and this flaw in our system must be addressed.

1736. Inchoate Obstruction Of Justice Offenses

It follows that an endeavor to obstruct justice need not be successful to be criminal. See, e.g., Osborn, 385 U.S. at 333; United States v. Bucey, 876 F.2d 1297, 1314 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1004 (1989); United States v. Thomas, 916 F.2d 647, 651 (11th Cir. 1990); United States v. Barfield, 999 F.2d 1520, 1522 (11th Cir. 1993); United States v. Wood, 6 F.3d 692, 695 (10th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, factual impossibility, which arises when the defendant solicits a third party to obstruct justice and the third party is a government informant, is not a valid defense. See United States v. Osborn, supra and United States v. Rosner, 485 F.2d at 1228-29.

Nadler: Judiciary panel could recommend articles of impeachment by late fall
By KYLE CHENEY | 08/05/2019 10:19 AM EDT

About 120 Democrats have said publicly that they would vote to launch impeachment proceedings against Trump. Nadler, of late, has argued that such a vote would be unnecessary because his committee is already engaged in an “impeachment investigation,” but Republicans have rejected that position and argue that only a formal vote can launch proceedings.

That determination is now in the hands of Beryl Howell, chief judge of the federal district court for the District of Columbia, who is weighing Democrats’ petition to access Mueller’s grand jury information. In their filing, committee Democrats argued that they should be treated as actively investigating impeachment because the House referred articles of impeachment to the panel in January and the fact that its members have repeatedly referenced the prospect of recommending articles over the course of their investigations.