Stats

Comments Posted By MurphTheSurf3

Displaying 211 To 240 Of 3,237 Comments

The Mueller Hearing? Your Response….

Just finished donating. She would be a strong VP choice too. Booker/Klobuchar?

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 3:36 pm

The next debate in September will winnow the field to 20 with 7 having already qualified for a place at the podiums.
Biden
Booker
Buttigieg
Harris
‘Rourke
Sanders
Warren

The DNC Selection Process combines polling of 2 percent or higher from 4 listed sources, and Donations from at least 130,000 unique donors; and a minimum of 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 states.

Klobuchar has the 4 polls but falls short in the fund raising.
Yang and Castro had the fundraising but not the 4 polls

The rest are also-rans right now and a number of them are likely to be so from this point on.

https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_presidential_primary_debate_(September_12-13,_2019)

I am donating to Klobuchar to do my part to get her on the stage.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 11:17 am

It just goes to show you how flawed these parallel track interviews done by moderators masquerading as debates are.

The moderators want ratings and flames bring ratings. So….Trump or Obama….impeachment…..whatever….light the bonfire.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 11:07 am

Fundamentally I am a pragmatist. As a historian I have come to realize that high ideals re. government and the law in general fit hardly at all into most people’s lives. I think that most political leaders are the same. In the last few days taunting cries of Moscow Mitch are pushing McConnell to do something he does not want to do- endorse a bill that will tighten up the far too slack electoral system. He hates the taunts but far more importantly these taunts (unlike many others of which he is inordinately proud) are looking to hit him where he lives….in his reelection bid. Most pols do as they must.

And if today’s young people are barely aware of the political environment I have no doubt that in the generations to come (barring a return to real civics and history education and enculturation) that they will be the same.

It is not GOP voters who need to be swayed (although I know of some, several, a few who are so disgusted with Trump that they might vote Dem….esp. since they are realizing that their farms are in jeopardy, their health care covers less and costs more, and polluters are free once again to ravage their land)….no, it is the so-called “independent” which generally means those who are just not connected with either party in any significant way (such as voting patterns, or even voting at all).

I live in ultra red Mo. and being practical in the “Show Me” state is a necessity for this progressive.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 8:46 am

Several paragraphs from the article you cite jumped out at me.

“In the past, a resolution directing the Judiciary Committee to consider impeachment was needed to grant the committee additional subpoena authority and financial resources. That was the official start of an impeachment inquiry.

But times have changed. In 2015, Republican leaders gave committee chairs broad subpoena powers — powers that Chairman Nadler retains today.

No additional step is required. No magic words need to be uttered on the House floor. No vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry is necessary.

The Judiciary Committee officially started its investigation into the abuse of power by President Trump on March 4, 2019. The stated purpose was to consider all constitutional remedies for presidential misconduct, including impeachment. In every meaningful way, our investigation is an impeachment inquiry. The Judiciary Committee already has the power to refer articles of impeachment to the whole House.”

The next step I refer to is the submission of articles to the House. The work currently taking place is an extension of that which began in March.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 5:31 am

Yes. Which I have supported for quite a while now. Inquiry by the Judiciary Committee is a proper next step. Whether an impeachment process should be launched is on the docket….officially. The next step would be movement to create articles of impeachment. The evidence being demanded now and which is being withheld is crucial and getting that is the next step.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 5:25 am

Yep. GOP. Them’s the ones. And they all have votes. Independents…not so clear…..Even idiots and zealots have votes and those votes determine elections. A democratic candidate will not win with those numbers. As democratic support edges up, there appears to be a similar phenomenon at work among independents. The GOP not much movement there.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 5:21 am

We are probably arguing over language here. “Crime” in current parlance refers to misdemeanors and felonies. High crimes and misdemeanors in the 18th century is a reference to both…and more. “High” in the legal and common parlance of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of “high crimes” signifies activity by or against those who have special duties acquired by taking an oath of office that are not shared with common persons. A high crime is one that can only be done by someone in a unique position of authority, which is political in character, who does things to circumvent justice. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” when used together was a common phrase at the time the U.S. Constitution was written and did not require any stringent or difficult criteria for determining guilt; it meant the opposite. The phrase was historically used to cover a very broad range of crimes. Thus Clinton was tried for having deceived Congress. Clearly Trump is guilty of much more. Whether the public will be enraged or not depends on how educated the public is….when this first started the majority of democrats and the great majority of others (GOP and independent) opposed the idea. That does appear to be changing as public awareness grows and that is a matter of education. I suggest that the path now being taken by Democrats is sensible. A rush to issue articles of impeachment would have likely been received as reckless and dismissed as a political gambit (as Clinton’s impeachment was).

