Politics: Fact-Checking 5 Claims About the Impeachment Inquiry - - PressFrom - US
  •   
  •   
  •   

Politics Fact-Checking 5 Claims About the Impeachment Inquiry

01:30  13 october  2019
01:30  13 october  2019 Source:   nytimes.com

Pelosi to GOP: We are not dropping impeachment probe

  Pelosi to GOP: We are not dropping impeachment probe House Speaker Nancy Pelosi fired back at Kevin McCarthy, who earlier in the day asked his fellow Californian to drop the impeachment inquiry into President Trump. © Provided by MediaDC: Washington Newspaper Publishing Company, Inc.“I received your letter this morning shortly after the world witnessed President Trump on national television asking yet another foreign power to interfere in the upcoming 2020 elections,” Pelosi said Thursday, referring to Trump’s South Lawn comments in which he called on China to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

“As you know, you have designed and implemented your [ impeachment ] inquiry in a manner that Thus, White House claims about what is legally or constitutionally ‘mandated’ ring hollow.” The Fact Checker is a verified signatory to the International Fact - Checking Network code of principles.

"I believe that an inquiry into impeachment is required at this time," Speier said. 15. Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland. Pocan released a statement supporting starting an impeachment inquiry in May. "Stonewalling Congress on witnesses and the unredacted Mueller report only enhances the

Defenders of President Trump have employed a number of arguments to back up their assertion that the impeachment inquiry begun by House Democrats last month amounts to a “kangaroo court.” They have cited historical precedent, the Constitution and public polling among other arguments against the inquiry. Here’s a fact check of some of their most-invoked claims.

Donald Trump wearing a suit and tie: President Trump at the White House on Wednesday.© Doug Mills/The New York Times President Trump at the White House on Wednesday.

WHAT WAS SAID

“In the 240-plus years of our history, those rare times where we have had impeachment process, it’s always gone through the House Judiciary Committee, because the House Judiciary Committee is the committee of jurisdiction over the Constitution and over impeachment. It’s not the Intelligence Committee.”

Leslie Marshall: Pelosi's big win (and what it means for Trump)

  Leslie Marshall: Pelosi's big win (and what it means for Trump) Pelosi wanted a smoking gun and bipartisan support before moving forward with a vote on impeachment, and she just may get her way.How are Americans feeling about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's impeachment inquiry? Well, if you’re a Democrat and among a majority in your party who wanted to see impeachment, you’re excited about the prospect, and perhaps relieved that the process seems to be headed toward an actual vote in the House. But for the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party, a mere inquiry doesn't go far enough.

making claims about former Vice President Joe Biden, Democratic critics and the whistleblower whose report sparked the impeachment inquiry . CNN's Daniel Dale fact checks all things Trump and he had several opportunities over the weekend. Here's one: Trump tweeted Sunday of Biden

Impeachment is the process by which a legislative body levels charges against a government official. Impeachment does not in itself remove the official definitively from office

— Representative John Ratcliffe, Republican of Texas, in an interview this month

False.

In her announcement last month initiating formal impeachment proceedings against Mr. Trump, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she had directed six committees — including the Intelligence Committee, whose chairman, Adam B. Schiff of California, has drawn Mr. Trump’s ire — to proceed with investigations under “that umbrella of impeachment inquiry.” Behind closed doors, she said the committees should forward their cases on potentially impeachable offenses by Mr. Trump to the Judiciary Committee.

This arrangement, according to Mr. Ratcliffe, amounts to a jurisdictional violation. But while impeachment inquiries have been typically conducted by the House Judiciary Committee since its formation in 1813, there is no rule mandating it and there is precedent for other committees taking the lead.

Giuliani outlines conditions for possible cooperation on impeachment inquiry

  Giuliani outlines conditions for possible cooperation on impeachment inquiry President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday outlined his potential conditions for cooperating with House Democrats in their impeachment inquiry into Trump.Giuliani said in an interview with Hill.TV that he may try to invoke attorney-client privilege if the House moves forward on impeachment."I would sit down with my client and with the other lawyers and we'd discuss attorney-client privilege," Giuliani said on Hill.TV'sGiuliani said in an interview with Hill.TV that he may try to invoke attorney-client privilege if the House moves forward on impeachment.

making claims about former Vice President Joe Biden, Democratic critics and the whistleblower whose report sparked the impeachment inquiry . CNN's Daniel Dale fact checks all things Trump and he had several opportunities over the weekend. Here's one: Trump tweeted Sunday of Biden

More than two dozen people emailed FactCheck .org inquiring about whether the claim was true, and the story has been shared more than 100,000 times on Facebook, according to CrowdTangle data. We do not know how much the impeachment inquiry proceedings against Trump will ultimately cost.

Special committees began impeachment inquiries against federal judges in 1804, 1808 and 1839. And in 1867, after the Judiciary Committee voted to not send articles of impeachment against President Andrew Johnson to the full House, a second attempt to impeach him succeeded after an inquiry by the Committee on Reconstruction.

