Althouse: "Mr. Nadler has said repeatedly that his committee is engaged in an impeachment investigation — or, if you prefer, an impeachment inquiry."

September 18, 2019

"Mr. Nadler has said repeatedly that his committee is engaged in an impeachment investigation — or, if you prefer, an impeachment inquiry."

"He insists the 'nomenclature' does not matter. The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and her leadership team clearly disagree. They assiduously avoid the 'I' word, painting the committee’s work as garden-variety oversight. As a result, even Democratic lawmakers don’t seem to know whether they are engaged in an impeachment inquiry. Representative Pramila Jayapal has said 'yes.' Representative Jim Himes has said 'no.' Last week, Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader, said 'no' — then backtracked, claimed he’d misheard the question and offered a non-answer instead...."

From "When Is Impeachment Not Impeachment?/When the speaker of the House thinks it is politically foolhardy" by the NYT The Editorial Board

64 comments:

rehajm said...: Bah. They are all pushing the same crack- Orange Man Bad. There's an election coming and it's an easier to sell when there's investigation inquiries going on.

Or they're hoping the prosecutors in New York find a 1099 from the Russians in Trump's tax returns.; 9/18/19, 6:26 AM
Hagar said...: Nah. Some people just are not right in the head - but still get elected to office.; 9/18/19, 6:30 AM
Kevin said...: So, chaos?; 9/18/19, 6:31 AM
John henry said...: Sounds like a "nonpeachment" to me.

John Henry; 9/18/19, 6:33 AM
Kevin said...: As it becomes evident Trump can win re-election, the impeachment wing of the party is going to come unhinged.

Pass the popcorn.; 9/18/19, 6:33 AM
wendybar said...: The whole thing is a clown show. Between the clown media and the clown Democrats, it was quite the show trial. They should be embarrassed, but their not. Wait until Trump wins a second term. WTH will they act like then??; 9/18/19, 6:34 AM
rhhardin said...: It's not that facts don't matter but that soap opera is entertaining enough that a lot of people voluntarily live in it. It's about ratings, on the performance side.

There's a big enough audience to keep them going.; 9/18/19, 6:36 AM
rehajm said...: It's about ratings, on the performance side.

I'm totally sold, though ratings are for newsies, politicians want votes. But it's definitely about maintaining a negative emotional reaction to Trump. You don't necessarily need to know why- a residual feeling left by a salacious NYT smear or an impeachment inquiry investigation- it doesn't matter.; 9/18/19, 6:44 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: Nadler will face a more progressive challenger in his next election, and this "investigation" is being done, at great public expense, to enable Nadler to defeat that challenger.; 9/18/19, 6:52 AM
Hagar said...: To help Lewandowski run for senator?; 9/18/19, 6:53 AM
Sally327 said...: I've been a believer that they don't have the evidence because if they did they would proceed with impeachment. But perhaps I'm wrong about that, they do have the evidence but the leadership thinks it will be politically a bad move so that's why it won't happen. So maybe that's a win for the pro-impeachment crowd, if people think this way, they could do it, they just won't do it for reasons that have little to do with the strength of the case against the President.; 9/18/19, 6:54 AM
Birkel said...: I'd place the current re-election odds at more than 90%. Events could always intervene.

31% of the New Mexico rally participants were registered Democratics.
46% latinos.

Warren gets schlonged.; 9/18/19, 6:54 AM
Krumhorn said...: This exercise is about more than politics; it is about safeguarding the health of our democracy.

Bullshit! They are so deranged with TrumpHate they cannot avoid stumbling off the platform and onto the tracks. If the lefties were were serious about the health of our democracy, they’d all lick the third rail Jonestown style.

SSZZSSZZTT! The fry smell would linger only briefly, and then our democracy would be all better.

- Krumhorn; 9/18/19, 6:58 AM
MadisonMan said...: When Is Impeachment Not Impeachment?

When Impeachment is not polling well.; 9/18/19, 6:58 AM
gilbar said...: At what point, back in 1984, did the narrative change from:
Mondale is a shoe in
To
We Always said it'd be Reagan in a landslide?; 9/18/19, 7:00 AM
iowan2 said...: The Dems have clearly laid out their agenda. Televised hearings where the Dems attempt to do a public trial presenting only selected bits of information and the media playing those video clips repeatedly in hopes low information voters will conclude that congress actually proved criminality.

