WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to announce a formal impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump late Tuesday, acquiescing to mounting pressure from Democratic lawmakers following reports that Trump may have sought a foreign government’s help in his reelection bid.
The decision sets up an election season clash between Trump and Congress that seems certain to exacerbate the nation’s fierce partisan divides and inject deep uncertainty into the 2020 presidential contest.
Pelosi was huddling with her caucus Tuesday afternoon and planned to announce the impeachment probe in a statement following the meeting. Her plans were confirmed by a person familiar with her thinking, who insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden said Congress must use its full constitutional authority to investigate Trump’s actions and if he doesn’t cooperate he’ll leave lawmakers “with no choice but to initiate impeachment.” If that happens, Biden said, it will be a tragedy of Trump’s own making.
Pelosi has spent months trying to keep an impeachment inquiry at bay. But her position became untenable this week as more members—including crucial moderates in political swing districts—swung in favor of a probe following reports that Trump pushed Ukraine’s leader for help investigating Democrat Biden and his son during a summer phone call.
Trump, who was meeting with world leaders at the United Nations, called the impending inquiry a “witch hunt” and predicted it would be a “positive for me.” He authorized the release of a transcript of his call with Ukraine’s president and predicted it would show no evidence of wrongdoing.
“You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call,” Trump said.
The president has all but dared Democrats to open impeachment proceedings, repeatedly stonewalling requests for documents and witness interviews in a variety of ongoing investigations. Trump advisers say they are confident that the specter of impeachment led by the opposition party will bolster his political support. Pelosi has shared that concern and has spent months trying to hold off liberals in her caucus pushing for impeachment.
But the atmosphere on Capitol Hill started shifting following a whistleblower complaint that centered in part on Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president, but is also said to include other events.
Trump has suggested he brought up Biden and his son Hunter in the phone call as part of discussions over corruption in Ukraine—despite no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of either man. He also confirmed on Tuesday that he ordered advisers to freeze $400 million in military aid to Ukraine in the days before the phone call, prompting Democrats to charge that he was holding out the money as leverage for information on Biden.
In remarks ahead of her caucus meeting, Pelosi notably said a quid pro quo wasn’t necessary to establish an impeachable offense.
“We don’t ask foreign governments to help us in our election,” Pelosi said.
Trump has sought to implicate Biden and his son in the kind of corruption that has long plagued Ukraine. Hunter Biden served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company at the same time his father was leading the Obama administration’s diplomatic dealings with Kyiv. Though the timing raised concerns among anti-corruption advocates, there has been no evidence of wrongdoing by either the former vice president or his son.
It's the Trump reelection committee at work. I thought there has been a probe since January in Congress and a special prosecutor with ultra liberal lawyers for 2 years prior to that. So what is new?
The irony is that the Democrats actually sought and got help from foreign governments (including Russia) for the 2016 Election. Also is this really an attempt to get rid of Biden?
Did the authors see the video where Biden blackmailed the Ukraine by holding up $1 billion in aid.
This article looks like an actual lift of an AP article. However, there are opinions expressed in this so it is not quite news.
Mr. Cosgrove,
With all due respect, your commentary on this article qualifies, in my opinion, as a good example of why the constitutional democracy form of government upon which our republic was established, is in a rapid state of disintegration. I pray that this is not irreversible. A healthy democracy depends upon an electorate made up of voters who value the democratic system itself more than they value winning particular elections and the acquisition of power. At this point, it appears that the only remaining question with regard to Trump’s communications with the Ukrainian president is whether or not there was an explicitly expressed quid pro quo connecting the release of the military aid money to Ukraine and the investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden that Trump was seeking. But even if this connection was not explicit, it was, at the very least, strongly implied, especially considering the timing of the holdup of the money and Trump’s phone call to Ukraine’s president. Under these circumstances, whether you, I or anyone else consider ourselves liberal or conservative is totally irrelevant to the matter at hand. Liberalism and conservatism are simply points of view that are inherently partial and contingent. What we should be hell bent on defending, at all costs, is the integrity of our democracy, the value of which transcends those partial and contingent perspectives. I do not blame mainstream conservatives for this situation. It is not their fault, and I actually sympathize with them for being in this dilemma. But now is the time to fight for our democracy and disavow all forms of spin and pure partisanship, regardless of what we believe about how all of this will shake out in the next election cycle or the one after that.
Why don't you be specific? You made some vague claims that are disparaging. I said nothing about Trump and Ukraine. We do not know anything yet as to what actually happened. But we have on a video Obama through Biden doing what you are objecting to.
