Tag: Trump impeachment inquiry

Phillips Statement On House Impeachment Procedure Vote

WASHINGTON, DC [10/31/2019] – Rep. Dean Phillips (MN-03) released the following statement today after the House passed H. Res. 660 to establish procedures for the ongoing impeachment inquiry:

“Today, I voted to codify procedures for Congress’s constitutionally-mandated oversight of this Administration. As a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I have joined my Democratic and Republican colleagues at secure depositions as we seek facts. Together, we’ve had the opportunity to ask questions and hear compelling testimony from many credible witnesses. Each deposition has been fair, with equal time afforded to Democrats and Republicans, principled, and driven by the pursuit of fact. As we enter the public phase of the inquiry, Americans will have a chance to join the conversation – to bear witness, review evidence, and weigh in on the principles and conduct of elected leaders who will illuminate our country’s future.”

 

Testimony from career diplomats outlines Trump’s dark view of Ukraine

Washington Post logoTwo career diplomats testified to House impeachment investigators Wednesday that President Trump displayed a deeply pessimistic view of Ukraine that was out of step with officials at the White House and State Department who saw support for the European country as critical in its battle with Russian-backed separatists.

The State Department officials, Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, said their optimistic view of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky clashed with a darker outlook of the new government held by Trump and an informal channel of actors linked to the president’s attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani, according to opening statements obtained by The Washington Post.

The testimony followed a blockbuster day in which Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a Ukraine expert assigned to the National Security Council, gave lawmakers a firsthand account of Trump’s alleged attempt at a quid pro quo during a July 25 call with Zelensky. Partisan tensions were also building around procedural rules for impeachment drafted by Democrats, which were scheduled for a markup Wednesday afternoon ahead of an expected House vote on Thursday.

View the complete October 30 article by John Hudson and Elise Bieber on The Washington Post website here.

Trump attacks on Vindman trigger backlash

The Hill logoPresident Trump‘s aggressive attacks on a White House official who testified about his concerns over Trump’s communications with Ukraine in the impeachment inquiry set off a furious backlash on Tuesday, with former Vice President Joe Biden calling the president’s remarks “despicable.”

Trump described Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, an active-duty member of the military who attended his deposition in uniform, as a “Never Trumper,” while some allies questioned the Purple Heart recipient’s patriotism given the fact that he emigrated from Ukraine as a child.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) called the attacks “absurd,” while Rep. Liz Cheney(Wyo.), the No. 3 Republican in the House, admonished those who would question Vindman’s patriotism without naming names.

View the complete October 29 article by Morgan Chalfant and Brett Samuels on The Hill website here.

New report reveals a Devin Nunes staffer is plotting to expose the whistleblower’s identity

AlterNet logoIn an effort to expose the still-secret identity of the whistleblower who sparked the Ukraine scandal that has ballooned into a full-fledged impeachment inquiry, a staffer for Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) has been plotting within the House Intelligence Committee to guarantee the release of the individual’s name, according to a new report in the Daily Beast.

Despite the fact that witness testimony, public evidence, and President Donald Trump’s own admissions have all largely confirmed that allegations made by the whistleblower, thus rendering the original complaint irrelevant, conservatives have been obsessed with the person’s identity. They’ve claimed that the whistleblower had an anti-Trump agenda or was working with Democrats to bring the president down. But even if the right-wing claims about the whistleblower had merit, they wouldn’t change the truth of what Trump has done that is appropriately leading to his impeachment.

For people like Nunes and his allies, though, it’s less important that an offensive strategy in the impeachment make sense than it is for it to create perceived enemies. And they see the whistleblower as a prime target for demonization.

View the complete October 29  article by Cody Fenwick on the AlterNet website here.

‘A crime called libel’: Experts outraged after torture advocate John Yoo accuses White House Ukraine expert Vindman of espionage on Fox News

AlterNet logoBerkeley law professor John Yoo on Fox News Monday night suggested Purple Heart recipient Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert at the White House, is engaging in espionage. Laura Ingraham also tried to paint the current White House national security official, a decorated Iraq war veteran, as a double agent. There is nothing to suggest their accusations are true or valid.

Vindman, who was on Trump’s infamous July 25 call with the president of Ukraine and reported his concerns, is testifying Tuesday before House investigators.

“Here we have a U.S. national security official who is advising Ukraine, while working inside the White House, apparently against the president’s interest, and usually, they spoke in English. Isn’t that kind of an interesting angle on this story?” Ingraham posited.