We have seen the NYT is very comfortable, printing lies in their newspaper as the work tirelessly to interfere in our elections. Russia is a NPC compared to the New York Times, when it comes to election interference.; 9/18/19, 7:02 AM
Birkel said...: gilbar,
December.; 9/18/19, 7:02 AM
Michael K said...: Nadler will face a more progressive challenger in his next election, and this "investigation" is being done, at great public expense, to enable Nadler to defeat that challenger.

Yes, that and fundraising. Meanwhile, Trump is in CA going for the popular vote. What will happen in those states that went popular vote if he gets it ?; 9/18/19, 7:04 AM
henry said...: It's just the Dems on the Judiciary Committee auditioning to be the ones to pack the Supreme Court when [insert leftist] wins the popular vote [illegal immigrant voters count double] to rule by pen and phone in 2020.; 9/18/19, 7:08 AM
Wince said...: To Dream the Impeachable Dream

To dream the impeachable dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go

To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star

This is my quest, to follow that star
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march
Into hell for a heavenly cause

And I know if I'll only be true
To this glorious quest
That my heart will lay peaceful and calm
When I'm laid to my rest

And the world will be better for this
That one man scorned and covered with scars
Still strove with his last ounce of courage
To fight the unbeatable foe
To reach the unreachable star; 9/18/19, 7:13 AM
rehajm said...: What will happen in those states that went popular vote if he gets it ?

Lefties will challenge their own policy in court.; 9/18/19, 7:20 AM
rehajm said...: ...and win, most likely.; 9/18/19, 7:20 AM
Michael The Magnificent said...: Warren gets schlonged.

There is a bumper sticker!

Seriously, this is a sham trial. The Democrats promised their base they'd impeach Trump, so now they have to have their show trial before they attempt to impeach Trump. And if they don't, their rabid base will be very unhappy and will primary them. I have a neighbor who belongs to that rabid base, and he is cock-sure that we cannot survive the irreparable damage that Donald Trump is causing, and that he needs to be removed from office as soon as possible.; 9/18/19, 7:25 AM
gilbar said...: What will happen in those states that went popular vote if he gets it ?

Well, their laws specify that they don't start until there are 270 votes wrapped up
So for 2020, they won't so anything

If, this was the future...
They'd call a special session of their legislature, and repeal their law during the time between the election and the college convening; 9/18/19, 7:28 AM
MacMacConnell said...: How can Dem Judicial Committee Chairman "Tent Zipper Pants" Nadler run an impeachment inquiry without being empowered to do so by a vote of the House?; 9/18/19, 7:29 AM
Oso Negro said...: I agree with Wendybar - the morning after a Trump re-election will be an interesting moment. If he loses a squeaker to one of these clowncar Democrats I will suspect massive fraud. My brother continues to profess the belief that Trump is a Russian asset and that Kavanaugh is a sex offender. I believe the aspiring leftist totalitarian state and its media lackeys have been keeping their lies going to facilitate fraud.; 9/18/19, 7:33 AM
narciso said...: Ah schrodingers inquiry; 9/18/19, 7:41 AM
David Begley said...: If the NYT is against impeachment, it must really poll poorly.; 9/18/19, 7:42 AM
Jeff Brokaw said...: What kind of moron falls for this terminology charade?

What kind of mendacious clown uses it as a trick to fool morons?

I mean, really. “Oh, well, it’s only an inquiry, I guess that’s okay. Glad it’s not an investigation!”.

The stupid is dialed up to 11.

You shouldn’t be doing impeachment at all so using different terms doesn’t help your cause, geniuses.; 9/18/19, 7:46 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: Can any order emerge at the end of this phase?

I was cheering Corey Lewandowski on yesterday as he gave the House Dems exactly what they deserve. Has anyone noted that Lewandowski was doing a Robert Mueller imitation when he asked to be directed to the page and paragraph of the Mueller report to which Nadler was referring? Team Obama wrote the book on non-responsive Congressional testimony, and now Team Trump is showing us what that means when the Dem clowns run the circus--we'll give them clowning.

Both parties need to do a deep think about what this means and whether there is any road back.

The Democrats need to go first. They started it.; 9/18/19, 7:57 AM
jaydub said...: "I have a neighbor who belongs to that rabid base, and he is cock-sure that we cannot survive the irreparable damage that Donald Trump is causing..."