No we don’t. The situations are very different. We do know for certain that aTrump was applying pressure on Ukraine’s president to open an investigation into Joe Biden. We also know that he was holding up $250,000,000 in military aid to to Ukraine while he was applying the pressure. Today Trump offered a laughable explanation as to why he was holding up that money. As a man of integrity, I’m sure you will not pretend to believe that obvious lie. Obama did want the Ukrainian prosecutor fired, but so did Great Britain and the International Monetary Fund, because he was known in international politics as a very corrupt individual. And the investigation into the company that Hunter Biden worked for had already been closed when Joe Biden applied the pressure. Trump is obviously guilty as sin of a very high crime that should qualify as treason. If Joe Biden is guilty of something related to Ukraine, so be it. I will not defend him. But so far the evidence is flimsy to nonexistent.
Ashley
“Disavowing the spin and partisanship”must mean at least reading the transcript when released...I suggest you adhere to your own exhortation, take a breath and read !!
I certainly will when it’s released, along with the whistleblower’s report, which, as you know, has been withheld from Congress for no good reason. But as I have seen your act before, let me go out on a limb and guess that you find Trump’s explanation of why the aid money was being held entirely believable. Of course you do, just as you believe that Trump is not a racist and a confirmed bald-faced liar. Get a little credibility by being willing to argue from a point of honesty, then it will be worthwhile having a serious discussion with you.
Ashley
Yes ....honestly ...you are way out on a limb!
I certainly believe Trump is a proven liar...but no I do not believe he is a racist.
I have yet to see the facts on any withholding of monies...I am waiting
Has it occurred to you that if there is “no there..there” in the transcript then any issue about money withholding ,if any, is a moot point?
You might recall that your above comment started with”we do know for certain....”....yet at that point you had not read the transcript!....speaking of honesty!
No there, there? Are you serious ? Trump has already admitted that he has spoken to the Ukrainian president about opening an investigation on Biden. And yes, we do know that a large grant of military aid for Ukraine was being held up by Trump. That is not opinion, it is an incontrovertible fact. We do need to see the transcript, but also the whistleblower’s report. Can you give one good reason why that report wasn’t turned over to Congress when it should have been? One legitimate reason why AG Barr has refused to allow Congress to see it? You can’t, and neither could I if I wanted to. The truth is that those who attempt to defend and justify the Trump administration even on this really don’t care about democracy and the niceties of constitutional law and the delicate balance of the separation of powers. The only thing they care about is for their own side to have the political power in its hands. To say you believe that justice is on Trump’s side on this matter is to, in effect, declare yourself a Sarah Huckabee Sanders type of straight-faced justifier of the absurd who will look a person right in the face and swear that black is white and white black.
Ashley
Once again “we know for certain....” before the documents are available
Non transmittal of of the Report.......Read a little more widely.... the legal counsel in the Justice dept has advised the Inspector General ‘s office that the whistleblower complaint is not covered by the statute requiring transmission to Congress. ...The statute only covers reports concerning individuals who are employees of the intelligence community supervised by the Inspector General.
Ashley Green--
Excellent comments. I feel the same way. I am mystified and devastated why more Americans do not see this as a non-partisan fight for democracy.
Because it is a partisan vote for power. Watch the party line votes for and against impeachment, for and against conviction. If more people do not see the world as you do, is it necessarily a statement about them? Or could it in fact be a statement about you?
Can you substantiate your findings?
Yes, which ones? Here are two
The Steele dossier was financed by the Hillary campaign and asked a ex British agent to get information from Russia on Trump. Steele claimed he had Russian sources. Here is an article on Biden bragging about the firing of Ukraine prosecutor http://bit.ly/2myGhME . If you want me to document the Mueller probe or the impeachment investigation let me know.
J Cosgrove--
You were already told that Obama and other countries wanted the prosecutor fired because he was corrupt. There is nothing on the Biden video that deviates from that.
Why did the United States threaten another country with holding back $1 billion for internal political issues? Did Biden's son get a large payout from a Ukrainian company? If not then it is a non issue. If he did, then why? Always interesting to see who is reading these comments.
J Cosgrove---
It is common knowledge that there is nothing new about countries withholding funds from other counties over an internal issue.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) managing director, Christine Lagarde, stated the possibility of withholding funds from the Ukraine due to its failure to eliminate corruption. Subsequently, the EU and the United States joined the IMF in its demands.
Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia under President Barack Obama, on Sept. 20 tweeted that the “Obama administration policy (not just ‘Biden policy’) to push for this Ukrainian general prosecutor to go” was “a shared view in many capitals, multilateral lending institutions, and pro-democratic Ukrainian civil society.”
FactCheck.org is considered to be a credible source. It goes into more detail about this issue.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/trump-twists-facts-on-biden-and-ukraine/
Judith
“You were already told..other countries wanted the prosecutor fired”...... I can find this statement repeated but have yet to see a source for it.. do you have the original source that proves this point?
