Don't think so - they have narrative with strong suggestion, but without further documents and witnesses, they stand a bit empty handed. However it is not over yet. What they assume is different from a lie and as to process, this is not a like a criminal court.
Never got around to comment on this - earlier I was inclined to agree, but not sure Putin need $$$. I think Trump make up his own mind. If Giuliani would bring anything useful to the table, he would take it of course. Trump needed the support of the GOP, but I don't think he has any intention to fall in line. Maybe why he used Giuliani ? With Putin, he may be looking for a deal which suit him ?
White House lawyers: Stonewalling was justified, subpoenas were unlawful
Deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin sought to justify the administration’s move to stonewall subpoenas for documents and witnesses, arguing that the House Intelligence Committee did not have the authority to issue such compulsory measures.
Philbin listed several reasons for the White House decision not to comply, from the initial refusal of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to hold a full House vote opening an impeachment inquiry, to the panel’s refusal to allow administration lawyers to sit in on depositions with witnesses.
“The subpoenas weren’t authorized because there was no vote or the subpoenas were to senior advisers to the president who are immune from congressional compulsion, or the subpoenas were forcing executive branch officials to testify without the presence of agency counsel,” he said.
Philbin argued that it was “common sense” that the House Intelligence Committee didn’t have authority to issue subpoenas because “the Constitution assigns the sole power of impeachment to the House of Representatives, to the House, not to any member, not to a subcommittee.”
“The problem here is there is no standing rule, there was no standing authority giving manager Schiff’s committee the authority to use the power of impeachment to issue compulsory process,” he said. “The House Democrats skipped over that step completely.”
Many congressional and legal experts dispute this logic. For one, the Constitution leaves it to the House to write its own impeachment rules; nowhere does it say the House must hold a vote on impeachment subpoenas.
Nope, even if there should be some technicality about process, the House cannot be ignored. Trump need to present witnesses and documents, but this is my belief on the matter.
This is where I got a problem - but is this really true ?
"The process that resulted in these Articles of Impeachment was flawed from the start. Since the Founding of the Republic, the House has never launched an impeachment inquiry against a President without a vote of the full House authorizing it. And there is good reason for that. No committee can investigate pursuant to powers assigned by the Constitution to the House—including the “sole Power of Impeachment”-unless the House has voted to delegate authority to the committee."
@Frontnine35 "....Perpura showed videos of testimony by witnesses that were never released by the House managers...." - not sure I understand what you mean, as all that was in the hearing.
@Frontnine35 and @rizlared - I think you are both partly correct. In my understanding, he viewed capitalism as a necessary part, but also understood that inequality would emerge until people would revolt and demand a more equal reform, thus entering a more social based system. A worry regarding a fierce class-struggle could be remedied by a shared ownership of the production system. ( took this just from top of my head, I have not studied it ) Anyway, I think this is where Lenin argued to skip the intermediate evolutionary step of capitalism. Why not start with a revolution of class-struggle immediately. Which resulted in a barbarian bloodshed.
I was impressed by a company, US or Canada, which had shared ownership in the production machinery and facilities, and shared profits. But else, they worked on several of their own ideas. Perhaps somewhat like Fab-Lab - and they achieved very positive results.
Several here came with interesting inputs that got me thinking a bit about some Finnish test results with the idea of 'basic income' -
But as I wrote initially, my ideas went perhaps a bit in the direction of this new cyberspace we share, and how we may be dictated by it. And how it still may be possible to have a say in how it will evolve. I think it is worrisome how some are buying up a lot of basic infrastructure.
Please anyone, add your ideas and inputs, we may need it.
oh, btw. @OldeGuy - not sure what is going on in California, but I think I heard they have proposed some legislation ?
@chancer_returns - do not agree. The administration is blocking and will not release documents and witnesses. In normal cases, you can get a court order, get evidence by force. But when his people chair many central positions, how do you do this ? The Senate has the power, and is asked to weigh in on this.
If the Senate does not resolve this, then what ? Militia men ?
hi again Frontnine - "Why did the House not allow defense witnesses?" - you mean in the House hearings ? do you mean defense witnesses for Trump ? He was welcome to attend. However that was a hearing, just like the police would ask witnesses in an investigation. The hearing was not a trial. However, both parties were represented, both parties did vote, but Biden was not the issue of investigation. Simple as that, but the Reps sure tried to deflect the issue.
"Are you a systems engineer? " - perhaps that could cover it, jack of many trades. Did run a company which dealt with all systems in automation, etc. Have a 28 foot sailboat that has not been on the water for years , which is sad.
Sorry, I listen to the senate trial - and experienced trouble with my focus in this answer.
My language is not as good as I wish it to be. Sometimes I simply phrase things different to avoid words that I am unsure to spell. I do not write in order to win an argument or discussion. I often think English, but my neighbor would probably call a psychiatrist if I went down to him and started to speak English ;) Sometimes you just feel a need to express.
You did send me into a flat spin here ;) "our somalian friend" - not sure what you meant here, but I actually interpret your comments as some friendly advise.
"It's a legitimate question because you frame all your conclusions as if they were fact." - perhaps I do, but I am not much aware of that. I suppose it is a personal trait, unfortunately. To throw out a statement, a thought, as a guide and way to direct your own focus and thoughts. Perhaps it derives from some bad habit from childhood, an attempt to put up a defense before dad would slap you around ? ( I could never predict him )
Frontnine, if I am correct in my interpretation of what you meant, then I am a bit impressed you picked up on that. Very good.