“There is certainly no constitutional requirement that any specific committee take it up,” said Frank O. Bowman III, a law professor at the University of Missouri and expert on impeachment. “The Johnson case really illustrates the basic principle: The House can run an impeachment any way they darn well please.”

WHAT WAS SAID

“In the history of our nation, the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the President without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step.”

New poll finds more than half support impeaching Trump and removing him from office

  New poll finds more than half support impeaching Trump and removing him from office More than half of US voters want President Donald Trump impeached and removed from office, according to a Fox News Poll out on Wednesday. © Evan Vucci/AP President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters during an event on "transparency in Federal guidance and enforcement" in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Wednesday, October 9. The poll marks the fourth in two days that showed public opinion is shifting on the impeachment inquiry.

THE FACTS : There are similarities for sure but Clinton’s proposal would have far broader impact. The estimated population of immigrants living in THE FACTS : There’s no serious argument that the Bush tax cuts brought on the recession. The recession was driven largely by the bust in the housing market.

The Post's Fact Checker looked at five of his claims . 5 fact checks from President Trump's inaugural address. On Inauguration Day, President Trump's address painted a bleak portrait of the nation. Why Pelosi is formalizing the impeachment inquiry now.

— Pat A. Cipollone, White House counsel, in a letter on Tuesday to House Democratic leaders

This is misleading.

Though the full chamber voted to start impeachment inquiries against Presidents Bill Clinton and Richard M. Nixon, nothing in the Constitution or House rules requires it. And outside of presidents, there are several cases of judicial impeachments that began without a vote.

“In the past, House committees, under their general investigatory authority, have sometimes sought information and researched charges against officers prior to the adoption of a resolution to authorize an impeachment investigation,” according to an October report from the Congressional Research Service.

For example, impeachment inquiries into three federal judges in the 1980s began without explicit authorization by the full House, according to the report.

While the whole House voted to start impeachment investigations into Mr. Clinton and Mr. Nixon, whether such a vote was taken in Mr. Johnson’s is more ambiguous. In the second attempt to impeach the 17th president, the full House voted on and approved resolutions authorizing the Committee on Reconstruction to begin a general investigation and to obtain the evidence gathered previously by the Judiciary Committee. But those resolutions did not explicitly authorize a second impeachment inquiry.

The Latest: Trump says 'swamp' is trying to erase 2016 vote

  The Latest: Trump says 'swamp' is trying to erase 2016 vote President Donald Trump is decrying what he says is a "wretched Washington swamp" that is trying to overturn the results of the 2016 election. Trump is telling thousands at a rally Thursday in Minneapolis that the swamp wants to "erase your vote like it never existed." But he says the swamp will fail because "in America, the people rule again." It's Trump's first8 p.m.

The impeachment inquiry was spurred by a whistleblower complaint about Mr. Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, when he requested Zelensky to investigate Biden's role in pushing out former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

Cipollone claims that the House’s impeachment inquiry should afford Trump certain rights typically associated with criminal trials, including “the If a court does order the administration to comply with congressional subpoenas, Trump’s first line of defense is the fact that Republican appointees control

“There’s no requirement in the Constitution that the House do anything specific, in any order, prior to voting to approve articles of impeachment,” said Stephen Vladek, a constitutional law professor at the University of Texas.

Mr. Bowman, who called the White House letter “a parade of absurdities,” noted that impeachment is just one of the powers granted to Congress so “if you took the White House argument seriously, it would mean that there has to be a vote” before any House committee could begin hearings on legislation related to interstate commerce, budgets or even establishing post offices.

WHAT WAS SAID

“The House of Representatives is now essentially running an impeachment process without following precedent, without allowing the president to have counsel, without allowing the president to call witnesses or have subpoena power.”

— Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, in an interview this week

Trump campaign manager calls impeachment inquiry a 'seditious conspiracy'

  Trump campaign manager calls impeachment inquiry a 'seditious conspiracy' President Trump's 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale on Monday called the impeachment inquiry from House Democrats a "seditious conspiracy" to overthrow the president. "Nancy Pelosi should step down for betraying her oath of office and attempting to overthrow our great Republic," Parscale said, referring to the Speaker and California Democrat.

The House committees leading the impeachment inquiry issued new subpoenas Thursday demanding documents Romney said he hasn't discussed impeachment with other senators. Wednesday, 4:22 p.m.: Speaking to reporters at the White House, Mr. Trump repeated several claims about his call

Democrats working on the burgeoning impeachment inquiry said Parnas and Fruman’s decision to ignore Republicans protesting Charlie Crist’s support of the impeachment inquiry will gather outside his district office PolitiFact: Fact - checking Trump’s claims about Medicare from his Florida visit.

“If they have a vote to do a formal impeachment inquiry, historically, precedent is such that, yes, then everyone gets the right, the minority party gets rights. Certainly, the White House gets rights. The president gets rights that aren’t there now.”

— Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, in an interview this week

Survey: 54 percent Americans support Trump impeachment inquiry

  Survey: 54 percent Americans support Trump impeachment inquiry A majority of Americans endorse House Democrats' decision to launch an impeachment inquiry into President Trump and his administration's dealings with Ukraine, according to a new survey from the Pew Research Center. The survey, which was released on Thursday, found that 54 percent of Americans support the impeachment inquiry, while 44 percent oppose it. The figure represents a four-point increase in support from a similar survey in September. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.

