Impeachment news

Trump tweeted shortly after arriving in the United Kingdom for two days of NATO meetings that he had read House Republicans' draft defense in which his allies insist there was no evidence of wrongdoing in Trump's interactions with Ukraine.

"Great job! Radical Left has NO CASE," Trump tweeted. "Read the Transcripts. Shouldn’t even be allowed. Can we go to Supreme Court to stop?"

  The Hill

No, fool. The Supreme Court would not hear that case. Trump's kneejerk response to anything he doesn't like is to threaten to sue.

The tweet marked the second time that Trump has raised the possibility of appealing his case to the Supreme Court to avert a possible impeachment.

[...]

The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday will hold its first hearing in the impeachment inquiry, titled "The Impeachment Inquiry into President Donald J. Trump: Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment." The panel will hear from legal scholars as Democrats weigh whether the evidence turned up in their weeks-long impeachment inquiry warrants the drafting of articles aimed at removing the president from office.

The White House said it will not participate in the hearing, though it did not rule out taking part in future hearings.

[...]

House Republicans argue in their draft defense that the president's actions were not politically motivated and that the evidence does not support Democrats' assertions.

Good luck with that.

A U.S. district judge denied the Justice Department’s request for a stay on testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn.

U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a 17-page opinion that a long-term stay on her opinion last week requiring McGahn testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee could cause “grave harm” to the investigation.

[...]

The judge, who was appointed by former President Obama, also decided to remove a temporary stay she agreed upon last week while the case moved up to the U.S. Court of Appeals. The Justice Department was advocating for a long-term stay.

She added that the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) chances of winning the appeal were “exceedingly low.”

“DOJ also does not, and cannot, deny that whatever additional information that the Committee (and the public) might glean from McGahn’s live testimony will be lost if the Judiciary Committee does not have an opportunity to question him prior to any House vote on impeachment,” she wrote.

[...]

Jackson decided last week that the president could not prevent McGahn from testifying and being subject to congressional oversight because history shows “Presidents are not kings.”

[...]

A Jan. 3 hearing with a three-judge panel has been scheduled for the Justice Department's appeal. Two of those judges were appointed by Republican presidents, Politico reported.

The department has said it would bring the request to the Supreme Court if necessary. Chief Justice John Roberts could grant a temporary stay against the subpoena, but five justices would need to support a longer stay for it to go into effect, according to Politico.

[...]

McGahn’s testimony could help House Democrats determine if they want to include Mueller report accusations in the articles of impeachment.

  The Hill

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is beginning to send out feelers to gauge if members are interested in serving as impeachment managers, a high-profile role that will put those chosen for it in a political spotlight.

Pelosi’s office has quietly reached out to some members she believes could serve as managers, while others have pushed their own names forward, multiple sources tell The Hill.

Unlike the past two modern impeachment inquiries into sitting presidents that only included House Judiciary Committee members as managers, sources say they believe Pelosi may shake things up by adding managers from the House Intelligence Committee.

  he Hill

I'll take Adam Schiff. And Sean Patrick Maloney.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, is viewed as being a likely to definite choice.

[...]

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.) has emerged as a key player on the Judiciary panel over the past year, in large part because of his more than two decades of work as a constitutional lawyer.

House Democrats have increasingly leaned on him to help distill complex questions surrounding the Constitution amid allegations that the president is violating the laws of the land.

[...]

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) is considered a possible choice as an impeachment manager given her unique role as the only House member who worked on both House impeachment cases against former Presidents Clinton and Nixon.

[...]

Rep. David Cicilline (R.I. the head of House Democrats’ messaging arm, is also viewed as a possible contender.

As a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Cicilline took on an active role during the closed-door deposition phase of the impeachment inquiry. He is also viewed as someone who is out front pushing Democrats’ talking points and agenda.

[...]

Rep. Eric Swalwell (Calif.)is another possible choice, according to sources, who note he’s close to Pelosi.

The Speaker may also want to place fellow California lawmakers in a few of the impeachment roles given the state serves as her largest base of support.

That's a really lousy reason to choose someone.

Swalwell, a former prosecutor, serves on both the Judiciary and Intelligence committees, which would allow him to follow the inquiry from its start on Intelligence to its conclusion with Judiciary.

Rep. Val Demings (Fla.)is another potential pick who would check a lot of boxes, sources told The Hill.

Demings, a CBC member, is the only other House Democrat to sit on both the Judiciary and Intelligence panels.

As a former police chief, she would bring a law enforcement background to the role.

[...]

Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.) is probably the most recognizable face of the impeachment inquiry after nearly two weeks of televised hearings leading the evidence-gathering portion of the Democrats’ Ukraine investigation.

If Pelosi chooses to add Intelligence members to the impeachment managers mix, Schiff is well positioned to get a spot.

[...]

