3754

The original request was filed on April 3, with an April 10 deadline. When April 10 passed, a new deadline of April 23 was set. Subpoenas were filed on May 10. On May 17, the deadline for the subpoenas passed. It took a few weeks after that for courts to rule against Trump’s suit to stop the subpoenas. The House Ways and Means Committee sued to obtain the tax records in July.

3755

These are two separate things. The House suit was to obtain federal tax returns. The Trump counter-suit from yesterday was to stop New York State from releasing state tax returns. New York just passed a bill, signed July 8, to permit the state tax department to supply presidential tax returns upon request from the relevant federal House and Senate committees.

3756

Yeah, I saw that the first time you posted it and I read it. The point was not that I don’t have time… the point is that we elect representatives because we want them to read these things and make decisions on our behalf. Instead, we find ourselves essentially living in a world governed by public opinion instead of by the representatives that are supposed to represent public opinion. The vast majority of citizens of ANY country are never going to read an important 400+ page document, regardless of where they live. Even if they did, most people aren’t trained to understand it.

3757

… So you’re mad that Pelosi didn’t sue Trump during the 2016 election? ;)

If you’re talking about the time lapse between when the House officially asked for the tax returns to be turned over and when they filed the lawsuit, it appears to have been a bit under three months. That doesn’t seem an unusual amount of time to me, but unlike the rest of the internet INAL or an expert on legislative strategy.

3758

Right, but on the other hand, characterizing the view that the House leadership seems to be wasting a lot of time as a silly longing for superheroes is perfectly reasonable.

3759

On Trump’s tax returns:

  • Dem Richard Neal campaigned in October 2018 on getting Trump’s tax returns if the Dems took the House;
  • Dems took the House and announced that getting Trump’s tax returns would be a top priority;
  • Despite that, Neal did nothing about it until April, when he simply asked for them;
  • Neal didn’t issue a subpoena until May 10;
  • Treasury refused to comply on the deadline of May 17;
  • Neal didn’t file suit to enforce the subpoena until July 2nd.

I’m not one of those who think Trump’s taxes are the holy grail, but I think Neal’s constituents can be forgiven for thinking that perhaps his heart really isn’t in this.

3760

He’s getting a primary challenger.

3761

Ah, excellent. They’re not fooled.

This same criticism applies to all of the House leadership. I think we’re doing other investigations instead of impeachment is both morally bankrupt and bad politics, but if that’s your story, you need to actually be doing the other investigations like you care about them, with a sense of urgency.

3762

Agreed, Scott

3763

I understand all the calls for a DOA-in-the-Senate impeachment process, and I personally agree with Warren’s statement cited above saying that impeachment hearings are essentially an ethical imperative if you are an elected official.

But that said, Pelosi is taking the the election-season view.

If they opened impeachment hearings now, there is a decent chance that Republicans could force a vote on the matter in fairly short order, potentially sending the issue to the Senate to die sometime this winter or early spring. The Senate would either ignore it or vote not to convict, and… well, that’s that. A moral and ethical victory for the Dems, but one that would be forgotten once the primaries roll around in June.

Conversely, a slew of investigative lawsuits could stretch the issue out far into next year and color the election itself, with hearings on whatever the Dems care to advance occurring like clockwork every two months or so and keeping Trump’s serial offenses in the public mind through the 2020 elections.

3764

I think we got ourselves a good ol’ fashioned conundrum.

3765

I get the thinking, but the idea that the system is so broken there’s no point in even trying suggests to me we need to raze D.C. to the ground.

3766

Congress can initiate an investigation pursuant to impeachment. They can do this (McGrain v Daugherty) prior to actual impeachment proceedings. The Nixon investigation in the House commenced 3 months before the vote.

I think it’s extremely unlikely that a Republican would bring articles of impeachment to the floor to try to short circuit an investigation. If they did, and got a significant number of Republican votes, the political fallout for the GOP would be… interesting.

3767

Perhaps, but there is no reason to believe that she is right, and this is a great and timely piece about the fallacy of confusing silence with cleverness.

3768

I think this overstates the likelihood😉. In any event, they would need 30 Dems to vote with them to force it to a premature floor vote, and that isn’t happening. If something like that were possible, then Pelosi has already lost control and all she’s doing is hiding that fact.

3769

House Dems ratcheting up the pressure:

A bitterly divided House Oversight Committee voted along party lines Thursday to subpoena White House work communications sent via personal email and cellphone, amid questions about whether the president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, and son-in law Jared Kushner violated federal record-keeping laws.

The 23-to-16 vote came after House Democrats earlier this month asked the White House for copies of all work communications sent via nonofficial means, in an expansion of their investigation into Trump administration officials’ use of personal email and encrypted applications to communicate.

“I don’t know how to say this any differently: We have laws. And the laws say we keep official records,”

3770

The GOP controls the Senate and the White House. All they can do is pass symbolic bills. Were you expecting gun control and a public option for health care?

3771

Some have said this could be a political advantage to Democrats, by forcing Republicans to go on the record as effectively looking the other way on Trump’s behavior. Then they can be called out for this and attacked as Trump toadies uninterested in the rule of law.

Dunno if I agree, but the argument has been made. Get it done, put it on the record, move on.

I do agree that this approach is better than living in the Impeachment Twilight Zone for another year and a half.

3772

If you’re going to be symbolic, strike a stronger stance rather than a weak one. Push a vision not a politically possible compromise.

And while that bill is fine, and definitely better than doing nothing, the long implementation time does rather mitigate the impacts (as inflation would cut the real net effect)

3773

The big problem is, as you said, the media creates a feedback loop, ultimately based on garbage hot takes.

And the reality is that most of these folks in the media? They aren’t actually that SMART. I’ve seen interviews where the folks being interviewed made some obviously falacious argument… and a lot of the time, I think they aren’t called on it, not because of some grand conspiracy, but because the media person interviewing them just isn’t smart enough to realize what the obvious followup question should be.

This isn’t always the case… I’ve seen Anderson Cooper offer decent follow ups a handful of times… but man, simply having news people who were hired for their minds rather than their looks would probably go a damn long way towards improving the education of the public.