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 2, 2019 @ 5:17 am

“The House has the power to impeach even if no crime is committed.” No, it does not have the right at all. The law is clear impeachment FOR high crimes and misdemeanors. Of course, like the judicial system where DA’s prosecute those they know to be innocent to protect the police, to make a name as someone who is tough on crime, out of personal animus, or racial hatred. I understand your feelings on this but I am very aware of how the public will judge this…just as they did with Clinton…..no guilty verdict and the presumption will be that there was nothing to see.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On August 1, 2019 @ 6:38 am

When a DA impeaches (i.e. indicts) a bad guy and the court finds him not guilty what does that do for the DA’s record?

Bringing the indictment in and of itself is not sufficient….one must have a sense that one can win, OR one can so convince he nation that if you lose the nation will groan at the injustice of it.

IF the Trump people can present the idea that the entire impeachment process is a fraud, an act of presidential harassment…..and most folks buy it, the dems lose big.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 5:03 pm

Yeah. I realize that. New info…in this case from a seminar at a local university with a very strong law school on judicial issues in the impeachment process.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:46 pm

I think that one has to grow momentum in matters like this. Impeachment is a political process and it takes a mandate from the party base. This is the reality.

“Why Aren’t 2020 Democrats Talking About Impeachment? Because Voters Aren’t Asking”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/28/us/politics/impeachment-democrats.html

which contrasts with this: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/26/poll-impeachment-mueller-1437596

Democratic voters are strongly in favor of impeachment, with 64 percent supporting it, combined with 18 percent who oppose it.

Democratic support for launching impeachment proceedings contrasts sharply with Republicans (6 percent support, versus 86 percent oppose) and independents (34 percent support, versus 42 percent oppose).

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:43 pm

The House considers the articles. The source of the articles is not stipulated. They can come from the floor, from the leadership, from the committees or from a committee. Could this be done in two weeks. Of course. The Dems control the House and that is all you need to pass them.

The Senate is an entirely different story. There is no requirement, or at least no enforceable procedure that has been used in the past, that the Senate even take up the articles. McConnell could say…nope…and then what.

So what should happen?

After the vote in the House to impeach….The House appoints a team to oversee the following trial on its behalf. These so-called managers are usually members of the Judiciary Committee.

The House gets the Senate involved. After the House decides to impeach, it adopts a resolution to tell the Senate of its decision. The Senate then adopts an order saying it is ready to hear from the managers.

The managers will appear before the Senate bar to explain the impeachment articles against the president. The managers present back to the House afterward.

The president is summoned. The constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try all impeachments. The Senate begins this by calling the president to appear in court on a chosen date to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. If the president or the president’s consul does not show up, the Senate assumes a not guilty plea. It then sets a trial date.

The Senate holds trial. An impeachment trial is similar to a criminal trial. The House managers act as prosecutors, and the president has defense lawyers. Witnesses are subpoenaed to give testimony and answer questions, and evidence is presented.

The senators take over the role of jurors, and the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the trial, sometimes ruling on procedural questions.

If at least two-thirds of senators find the president guilty, he or she is formally convicted.

The president is removed, and the vice president becomes president. When the Senate finds a president guilty, it can also vote on whether the president should be disqualified from holding office again. A majority vote decides this.

LOOKS PRETTY DIRECT BUT IN PRACTICE……It has had looked very different in the each of the three previous runs at this….

Bottom line….the Senate, unless there is a massive change of heart among the Republicans, will not convict.

How long does this all take? As long as the party in control wants it to (especially with courts unlikely to expedite).

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:25 pm

Ad makes a strong case…I still think we need enough of a base buy in to provide the energy needed to push it forward.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:14 pm

A valuable mantra: Life is too short to do anything that will not get Trump out.

If the effort is not likely to remove him then it is a loss of effort that should be utilized in check mating him now and defeating him then.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:12 pm

Do you think this SCOTUS will hold to that? Is this court one you would trust to do that? Not me.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 1:08 pm

I like mass protests as well…though I think they work better in systems that do not have the kind of locked in electoral calendar that the U.S. does…..mass protests force more movement in Europe because the calendar is not as set and can be altered by pressure on the government in place.

I think that one has to grow momentum in matters like this. Impeachment is a political process and it takes a mandate from the party base. This is the reality.

“Why Aren’t 2020 Democrats Talking About Impeachment? Because Voters Aren’t Asking”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/28/us/politics/impeachment-democrats.html

which contrasts with this: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/26/poll-impeachment-mueller-1437596

Democratic voters are strongly in favor of impeachment, with 64 percent supporting it, combined with 18 percent who oppose it.

Democratic support for launching impeachment proceedings contrasts sharply with Republicans (6 percent support, versus 86 percent oppose) and independents (34 percent support, versus 42 percent oppose).

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 12:12 pm

Impeachment “inquiry” 113 favor. I do too. An inquiry may or may not lead to articles of impeachment. A wide stop.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 11:49 am

I do hope you can join us soon….it is a really good place to hash things out……I tend to agree with your POV

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 11:43 am

It has been a week since I had a window to blog….I am with you on the dangers of leaning so far left that the progressives leave middle of the roaders like me cold. As to Mueller…..I thinking it is taking time but I am now expecting that post recess the “impeachment inquiry” will have solid support from a majority (which THEN MIGHT result in an impeachment process).