I have one of those too. My argument to her is that my priorities in a president are a strong economy, a strong national defense, property rights and personal freedom; so, which Democrat would she suggest I vote for?; 9/18/19, 7:59 AM
Temujin said...: Great article. You've got the New New York Times, which doesn't know what it's doing, questioning House Democrats who don't know what they're doing, all trying to figure out what to do about Trump, who they maintain doesn't know what he's doing. However, I have to say, after 3 years of watching the New New York Times, the Dems, and Trump, I think Trump is the only one of the three who does know what he's doing.

And he's burying them.; 9/18/19, 8:00 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Antifa fascists and the Clinton Crime Syndicate run the democrat party.; 9/18/19, 8:16 AM
Michael K said...: The local paper in Tucson has bought into the left's war on the Supreme Court.

It's just nauseating but expected in a college town. I normally only read the weather report and the crime report. Fortunately, all the crime is south of the river where all the lefties live.; 9/18/19, 8:22 AM
narciso said...: Take them litetally no:
https://mobile.twitter.com/Sam_Schulman; 9/18/19, 8:35 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: Fat-boy Nadler and his kangaroo committee is a real disgrace. They are barely American. God help us, if they ever got power over our lives.; 9/18/19, 8:40 AM
Sebastian said...: So, Althouse, are you still thinking about voting to empower these clowns? You don't think they are "competent" and "serious" and "express American values," do you?; 9/18/19, 8:48 AM
narciso said...: The absurdity:
https://babalublog.com/2019/09/17/beto-is-a-4-letter-word-part-2/; 9/18/19, 9:06 AM
Drago said...: It's "Impeachment", but not Impeachment Impeachment.; 9/18/19, 9:23 AM
bagoh20 said...: What Nadler is actually engaged in is a reelection campaign, and he believes his constituents are entirely different people than the ones who elected him in the past, or at least they have all gone mad, and he needs to reassure them that he can stop the coming Trumpocalypse in 2020.; 9/18/19, 10:24 AM
Earnest Prole said...: Clown-car dumpster fire.; 9/18/19, 10:26 AM
Yancey Ward said...: Actual impeachment died with the Mueller Report. I suppose this sort of fake impeachment is a sop for the lunatic mainstream that still believes the Russia Hoax.; 9/18/19, 11:35 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: The point here is that while Mueller investigation was ongoing, their very aggressive Obstruction statutory construction made assertion of Executive Privilege (EP) problematic. Plus, politically Trump decided not to fight the openly, as would have been the case if he had asserted EP. now, the Mueller investigation is over, the investigation is now purely political, with Wadler and his Dem hyenas in the House, Trump is involving EP, and AG Barr is telling Wadler and his committee to pound sand. The Mueller team had millions of pages of documents, hundreds of nerviest transcripts, grand jury testimony, and very likely a lot of stuff illegally obtained under FISA Titles I (wiretaps) and VII (NSA database searches). Wadler wants it desperately, but isn’t very likely going to get it.

Obama asserted EP for stuff well down in the various departments. That was ridiculous, of curse, and ultimately tended not to fly. But what Wadler and his hyenas want is information and evidence about Trump himself, or at least his inner circle. This is precisely where EP is at its strongest. Normally, Wadler wouldn’t have a chance - except that the Supreme Court forced Nixon to turn over evidence to the House impeachment investigation that Nixon had asserted EP over. Wadler wants to piggyback on that. His problem is that the House hasn’t opened up a formal impeachment investigation, as was done with Nixon, which required a vote of the entire House. That would require a number of Trump district House members to vote to open the investigation, which is why Speaker Palsy isn’t going to give that to Wadler. She wants another term as Speaker, and won’t get it if she has to force the Trump district members of her caucus to vote for it. All we have so far is Wadler and his hyenas on the Judiciary Committee voting to open an impeachment investigation. He is trying to fudge the distinction between the two, so that maybe he can overcome the Trump Administration’s assertion of EP (as well as denying them grand jury testimony based on Wadler’s investigation not being criminal and thus not within an exception to GJ secrecy).

