Sunday, January 26, 2020

Well, you know

The House should be spending this year in court trying to get that information, because the Senate can't afford to wait for the courts to decline to review a subpoena issued in an impeachment (as impeachments are not subject to judicial review or even oversight).  Just to be clear, this is what Ms. Haberman wrote in the NYTimes:

“The president’s statement as described by Mr. Bolton could undercut a key element of his impeachment defense: that the holdup in aid was separate from Mr. Trump’s requests that Ukraine announce investigations into his perceived enemies, including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, who had worked for a Ukrainian energy firm while his father was in office."
Now, the Senate could still hear from Bolton, and still say it's not worth removing the President over; but why mess up a good thing?  IOW, Bolton's chances of ever testifying before the Senate just dropped below zero.  His chances of being asked to speak to the House, however?

Besides, there was corruption!
Oh, wait! The corruption was between Trump's incompetence and Giuliani's venality! Whew! Could think we kept that off the TV cameras!
Absolute immunity is an even better dodge than executive privilege!
But that would be corruption! Which is what Trump wanted to investigate, maybe! See? He found it!
But is it "crime-like"? Because that's the new standard! And only Alan Dershowitz knows what it means!

No comments:

Post a Comment