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 31, 2019 @ 11:40 am

You and I are thinking with one mind pal! I am heading over to Vox Populi. If you want to join us just click the blue Vox box at the bottom right of the page.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:52 pm

There is indeed a lot of rot….and it appears to be spreading. I really don’t think that our institutions are very good at dealing with rot. Clinton’s impeachment was an act of rot done by a GOP that could only do it because it controlled the House and Senate. It was done to bring him down and instead it elevated him. Like you, many Americans regarded the entire thing as an injustice. Unfortunately in this case we have a lot of what is really rot that half the nation regards as fake news and another third say may be so but they do not care with a Senate in the hands of a GOP that has only one loyalty- to their own power (and that means holding onto Trump). I say again….if the House passes articles to the Senate they are passing the pass to Moscow Mitch. What do you think he will do with a process that he will be able to control?

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:50 pm

We are reading from the same book! There will be an Impeachment Inquiry Committee to serve as a clearing house for info, to present new findings, to orchestrate the show and tell that will hopefully energize the public and will be there just in case there is a slam dunk that lands in their laps.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:44 pm

Does an impeachment inquiry change the powers of the House? Does it, in fact, have more access…..I think it all gets challenged in court….I think it all gets drug out as far and as slowly as possible and this WH is really good at doing that…

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:28 pm

Then why are the numbers in favor of proceeding impeachment so low……why after a bit of an uptick post Mueller’s “clarification” did they fall back again…why are the post Mueller testimony spot polls so disappointing…..

And why is his approval rating the highest it has been? Just because he is sitting in the low 40’s does not meal that the rest, the 50’s sitting solidly with anyone.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:25 pm

And then there is the calendar.

Begin with the calendar. From July 27 through September 10 they are “back in district” for “work.” per the House calendar. Then they return to districts on September 29 returning October 15. Then they have 2 weeks in district in November. They come back for two weeks in December returning in the first week of January. Add in the regular work week for the House (6:30 PM on Monday to 3:30 PM on Thursday. 32 work days.

How does it get done?

Had there been hearings shortly after the Mueller Report was released on April 18 (redacted version) there might have been time to get the ball rolling It has taken to this week to get the “author” of that report before Congress.

The Starr report came out on September 9, 1998. With the House and Senate in the hands of the GOP the House votes for impeachment proceedings on October 8 which lead to a December 19 vote to brings articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton. On February 12 the Senate votes. 67 votes were needed to convict him on each charge. They got 45 on one and 55 on the other. 6 months AND the GOP had full control of both Houses.

The Watergate impeachment was a different universe but even there we are looking at a year once the Special Committee is created and it shut down because Nixon resigned.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:12 pm

Not much time to do both.

Begin with the calendar. From July 27 through September 10 they are “back in district” for “work.” per the House calendar. Then they return to districts on September 29 returning October 15. Then they have 2 weeks in district in November. They come back for two weeks in December returning in the first week of January. Add in the regular work week for the House (6:30 PM on Monday to 3:30 PM on Thursday. 32 work days.

How does it get done?

Had there been hearings shortly after the Mueller Report was released on April 18 (redacted version) there might have been time to get the ball rolling It has taken to this week to get the “author” of that report before Congress.

The Starr report came out on September 9, 1998. With the House and Senate in the hands of the GOP the House votes for impeachment proceedings on October 8 which lead to a December 19 vote to brings articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton. On February 12 the Senate votes. 67 votes were needed to convict him on each charge. They got 45 on one and 55 on the other. 6 months AND the GOP had full control of both Houses.

The Watergate impeachment was a different universe but even there we are looking at a year once the Special Committee is created and it shut down because Nixon resigned.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:10 pm

Do you know how one prosecutes a contempt of congress? Throught the department of jusitice. Following a contempt citation, the presiding officer of the chamber is instructed to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia;according to the law it is the “duty” of the U.S. Attorney to refer the matter to a grand jury for action. However, while the law places the duty on the U.S. Attorney to impanel a grand jury for action, some proponents of the unitary executive theory argue that the Congress cannot properly compel the U.S. Attorney to take this action against the Executive Branch, asserting that the U.S. Attorney is a member of the Executive Branch who ultimately reports only to the President and that compelling the U.S. Attorney amounts to compelling the President

Now “inherent contempt” could be overseen directly by the chamber but the notion has yet to be challenged in the courts and it would be.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:08 pm

Why will it be easier to obtain documents, miscellaneous info and witnesses….I read that often but I cannot see that there is any intrinsic authority that comes with the appointment of an Impeachment Committee. And, the public is not paying attention. I am convinced that public opinion is baked into the pie….I cannot see how any other hearings are going to help. We also see in this how outmatched the legislative is by the executive….far too much power has been ceded to the president and his officers and that branch is now overmighty.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 6:04 pm

Savant-like diabolic intuition. That, my friend, is a keeper.

» Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On July 26, 2019 @ 5:58 pm