1) People are misapplying logic; because they buy into the Lawfare premise. So, let me be clear:
House rules cannot supersede the separation of powers.
Nancy Pelosi cannot decree the constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch is nullified.
House rules cannot supersede the separation of powers.
Nancy Pelosi cannot decree the constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch is nullified.
2) There is a distinct difference between a congressional subpoena intended to compel generic testimony, and a congressional subpoena intended to compel impeachment testimony.
3) Attempting to compel testimony that crosses through the separation of powers; and goes even further in an attempt to penetrate the firewall around executive privilege; requires the House -or a committee therein- to carry "Judicial Authority".
4) "Judicial Authority" is not absolute authority, but rather a legal reference that forms the basis for a compulsion demand by the House.
Creating Judicial authority gives the Executive Branch access to appeal a demand via the Judicial Branch (courts).
Creating Judicial authority gives the Executive Branch access to appeal a demand via the Judicial Branch (courts).
5) Pelosi's Lawfare roadmap attempts to construct a path to impeachment that avoids asserting House "judicial authority"; because they fear losses from a Judicial Branch ruling.
6) That is the *cliff notes* outline, of a constitutionally valid argument, expressed in this letter:
whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…
whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…