Отмена. Месяц бесплатно. Fact - checking the VP candidates' claims . Fox News. Загрузка WATCH LIVE: Lawmakers react to Trump impeachment inquiry on House floor PBS NewsHour 4 415 зрителей.

CLAIM : “The SSPX bishops do not have jurisdiction and are not in full communion, so the priests of the SSPX have never been able to absolve sins in “… Regarding your inquiry (March 25, 1994) I would point out at once that the Directory on Ecumenism is not concerned with the Society of St. Pius X. The

This is misleading.

This argument — which featured prominently in Mr. Cipollone’s letter and has been echoed by other defenders of Mr. Trump — misrepresents the separation of duties in Congress in regards to the impeachment process: The House investigates and charges, and the Senate holds trial.

Allowing the subject of an impeachment inquiry to call witnesses or present counterevidence is not required in either the Constitution or House rules. The House Judiciary Committee did hear testimony from the White House counsel at the request of the Clinton administration in 1998 and allowed Mr. Nixon’s defense lawyers to present rebutting evidence in 1974. But no such accommodation was made in Mr. Johnson’s case, who was impeached by the House before it even drew up articles of impeachment.

“It’s perfectly reasonable for folks to suggest that the House should follow these more conciliatory precedents,” Mr. Vladeck said. “It’s completely false to argue that it’s under any constitutional or legal obligation to do so.”

After a successful impeachment vote, the House then appoints lawmakers known as managers who essentially act as prosecutors in a Senate trial. The impeachment rules in the upper chamber do offer the impeached person some rights. Witnesses, for example, may be cross-examined and each side — the House managers and the impeached person — can make closing arguments before the Senate.

WHAT WAS SAID

“Remember when Pelosi said that the transcript would show a quid pro quo? It doesn’t.”

Pelosi releases 'fact sheet' saying Trump has 'betrayed his oath of office'

  Pelosi releases 'fact sheet' saying Trump has 'betrayed his oath of office' Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) office on Monday released a "fact sheet" laying out what Democrats believe is their most compelling evidence to date against President Trump in their investigation of the president's efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political rival. © Greg Nash Pelosi releases 'fact sheet' saying Trump has 'betrayed his oath of office' "President Trump has betrayed his oath of office, betrayed our national security and betrayed the integrity of our elections for his own personal political gain," the document states in laying out how Democrats are likely to try to make thei

Facing an impeachment inquiry , President Donald Trump is turning to a familiar playbook to defend himself: blasting the inquiry as illegal, attacking Trump also has repeatedly lambasted Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee chairman who is leading the impeachment

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, in an interview this month

False.

“No quid pro quo” has become a rallying cry among those opposed to an impeachment inquiry, particularly since the reconstituted transcript of the phone call between Mr. Trump and the Ukrainian president was released on Sept. 25. (The phrase appears in talking points the White House pushed to its surrogates).

A spokesman for Mr. Graham cited remarks Ms. Pelosi made to House Democrats in a closed-door meeting on Sept. 24, the day before the transcript was released. But in those remarks, she focused less on the need to prove an exchange of favors, arguing that simply asking for foreign intervention into an election was inappropriate enough.

“Don’t get caught in the trap of, oh, there is no quid pro quo. No, he asked for assistance from the foreign government. That’s wrong,” she said.

“It’s really important to know this: There is no requirement that there be a quid-pro-quo in the conversation,” Ms. Pelosi said in public remarks that day. “We don’t ask foreign governments to help us in our elections, that’s what we tried to stop with Russia. It’s wrong.”

Other Democratic leaders in the House also echoed that sentiment.

“It’s not necessary for us to find evidence of a quid pro quo,” Mr. Schiff said on Sept. 22. “You don’t need an explicit quid pro quo to betray your country.”

WHAT WAS SAID

False.

Mr. Trump appears to be referring to a Washington Post-Schar School poll released on Tuesday. But that poll shows 58 percent of Americans support an impeachment inquiry, and 49 percent support removing Mr. Trump from office. The 25 percent refers to the proportion of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents — not the electorate at large — who support an inquiry.

According to the polling average calculated by FiveThirtyEight, 49.3 percent support impeachment, as of Oct. 1, an increase from the 40.1 percent who supported it as of Sept. 19.

Curious about the accuracy of a claim? Email [email protected]

Pelosi releases 'fact sheet' saying Trump has 'betrayed his oath of office' .
Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) office on Monday released a "fact sheet" laying out what Democrats believe is their most compelling evidence to date against President Trump in their investigation of the president's efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political rival. © Greg Nash Pelosi releases 'fact sheet' saying Trump has 'betrayed his oath of office' "President Trump has betrayed his oath of office, betrayed our national security and betrayed the integrity of our elections for his own personal political gain," the document states in laying out how Democrats are likely to try to make thei

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 19
This is interesting!