[ad_1]
No one on Capitol Hill has yet seen the potentially explosive complaint involving President Trump that an anonymous whistleblower is trying to show lawmakers.
In less than 48 hours it has become the focus of the ongoing removal drama – some lawmakers in favor of dismissal state that it is a decisive moment to hold Trump accountable and to more blatantly protect the constitutional defense . rock in place.
"If some of these allegations are true, they are probably the most serious allegations against the president," said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a supporter of impeachment. "I think that's probably going to get more members to start claiming this [impeachment] by hearing … I guess these numbers will continue to increase. "
Several reports indicated that the whistleblower's complaint related to a Trump appeal with the newly elected Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Trump had urged him to investigate the commercial transactions of Joe Biden's son, Hunter, in the country. Trump 's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, had already pushed Zelensky to open such an investigation and acknowledged it during recent interviews.
Trump's acting national intelligence chief had prevented the legislator from seizing the entirety of the content of the whistleblower's complaint, while it was an issue. " urgent "which legally obliges to inform the Congress of its congress. And the news – which suggests that Trump has lobbied a foreign government for that he is conducting beneficial investigations for his 2020 re-election campaign, with the possible threat of a withdrawal of aid from Security – have fanned the Democrats of the House who are in favor of dismissal.
"Congress Colleagues: If it's not an impenetrable power abuse, what is it?" Asked Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA) on Twitter Friday afternoon. "I'm fed up with parsing, dithering and over-calculating politics."
A Democratic assistant, speaking anonymously to discuss the atmosphere in the caucus, said even more brutally. "I do not know why everyone is here if we do not charge him for that," said the assistant. "Trump has no reason to change, because we will not do it."
But it remains that only President Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will decide whether the caucus is going ahead with dismissal. On Friday afternoon, she called on the Trump government to end the whistleblower complaint – and promised that its committees would act to get it out if they did not comply. But, in particular, she did not address the subject of dismissal.
"Reports of a reliable whistleblower complaint about the president's communications with a foreign leader raise serious and urgent concerns for our national security," she said.
The comments sparked renewed frustration among lawmakers fearing that failing to initiate impeachment proceedings has encouraged Trump's more dubious activity.
"She's still holding back," said a pro-impeachment MP about Pelosi. "If dismissal is not made for that, why is dismissal inscribed in the constitution?"
In private, legislators have enumerated those who favor indictment with just under 140 members in the House. But that number has steadily risen over the summer even though Ms. Pelosi said she saw no political benefit in her pursuit.
A senior Democratic Party official who argued against dismissal at private meetings with lawmakers said he suspected Pelosi was actually trying to get his hand shaken by his caucus. "That's why I do not think putting pressure on Dems is an act of disloyalty," said the person. "She wants them to do it, so it's politically safe to do it if she does."
Others doubt that more Democrats are acting in impeachment unless or until Pelosi wants to defend it. "She is the pivot," said the Democratic House assistant.
A group of prominent activists, hoping to gain public support for the impeachment, told The Daily Beast that he was talking about incorporating information about the launchers of Alert in his pressure campaign. "My question to the Democrats, the Republicans and the President is this: what are you waiting for?" Asked Kevin Mack, chief strategist at Need to Impeach.
One of the more and more speculative topics on and off the hill is whether there is a legislator of such magnitude that it could change the content of the debate on impeachment – and force Pelosi's hand – into pronouncing in his favor. The parallel was made with former representative Jack Murtha (D-PA) who spoke out against the war in Iraq relatively soon after the start of the war – a moment that Pelosi herself credited for having changed the course of public opinion against war.
But the conclusion is that few of these lawmakers have this type of weight. And the names often discussed – the long-time civil rights representative, John Lewis (D-GA) and former President Barack Obama – would have a profound impact on other Democrats. But Obama is almost certain not to intervene. And even if he did, neither the Lewis nor the Lewis impact would go beyond party boundaries.
"There are simply no more such numbers," said the Democratic official.
[ad_2]
Source link