Stuart Meisenzahl---
The original source is The International Monetary Fund (IMF) itself when its managing director, Christine Lagarde, stated the possibility of withholding funds from the Ukraine due to its failure to eliminate corruption. Subsequently, the EU and the United States joined the IMF in its demands.
https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2017/12/07/pr17473-ukraine-imf-statement-on-the-efforts-to-fight-corruption
FactCheck.org and Politifact are both credible sources. FactCheck.org goes into detail about the IMF statement concerning withholding funds from the Ukraine due to corruption. Politifact states that Obama and the western countries wanted the Ukrainian state prosecutor gone. There is no evidence Joe Biden supported this position to enhance his son’s position. The only claims I see about Biden are from right wing sources.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/trump-twists-facts-on-biden-and-ukraine/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/07/viral-image/fact-checking-joe-biden-hunter-biden-and-ukraine/
I hope this is helpful.
Not helpful....Statement was that “Other countries wanted THE PROSECUTOR FIRED”...
Your sources are to concern about corruption endemic to The Ukraine in General .......with a leap then to to the prosector
Further you leave out that Fact Check referenced the Wall Street Journal Report that Burisma and Its principal we’re subject to investigation but that Hunter Biden as son of a Vice President being on its Board was a shield.
Fact check summarily states there was no other back up. Yet Shokin the fired prosecutor has submitted testimony that Hunter Biden had been asked to testify....
Fact check also reports that Shorkin “quit” while Joe Biden was there which I note in turn flies in the face of Joe Biden’s own braggadocio on tape that Joe Biden had gotten him fired.
I want to thank Ms. Green and Ms. Jordan for corroborating everything I said. It's always nice to have people who disagree with you do that.
Corroborate what?
Everything I said. You are obviously hostile but didn’t contradict anything I said. So that is tantamount to corroborating it. Thank you!
This means Pence is next in line to appoint Judges to the US Courts.
This is troubling
Jorge
This means you have jumped the gun....please count the votes in the Senate....also please note that A Pelosi announcement of an “official ,impeachment inquiry” is simply a personal announcement. Under the Constitution there is no such official inquiry unless there is a resolution passed by a vote of the whole House. ...that has not happened
You might ponder why Pelosi is avoiding taking that vote.
The democrats are starting an investigative inquiry into allegation inquiries that could results in a formal impeachment inquiry... democrats really think their constituents are dimwits
Biden and sons are guilty of being profiteering political swamp creatures ... drain the swamp
Christopher Scott--
Sorry, but Trump brought in so many swamp creatures that it is difficult to drain.
Finally! Trump has deserved impeachment since he first entered office with all his grifting, election fraud, obstruction of justice, etc. The whistleblower will apparently appear before the House Intelligence committee this week ... hopefully we will finally learn what Trump has been hiding on this subject. He makes Nixon look like a patriot.
In the world of diplomacy, for centuries, what has transpired between leaders of states and nations has necessarily needed to be secret; leaders represent electors and are not puppets to be manipulated by them.
What lunatic would believe that the average voter had any capability at statecraft?
I believe Trump is corrupt to the core and one of the greatest threats to this country’s Constitution, American values, and traditions. I believe he is extremely ignorant about our history, government, and institutions. I believe he has committed impeachable acts. I have been a Democrat my whole life.
Having said all this, I am totally opposed to his impeachment. It will polarize our country even more. Trump’s supporters will dive into all their “conspiracy” theories. They will always believe that the “deep state” took down Trump, rather than Trump himself. It will take a protracted amount of time to impeach and try him, yet, he will be out of office, hopefully, almost by then. The Senate will never vote guilty and we will have created more problems without the desired results.
As I noted above this AP Report is yet another misleading article omitting the controlling law which renders it worthless. There is no such thing as an “Official Impeachment Inquiry” without a resolution passed by a vote of the House of Representatives.
Mrs Pelosi has simply engaged in a very dramatic political press conference presentation designed to heighten the discord and polarization.
Once again, you don’t believe what you’re saying. You are just throwing out nonsense, in imitation of your hero Trump, hoping to create confusion. Pelosi is just trying to sew discord and polarization, while the good man Trump just wants to do his job and govern (my words, but that is the impression that you are trying to create)? No one is really ignorant enough to believe that.
Ashley
Please just check the Constitution and it’s requirements for a House Resolution for an Impeachment Inquiry. Nancy Pelosi knows full well what the Constitution requires yet she makes an announcement as though she can independently declare an “Official Impeachment Inquiry”
You explain why she announces with a fanfare of press coverage and draped flags that which she knows is meaningless....my guess is that it is to mollify people like yourself....and apparently you fell for it and are mollified (Congrats to Nancy for knowing her supporters)
Once again, you don’t believe what you’re saying. You are just throwing out nonsense, in imitation of your hero Trump, hoping to create confusion. Pelosi is just trying to sew discord and polarization, while the good man Trump just wants to do his job and govern (my words, but that is the impression that you are trying to create)? No one is really ignorant enough to believe that.