View the complete October 29 article by David Badash from the New Civil Rights Movement on the AlterNet website here.

Trump rails against impeachment inquiry as key White House witness testifies

The Hill logoPresident Trump on Tuesday railed against the impeachment inquiry into his alleged abuse of power ahead of key testimony from a White House official that threatens to deepen the president’s problems.

Trump tweeted or retweeted dozens of messages denying wrongdoing, chastising Democrats for their handling of the impeachment proceedings thus far and questioning the credibility of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council official who will meet behind closed doors with lawmakers on Tuesday.

“Supposedly, according to the Corrupt Media, the Ukraine call ‘concerned’ today’s Never Trumper witness,” Trump tweeted. “Was he on the same call that I was? Can’t be possible! Please ask him to read the Transcript of the call. Witch Hunt!”

View the complete October 29 article by Brett Samuels on The Hill website here.

Republican Senators Struggling To Defend Trump From Impeachment

The House’s impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump’s alleged plot to withhold critical security aid to Ukraine in order to force them into investigating his political adversaries is now entering its second month — yet Senate Republicans are still struggling with how to handle it.

And, according to the Washington Post, Republicans are reluctant to defend Trump’s behavior both because there is no good defense, and because there’s worry they’ll have egg on their face if and when more troubling Trump conduct surfaces.

“It feels like a horror movie,” an unnamed “veteran” Republican senator told the Washington Post.

View the complete October 28 article by Emily Singer on the National Memo website here.

Internal White House debate stifles release of Pence-Zelenskiy call

Nearly three weeks after the vice president said he had “no objection” to releasing a transcript, administration is divided on whether it could help or hurt Trump’s cause.

WASHINGTON — It’s been almost three weeks since Vice President Mike Pence said he had “no objection” to releasing a reconstructed transcript of his phone call with the leader of Ukraine. But as House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry continues moving swiftly into its second month, the White House still has not made a decision on whether to make those details of Pence’s call public.

The internal debate has divided White House officials over whether releasing the call would help or hurt their flailing efforts to counter accusations that President Donald Trump held up military aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate his political rivals, according to two people familiar with the discussions.

One concern raised by some of Trump’s allies is that releasing his call with Zelenskiy was a mistake because it fueled the impeachment inquiry rather than tamp it down, these people said. Another is that a comparison of Pence and Trump’s calls with Zelenskiy could potentially make the president’s self-described “perfect” conversation appear significantly less so.

View the complete October 29 article by Monica Alba and Carol E. Lee on the NBC News website here.

Ex-Trump official’s refusal to testify escalates impeachment tensions

The Hill logoThe refusal of a key former White House official to testify Monday in the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry raises new questions about the pace and effectiveness of the investigation into allegations of wrongdoing swirling around President Trump.

Democrats were quick to argue that the decision by Charles Kupperman, who was a deputy to former national security adviser John Bolton, to defy a congressional subpoena will do nothing to slow down their hard-charging probe into Trump’s dealings with Ukraine. Just hours later, Democratic leaders announced they will vote Thursday on legislation outlining the next phases of the process, to consist of public hearings as they weigh whether to introduce articles of impeachment.

Yet Kupperman’s strategy to seek court authorization before participating in the probe could prove to be a model for future witnesses, both public and private, stirring new doubts about which Trump officials will appear on Capitol Hill as the proceedings evolve.

View the complete October 28 article by Olivia Beavers and Mike Lillis on The Hill  website here.

Here’s how Nancy Pelosi can call Trump’s bluff — and destroy the White House argument against impeachment

AlterNet logoBased upon a specious contention from the White House — and parroted by some of Donald Trump’s most avid defenders – that the current House impeachment inquiries are unconstitutional, a long-time political analyst said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) should call the president’s bluff and hold a vote on going forward.

According to Michael Tomasky, writing for The Daily Beast, Pelosi holds a solid majority on the House that would likely grant approval and would stick a fork in one of the White House’s main complaints.

Writing, “There’s no constitutional or legal requirement that they have such a vote. Remember—in the Watergate era, the House Judiciary Committee started hearings they called impeachment hearings in October 1973; the full House vote came in February 1974,” Tomasky made the case for doing it anyway.

View the complete October 28 article by Tom Boggioni from Raw Story on the AlterNet website here.