House to hold series of public hearings on the Mueller Report.

[The Romulan Republic]

In what is fairly obviously a step toward building public support and a strong case for impeachment, the House will conduct public hearings on the Mueller Report, with the first focusing on obstruction by Trump. In case the direction we're heading isn't clear enough, their first witness will be former White House counsel John Dean, who played an important role in Watergate:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 42721.html

Democrats in the US House of Representatives have announced a series of Mueller report hearings that will first examine what they are calling Donald Trump's "most overt acts of obstruction".

The hearings will also look into findings by special counsel Robert Mueller's team that Russia actively sought to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and are set to begin with the question of obstruction on 10 June.

Jerry Nadler, the House Judiciary Committee chairman, announced the hearings in a statement accusing the White House of attempting to "stonewall" Congressional oversight, and pledging to move forward with the investigation whether the president cooperates or not.

"Given the threat posed by the president's alleged misconduct, our first hearing will focus on President Trump's most overt acts of obstruction," Mr Nadler's statement reads. "In the coming weeks, other hearings will focus on other important aspects of the Mueller report."

Mr Nadler also said that Mr Mueller, who submitted his report to the Justice Department in March, "has now left Congress to pick up where he left off."

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Watergate 2: Idiot Edition anyone?

Because this is how 'Tricky Dick' Nixon resigned, the ever persistent and slow gears of justice simply ground him to dust and left before causing too many problems for the Presidency.

[The Romulan Republic]

Watergate 2: Idiot Edition anyone?

Because this is how 'Tricky Dick' Nixon resigned, the ever persistent and slow gears of justice simply ground him to dust and left before causing too many problems for the Presidency.

The problem there is that Nixon then got pardoned, ensuring a horrible precedent was set. And that Nixon was actually willing to step down, and did not have a base who might actually be willing to fight a civil war to make him dictator for life.

So while impeachment is necessary, it has to be accompanied by contingency plans- to quickly apprehend Trump if he attempts to resist by force, and to ensure he serves jail time (which means either persuading Pence not to pardon him, impeaching Pence too, or getting Trump on state-level charges post-Presidency).

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

The problem there is that Nixon then got pardoned, ensuring a horrible precedent was set. And that Nixon was actually willing to step down, and did not have a base who might actually be willing to fight a civil war to make him dictator for life.

So while impeachment is necessary, it has to be accompanied by contingency plans- to quickly apprehend Trump if he attempts to resist by force, and to ensure he serves jail time (which means either persuading Pence not to pardon him, impeaching Pence too, or getting Trump on state-level charges post-Presidency).

However, the 'Nixon Precedent' was of a context that doesn't exist right now, and that is why anyone not stupid (dominated by the Dems, but some periphery GOP members have been making noises in the same vein) has been putting the gears to the speed where the gears turn whatever is caught into fine dust. Nixon's precedent was built under the context that the President knows his place, Congress knows their's. That context isn't there anymore.

[Solauren]

Also, Nixon apparently had a certain level of morality, integrity, and maturity that the organ-man-controlled-by-his-alien-hair-piece does not.

[Gandalf]

Also, Nixon apparently had a certain level of morality, integrity, and maturity that the organ-man-controlled-by-his-alien-hair-piece does not.

I wonder how much of that thought of Nixon is based on people idealising the past?

[The Romulan Republic]

The cabinet had to work behind his back to keep him from launching a drunken nuclear strike, so...

Yeah, he was shit.

[Solauren]

Also, Nixon apparently had a certain level of morality, integrity, and maturity that the organ-man-controlled-by-his-alien-hair-piece does not.

I wonder how much of that thought of Nixon is based on people idealising the past?

Certain level, in this case, means 'more then Trump'.
Since Trumps level in all those things is 0....

[The Romulan Republic]

Following his hearing, John Dean (White House Counsel during Watergate) did not mince words, posting the following on Twitter:

Congressional Republicans are a pathetic lot. They've descended into trying to out-Trump, Trump. This is the way authoritarian followers strut their stuff for their leader. It is pretty weak but if I can provoke them to show the true nature of their vile behavior that is good.

[The Romulan Republic]

Following a subpoena, Robert Mueller has agreed to appear publicly before House committees on July 17th:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/25/politics ... index.html

(CNN)Robert Mueller will testify before Congress on July 17 after House Democrats issued a subpoena for his appearance, a move that paves the way for a reluctant special counsel to answer questions publicly for the first time about his 22-month investigation into President Donald Trump.

The House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees announced Tuesday that Mueller had agreed to testify after they issued subpoenas for his testimony, and Mueller would appear in public before the two panels next month.

"Americans have demanded to hear directly from the Special Counsel so they can understand what he and his team examined, uncovered, and determined about Russia's attack on our democracy, the Trump campaign's acceptance and use of that help, and President Trump and his associates' obstruction of the investigation into that attack," House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said in a joint statement.