And that all is causing Wadler and his hyenas a lot of trouble. All he really has as the basis for impeachment is the redacted Mueller Report. And the Mueller Report talks about more detailed evidence that might possibly incriminate Trump. But he can’t get to it. The OJhas essentially told him that if he wants the underlying information and evidence, his committee can get it the same way that Mueller supposedly (but not, in many cases) actually did. So, that was what they were trying to do yesterday in their hearing. But that didn't go very well, because many of Wadler’s hyenas are political hacks, instead of skilled prosecutors, so are apparently relatively easy to thwart. And without finding more, they are left with the sort of non Obstruction that Barr, Rosenstein, and DoJ OPR rejected as qualifying as Obstruction, such as the firing of FBI Dir Comey, etc.; 9/18/19, 11:38 AM
Skippy Tisdale said...: "Or they're hoping the prosecutors in New York find a 1099 from the Russians in Trump's tax returns."

I find NY incredibly stupid for passing the law that at some point will come back to bite them in the ass.; 9/18/19, 12:08 PM
Skippy Tisdale said...: "I mean, really. “Oh, well, it’s only an inquiry, I guess that’s okay. Glad it’s not an investigation!”."

No one expects the Spanish Inquiry!; 9/18/19, 12:17 PM
gerry said...: It's part of the Progressive/Liberal-Democrat-Bill Clinton post-modern truth technique. One's actions are independent of relative reality, which depends on how one defines whatever it is one is trying to avoid admitting to having done.

No definitions apply.; 9/18/19, 12:27 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: “I've been a believer that they don't have the evidence because if they did they would proceed with impeachment. But perhaps I'm wrong about that, they do have the evidence but the leadership thinks it will be politically a bad move so that's why it won't happen. So maybe that's a win for the pro-impeachment crowd, if people think this way, they could do it, they just won't do it for reasons that have little to do with the strength of the case against the President.”

Mueller’s prosecutors had far more evidence that the House Judiciary Committee has, and weren’t able to show either collusion or obstruction, despite a desperate need to justify their investigation . They had the illegally obtained FISA information, as well as transcripts from hundreds of interviews, a large number of grand jury hearings, and north of a million pages of documents, mostly acquired without Trump asserting Executive Privilege. Wadler and his hyenas very likely have little more than the redacted Mueller Report. And, with Trump invoking Executive Privilege are unlikely to get much more.

Of course, it wasn’t supposed to be that way. The plan, from the start was very likely to pass the Mueller information and evidence to the House Judiciary Committee, as soon as practicable, after the Dems retook the House. But I think what happened to thwart this was that AG Barr was confirmed much ore quickly this year than the House, under new leadership, could organize itself, and Barr shut dow the Mueller investigation before it could transfer its mountain of evidence and information to the now Dem controlled Judiciary Committee. That left the Dems demanding that the DoJ turn it over to them, and AG Barr telling the,m to pound sand.

I think that if the Mueller prosecutors could have kept their investigation going another couple months they likely I think would have just respected the House Judiciary Committee’s subpoena or everything they had. But, I think with the elections going against the Republicans, they saw what the Democrats were planning to do, and expediated AG Barr’s confirmation, in order to thwart their plan. And it seems to have worked.; 9/18/19, 1:02 PM
narciso said...: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/17/20870689/kavanaugh-scandal-new-york-times-fox-news?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter; 9/18/19, 1:31 PM
bagoh20 said...: I imagine that the boomers were at least as scary to their parents as the current crop of know-nothings. We were pretty far out with our own time's imagined future horrors. Remember them all: pollution, acid rain, over-population, the Russians, the Japaneses, east coast earthquakes, California falling in the sea, paraquat, pandemic AIDS, Y2000, Nixon, and on and on. Virtually every predicted holocaust was either bullshit or calmly averted by technology. Taxation didn't solve any of them.

Global warming will similarly either go away, or be solved in the same fashion, and in plenty of time, but telling people that won't will get you clicks, votes, and grants. Those old predictions of disaster also made a lot of money for a lot of people who had no hand in actually solving them. We did our worrying too, but I think it was similarly only half-hearted for reasonable people.; 9/18/19, 1:36 PM
RMc said...: Last week, Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader, said 'no' — then backtracked, claimed he’d misheard the question and offered a non-answer instead

Your tax dollars at work.; 9/18/19, 1:37 PM
bagoh20 said...: Woops, wrong thread. Moderation sucks. I could have fixed it immediately.; 9/18/19, 1:37 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: It was great fun watching Lewandowski tie Wadler in knots running him out of time, by requesting that the page and paragraph being referenced be shown to him. They finally get him a copy of the Mueller Report, and finally gets to Wadler asks him about the conversation, and Lewandowski then informs him that the President has requested that he not discuss anything that isn’t in the Mueller Report. They went round and round, and Wadler got nothing. Sure, the entire House could find him in contempt and then what? AG Holder was found in contempt of Congress, and surly didn’t lose any sleep over it. If they go into court, they will be opposed by the DoJ.