Had to google Maryland - as I wasn't that sure. I did notice your sailboat, so at least perhaps something we could find agrement on. Another spin - in fact, I was called to .. Baltimore. Crazy stuff. Large cruiseship with control system problems of the main engines. Did solve it, but missed out the sightseeing.
Added note: I have followed every televised hearing in the house, checking additional sources, and I have tried to follow the current Senate hearings. But - you know, to keep focused for, like last night 13 hours non stop, is demanding. Because being in another time zone, I don't believe that so many would do this - but as explained earlier - I do care about these things - something many do find a bit odd. Guess I am a bit crazy, huh ?
Read the other day an economist that presented these figures: - most EU countries have healthcare that covered everyone to a cost of 10 percent of BNP. In USA the figure was 17.5 of BNP, and not covering everyone.
"The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition" - Jonathan Tepper
I like to add that there is pressure and changes other places, as American business models and corporations, do try to convince others of their superior thinking. So, sadly we see more and more of these things. For example UK-US trade deal, which clearly will not benefit common people. It is how the rich is getting richer and the poor will loose out.
He is corrupting everything, but for some strange reason, people do not want to see it. He has managed to influence everybody - also foreign countries in this new trend of deception and dishonesty. He seem to be a phenomena of our time - social media, twitter, a wave of populism. He did not come to power in a regular way, as the election was interfered with by these new network tools. He does not follow protocol, which some think is fine, while that is corrupting the rule of law, functions of the state, and international law, regulation, conduct, and relations. That is simply a danger to everybody, and it can undermine the very foundation our society rest upon. He may be okay in many fields, but holding office as President is not a position he should have.
It will be interesting to see what will happen. Who knows, maybe the best defense Trump have, is to blame everyone else. Being a victim of bad advisers and lawyers. You can say he would be keeping his campaign promises of "draining the swamp" with him ?
His devoted followers may canonize him - how does St.Trump sound ?
Stupid nonsense - the one that has instigated hate, split and divide is Trump himself and his followers. He will not make America great, but degrade and destruct it. Why is this so difficult to fathom ? We may hate what he is doing to the nation, his lack of respect and dishonesty. Why don't he he show himself as a real man ? No, he is so afraid to be exposed that he fight to conceal and hide. It is a tragic comedy, which is why he is opposed. A corrupting and lying person, - which will reap what he sow.
They made an error in including "Iran" in the text, congress should always be consulted. It does not prevent defending yourself, but keep in mind that his action is not limited to just America, as it cause real trouble for all countries in the alliance, so - I think that would be more sensible. We use the name "defence" - example defence department, not war department, right ?
Well, it should tell you something when congress has to go trough such trouble because a fellow in the White House can not be trusted. They should have put him in a straight jacket so he couldn't tweet or hit any buttons - just to be on the safe side.
Bill Gates Pushes for Higher Taxes on Rich as Wealth Soars By Ben Steverman January 2, 2020, 11:51 PM GMT+1 Updated on January 3, 2020, 5:06 PM GMT+1
Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates started the last decade worth more than $50 billion and a pledge to donate a big chunk of his fortune to charity.
By the end of it, he’d given billions of dollars to fight poverty and improve health care and education. But his net worth also more than doubled during the period, a result of soaring stock markets and favorable tax policies.
And so, at the end of the decade, the world’s second-richest person said he wants his fellow billionaires to pay much higher taxes.
U.S. lawmakers should close loopholes, raise the estate tax and hike the capital-gains tax so that it equals the rate on labor income, Gates wrote Monday in a year-end blog post. He also called for states and local governments to make their taxes “fairer” and reiterated his support for a state income tax in Washington, where he and his wife Melinda live.
“I’ve been disproportionately rewarded for the work I’ve done -- while many others who work just as hard struggle to get by,” he wrote. “That’s why I’m for a tax system in which, if you have more money, you pay a higher percentage in taxes. And I think the rich should pay more than they currently do, and that includes Melinda and me.”
Gates, 64, has a net worth of $113.7 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, a ranking of the world’s 500 richest people. In 2010, he and Melinda announced the Giving Pledge with Warren Buffett and asked other billionaires to sign to give away portions of their fortunes. As of May, 204 people from 23 countries agreed to participate. Gates's fortune has steadily climbed throughout the past decade
At an event in November, Gates expressed reservations about the wealth tax proposed by presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. In his blog post, he said he won’t take a position on the various proposals being debated during the campaign.
“But I believe we can make our system fairer without sacrificing the incentive to innovate,” he wrote. “Americans in the top 1% can afford to pay a lot more before they stop going to work or creating jobs. In the 1970s, when Paul Allen and I were starting Microsoft, marginal tax rates were almost twice the top rate today. It didn’t hurt our incentive to build a great company.”
Some people ask Gates why he doesn’t just pay extra taxes himself, but that “is not a scalable solution,” he wrote. “Additional voluntary giving will never raise enough money for everything the government needs to do.”
The Gates foundation had paid out $50.1 billion in grants as of the end of 2018. Gates defended tax breaks for foundations in his post, writing that “philanthropy is good at managing high-risk projects that government can’t take on and corporations won’t.”
stupid that Mercedes told everybody, else I thought this was clever. You would always know when she would be at your door and could ignore everyone else. Now you need to re-wire it
been down that hole ...but came to think of Donald who wanted to by Greenland, but why not ask about buying the melting water ? Pipelines - save forests and drinking water, if you don't mind it might be passed date
2maybe Blog Comments (272)
America vs. America
@Frontnine35 - not in a good mood today ? want to borrow some crayons ? ;)