Schiff said Tuesday that the committees would be questioning Mueller separately the same day, and that his committee would question Mueller's staff in closed session following the public hearing so they can discuss the counterintelligence portions of the investigation.
Mueller's testimony is poised to be the most-anticipated congressional hearing in years, and represents a huge moment for House Democrats who have wrestled with whether to dive into a politically divisive impeachment process following the Mueller investigation and White House stonewalling of congressional probes.

The subpoenas to Mueller come after weeks of negotiations between Democrats, the special counsel's team and the Justice Department. Democrats are proceeding with subpoenas to Mueller after he spoke publicly last month and said he did not wish to testify publicly about the investigation, and that his testimony would not go beyond what was written in the special counsel's 448-page report.

In a letter to Mueller, the Democratic chairmen said that they understood Mueller's concerns about ongoing investigations referred by the special counsel, but still felt it was necessary for him to testify.

"We will work with you to address legitimate concerns about preserving the integrity of your work, but we expect that you will appear before our Committees as scheduled," Nadler and Schiff wrote.

Democrats have been talking about bringing Mueller in to testify since his investigation wrapped in March, and their decision to issue subpoenas comes more than a month after the initial date that Nadler had floated for Mueller to appear.

Since then, Democrats have continued to negotiate with Mueller, holding out hope he would agree to testify voluntarily. While Mueller stated he did not wish appear before Congress, Democrats — and some Republicans — have said they still believe Mueller should testify. Democrats have argued that the American people can hear directly from the special counsel in a public setting, and lawmakers in both parties have said they want to ask him about some of the decisions made during the investigation.

Mueller's report was written in two parts: a volume on Russian election meddling and one on obstruction.

In the first volume, the special counsel did not establish a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, but it did detail numerous contacts between Russians and members of Trump's team that Democrats charge are troubling, even if they aren't criminal. In the second volume, Mueller documented nearly a dozen episodes of possible obstruction of justice. The special counsel wrote that DOJ guidelines did not allow a sitting president to be indicted, and that the investigation could not exonerate Trump.

Mueller's public statement last month — in which he emphasized that the investigation did not exonerate the President and that his team followed the DOJ guidelines — sparked a wave of House Democrats to call for the opening of an impeachment inquiry.

Their numbers have grown amid White House stonewalling of testimony and documents to congressional investigations, and now more than 75 have come out in favor of opening an impeachment inquiry.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has continued to resist the move, arguing that Democrats are winning their court fights with the Trump administration and impeachment should only be pursued if the public is on board.

Schiff and Nadler have both publicly refrained from calling for the opening of an impeachment inquiry. Behind the scenes, Nadler has lobbied Pelosi to do so, while Schiff has argued against it.

This story has been updated with additional developments Tuesday.

CNN's Ashley Killough contributed to this report.

[The Romulan Republic]

Mueller's testimony comes with conditions:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre ... k-n1022236

WASHINGTON — After months of negotiations, former special counsel Robert Mueller has agreed to testify before the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees on July 17, but his willingness still comes with some parameters, according to a congressional aide with knowledge of the arrangement with Mueller’s office.

There will be two open sessions with Mueller and two closed sessions with his staff.

The House Judiciary Committee will have to choose which of its members are able to ask Mueller questions during its open session. Unlike the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Judiciary Committee is quite large, almost double in size, so only 22 of its 41 members will be able to ask questions during the open session, the aide said.

The details of the agreement between the committees and Mueller’s office are still being worked out, a second congressional aide said, and could still change.

Judiciary Committee members who do not get to ask questions of Mueller will still be able to attend a closed session with Mueller’s staff following the open testimony, where they will be able to ask about material that was redacted from the public eye.

Each member of the Intelligence Committee will be able to ask Mueller questions for five minutes in the open session before following up in a similar closed session.

In the closed sessions, the Intelligence Committee will have access to the unredacted version of volume I of the Mueller report, which focuses on the question of collusion and conspiracy with the Russian government, while the Judiciary Committee will have access to the unredacted version of volume II, which focuses on obstruction of justice.

Neither committee will have access to any information that is redacted for purposes of protecting information provided to the grand jury.

There will be no transcript of the closed session of the House Intelligence Committee, but there will likely be a transcript of the session with the House Judiciary Committee.

The first congressional aide said members of both committees will not be restricted in what they can ask Mueller, but they do expect he will largely stick to the information he provided in the report.

The committees did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

So they'll get some redacted information, but not the grand jury testimony.

The restrictions on how many members can ask questions strikes me as a move to keep the Republican members from turning the public hearings into another partisan circus where they all grandstand and slander Mueller to win the favor of the Fuhrer.