What if the target is not really Trump but Biden? Hard to see a two-thirds vote in the Senate for conviction for Trump. Much easier to see this whole sordid mess finishing Biden in the Democratic primary process.
Andrew
Bullets do indeed ricochet!
This was supposed to be a twofer. But only Biden gets hit. Hillary is now talking about running.
A message to the Donald from Abraham Lincoln
Marry Todd did marry
Lincoln's lover, Lincoln's wife
The House it was divided
Filled with frequent strife
When the conspiracy came to kill him
In a theater named for Ford
He had done his noble duty
Emancipating true justice of the Lord
I visited his boyhood home
I write poems in private pages
He lives on in grateful hearts
He still belongs to the ages
When I ask him what to do
And my mind on him is thinkin'
He counsels, "Denounce this hate-filled idiot
Donald Trump, and marry, Todd" - Lincoln
Todd Witherell
author's note* I left this poem in front of a Madonna and Child
Statue in the chapel at Georgetown University a couple years ago.
A few weeks later I was visited by the Secret Service. We had a nice
discussion. They were very interested in my poetry and my ideas
about the evil president in the White House.
Ok, I have had my say, so I am going to take myself out of the discussion. Let me leave a final observation that when the NationalReview says that Trump committed in impeachable offense based on the transcript Aline, anyone who continues to say so root the effect that this is a partisan witch-hunt is sufficiently disconnected from reality to qualify for immediate admission to the nearest mental health facility. No disrespect intended toward those who suffer from mental illness.
Sorry for the typos and syntax errors above. Sent from iPhone. Hopefully not totally unintelligible.
Sorry for the typos and syntax errors above. Sent from iPhone. Hopefully not totally unintelligible.
Typos and syntax are rather minor among the errors for which you should be apologizing. A lack of logic and of charity would appear far higher on the list of any fair-minded, rational person. Let's see how the votes in the House and Senate go.
National Review is now managed by people who would have been deemed unworthy to loosen William F. Buckley's sandal straps.
“If I shot someone in the middle of the street…” Hopefully, for someone who always believes (delusionally) that he is above the law, reality and justice will catch up with Trump.
What really concerns me is how gullible, and quite frankly dumb, the democrats have become. It’s hard to listen to them anymore, like reading articles in America, it’s just parroting more predictable leftist political talking points-its sounds really weak and boring. The sad fact is when it comes to learning about Christianity from people like the Jesuits it’s hard to take them seriously anymore when they look and act so dumb. How is it possible they have any wisdom? There is much more interesting Christian teaching outside the confines of the Church today. Stay in the Church for the Sacraments but don’t be afraid to expand your religious education to other great Christian thinkers outside the Catholic Church, like CS Lewis...
Christopher, Son, come over here and sit down while I give you a little advice. If you want to participate in the comments section of an online journal like America Magazine, you need to have some intelligible arguments to put forward for other people to consider. Just making generic statements about “leftists”, people being dumb, etc, won’t cut it. Now run along for now, and come back when you have something to contribute to the discussion. You can do better than that. Come back and make us real proud.
I know I said I was through commenting on this thread, but I couldn’t resist.
Saying that anyone who disagrees with you is "sufficiently disconnected from reality to qualify for immediate admission to the nearest mental health facility" is your idea of an "intelligible argument"? I'm sad that you have such a low standard and we still don't seem to have met it. Maybe an "intelligent argument" would be too much to ask for.
I made that comment in reference to a very specific point of view that is not remotely credible. I did not make it in regard to people who disagree with me in general. That’s a very different thing.
Saying that people who hold "a very specific point of view that is not remotely credible" belong in a mental institution is still not an "intelligible argument". In fact, it's not an argument at all; it's just an insult.
If you enjoy insulting random strangers, if it adds meaning to your life then, by all means, continue doing it. But have the intellectual honesty to admit that you are just practicing a form of self-indulgence, not adding to the store of human knowledge.
No thanks, I too am done. Sorry but at this point there is just no need to explain it or get involved in arguing about it, it’s just dumb.
Christopher, don’t Let the liberals get to you. They have little coherent to say and enjoy denigrating others. For a revealing insight to Jesuit thought read the article on why Latinos love the Pope. They want to change the entire theology of the Catholic Church. It’s gradually coming out what they believe. Watch the Autocomplete series and what the two Jesuits do not say. They confirm their support for liberation theology and a new Church.