I don’t have nearly the litigation experience of some here, but I would fire a lawyer who asked questions like Wadler and Jackson Lee did. He was an adverse witness. That means that they couldn’t assume that he would bring a copy of the Mueller Report. Of course he wouldn’t. Of course, he wouldn’t have read it, or know what was on each page. You expect to have to work for it, if they are an adverse witness. Not only did they not have a copy of the Mueller Report ready for Lewandowski, Wadler didn’t have one in front of him either. So,nthen you had Wadler asking about a meeting Lewandowski had with Trump described on a certain page in the Report, but Wadler couldn’t tell him precisely where on the page, because he didn’t have a copy himself. No doubt his questions were drafted by his staff. And then he kept asking about conversations Lewandowski had had with Trump, and Lewandowskiwould respond by offering a letter from the Trump lawyers requesting that he not disclose anything outside the Mueller report, and nothing about private conversations with Trump. Rinse and repeat, until Wadler had to admit his time was over (it was a circus when he stopped the clock, all by himself, in order to get Lewandowski a copy of the Report).

Still, my favorite moment when he asked Jackson Lee what her question was. You expect this from adverse witnesses, and carefully phrase your questions, but here, it was obvious, she was ranting, not asking questions that could be answered.; 9/18/19, 2:03 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Go Nadler! Go Nadler!; 9/18/19, 2:38 PM
Michael K said...: My favorite on the committee is Hank Johnson. Congressman Guam.; 9/18/19, 3:03 PM
Lucien said...: I guess it would have been too hard for Committee Staff to have a tabbed highlighted copy of the Mueller Report sitting in front of the witness, so members could ask questions like “Turning to tab 4 of the binder directly in front of you and looking at the highlighted portion labeled “A” did you tell the Special Counsel’s staff . .”?; 9/18/19, 3:28 PM
vanderleun said...: The only thing that could possibly improve Nadler's looks would be if somebody slapped a pink mist sombrero on him.; 9/18/19, 3:48 PM
404 Page Not Found said...: Have we reached peak retard yet?; 9/18/19, 4:41 PM
404 Page Not Found said...: One of the sharpest minds in the Democrat Party, Hank Johnson, recently asked if too many American troops on Guam would make the island likely to capsize. Sheila Jackson-Lee recently asked a NASA administrator if the Mars rover would be taking picture of Neil Armstrong's footprints. A CNN anchor recently asked Bill Nye is asteroid near-misses were caused by global climate change.

Yes, this is your Democrat Party of today.; 9/18/19, 4:44 PM
404 Page Not Found said...: Journalist:

"Vice President Biden, how many genders are there?"

Joe Biden:

[puts hands on journalist] "Don't mess with me, kid."; 9/18/19, 4:45 PM
bagoh20 said...: Hank Johnson looked at Nadler and wondered to himself if the Capitol building could tip over.; 9/18/19, 5:48 PM
bagoh20 said...: The Idiocracy has arrived and it's not a bunch of rednecks and hillbillies. It's highly educated and elite powerful people. How did we let that happen? Idiots vote too, and college is available to everyone who can't think of anything better to do with a few hundred grand.; 9/18/19, 6:18 PM
JAORE said...: Nads has the tiger's tail in hand. Now what to do?; 9/18/19, 9:51 PM
Michael The Magnificent said...: Hank Johnson looked at Nadler and wondered to himself if the Capitol building could tip over.

LOL! It might!

What was quite obvious was that Lewandowski's IQ exceeded the grand sum total of the Democrat's IQ on that committee. "I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries."; 9/19/19, 12:00 AM
narciso said...: The admiral who was testifying before johnson was a career naval aviator that flew the inverted mig in top gun.; 9/19/19, 12:48 AM