Rep. Jackie Speier (Calif.) a Californian who represents a district adjacent to the Speaker’s district, is a longtime friend and ally of Pelosi. She too is seen by colleagues as a potential pick.

During the Intelligence hearings, Speier appeared composed, prepared and searing, when needed.

[...]

Rep. Jim Himes (Conn.), the second most senior Intelligence member, is also seen as a contender.

Himes impressed some Democrats with his measured questioning of witnesses during the open hearings, remaining level as he sought to elicit answers from witnesses while also bashing Republicans for their attacks against certain witnesses.

[...]

Rep. Joaquin Castro (Texas), the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who worked as a lawyer before his political career, is also seen as being in the running.

[...]

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), who previously practiced law in Chicago and sits on the Intelligence and Oversight panels, has also had his name floated as being in the mix.

That covers almost everybody.

With two cases involving efforts to access President Trump’s tax records already at the Supreme Court, and more cases involving congressional oversight likely to be there soon, all eyes are on the court that Chief Justice John Roberts leads. And all eyes may be on the chief justice himself soon if, as seems likely, the House’s ongoing impeachment inquiry turns into a Senate impeachment trial. No matter how senators ultimately vote at any trial, the chief justice’s role there could shape the decisions he makes on the court well into the future.

[...]

The Constitution doesn’t provide any details about what the chief justice should do as presiding officer over a trial of the president, but the Senate rules governing impeachment provide, among other things, that the “Presiding Officer possesses authority to rule on all evidentiary questions,” or he can “put any such issue to a vote before the Senate.” They also allow that “any Senator may request that a formal vote be taken on a particular question.”

[...]

Whatever the precise parameters of his role, Chief Justice Roberts will be front and center if the Senate considers, and ultimately votes upon, allegations that President Trump has committed “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” And he will have literally a front-row seat as the senators hear in detail about this president’s many abuses of the powers of his office.

At the same time that Chief Justice Roberts is playing his constitutionally prescribed role at a Senate impeachment trial, he’ll be continuing his day job as well — and there he may be in the process of deciding one or more of these congressional oversight cases, cases that will surely be political blockbusters and will require two of his colleagues, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, to decide whether to vote against the president who appointed them to sit on the bench.

[...]

[T]his is a trying time for a justice who wants his court to be seen as an impartial institution. The president has repeatedly suggested that the Supreme Court is in his back pocket — even tweeting that if the “partisan Dems ever tried to impeach, I would first head to the U.S. Supreme Court.” (The Constitution gives the Supreme Court no role to play in the impeachment process.)

These congressional oversight cases will, if the court decides to hear them, be tests of who’s right about whether the court is above politics: Chief Justice Roberts or President Trump. To be clear, these cases shouldn’t be difficult. Congressional oversight has deep roots in our political and legal tradition, and the Supreme Court itself has repeatedly recognized the breadth of Congress’s oversight authority. The president’s arguments against congressional scrutiny would, if accepted, meaningfully cabin Congress’s oversight authority, undermining a fundamental check Congress has long used to hold the executive accountable.

If and when Chief Justice Roberts is asked to preside over an impeachment trial, he will bear witness to a powerful reminder of the critical importance of our nation’s system of checks and balances. That reminder should guide him when he’s doing his day job.

  Thee Hill

We'll see.

Joseph Bondy, the lawyer for Parnas, asked a federal court in Manhattan on Monday for an update on discovery in his client’s case, specifically referring to additional electronic devices that were seized in court-authorized searches following Parnas’ arrest at the Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C. in October.

Federal prosecutors described the material seized from Parnas and his three co-defendants to be "voluminous" including at least 29 electronic devices.

[...]

"We think a superseding indictment is likely," Assistant U.S. Attorney Douglas Zolkind said, referring to the case against Parnas and his associate Igor Fruman, adding any additional charges would be brought ahead of a trial but did not specify who the target of those charges would be.

[...]

Bondy also said there are paper records in the government’s possession that his client would like to turn over.

A protective order governing the case requires Parnas to get court approval before turning over to Congress any materials seized as part of the criminal investigation.

"I expect to grant that request," Judge Paul Oetken said

[...]

Federal prosecutors have been investigating Giuliani’s business dealings as part of the case against Parnas and Fruman, according to sources.

[...]

As ABC News has previously reported, the House Intelligence Committee is in possession of audio and video recordings and photographs provided to the committee by Parnas, an associate of Giuliani.

[...]

The material submitted to the committee includes audio, video and photos that include Giuliani and Trump. It was unclear what the content depicts and the committees only began accessing the material last week.

[...]

Sources familiar with the matter told ABC News last month that some of the material sought by congressional investigators is already in possession of federal investigators within the Southern District of New York and thus held up from being turned over. It is unclear if this material is what Bondy was asking the court to release to Congress Monday.

  ABC