Thread by @TheLastRefuge2

1) Thread - Pelosi's House Impeachment design and why Chuck Schumer has to make this ridiculous effort for more evidence in the Senate.

2) The failure of a full House vote to authorize the House Judiciary Committee to pursue evidence -via enforceable subpoenas- was a defect by design of Nancy Pelosi’s decision to initiate an impeachment inquiry by her decree, not an authorizing vote. [Note Dates]

3) The structural issue was noted Aug, Sept, Oct, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings. None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

4) The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production. Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.

scribd.com/document/44378…

5) Absent the vote to authorize, the Legislative Branch never established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempted to work through their quasi-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

6) As a direct and specific consequence all Schiff committee subpoenas did not carry a penalty for non-compliance.

7) “Lawful subpoenas”, literally require an enforcement mechanism; that’s the “poena” part of the word. The enforcement mechanism is a judicial penalty, and that penalty can only be created if the full House voted to authorize an impeachment inquiry.

8) Instead of subpoenas, Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) were only sending out request letters. The compliance was discretionary based on the outlook of the recipient.

9) Throughout the process, Speaker Pelosi was lying about the committee letters being legally enforceable subpoenas.

Pelosi could only succeed if the media didn't challenge her on the issue. The media remained silent. The media knew the truth, but assisted the fraud.

10) Speaker Pelosi & Lawfare’s impeachment scheme could only succeed with a compliant media protecting it. The media was entirely compliant in not explaining the fraudulent basis for the construct.

If the media would have ever asked questions the fraud would have collapsed.

11) It has long been established by SCOTUS that Congress has lawful (judicial authority) subpoena powers pursuant to its implied responsibility of legislative oversight. However, that only applies to the powers enumerated in A1§8.

12) Neither foreign policy (Ukraine) nor impeachment have any nexus to A1§8. The customary Legislative Branch subpoena power is limited (separation of powers) to their legislative purpose.

13) There is an elevated level of subpoena, a power made possible by SCOTUS precedent, that carries inherent penalties for non-compliance, and is specifically allowed for impeachment investigations.

14) However, that level of elevated House authority required a full House authorization vote, and only applies to the House Judiciary Committee as empowered.

15) In Sept/Oct 2019 the Legislative Branch was NOT expressing their “impeachment authority” as part of the Legislative purpose. So that raised the issue of an entirely different type of subpoena…

16) The House was seeking to create a demand from congress that penetrates the constitutional separation of powers; and further penetrates the legal authority of Executive Branch executive privilege.

17) It was separately established by SCOTUS during Nixon impeachment investigation that *IF* the full House votes to have the Judiciary Committee commence an impeachment investigation, then the Judiciary Committee has subpoena power that can overcome executive privilege claims.

18) There was NO VOTE to create that level of subpoena power.

As a consequence, the House did not create a process to penetrate the constitutionally inherent separation of powers, and/or, the legally recognized firewall known as ‘executive privilege’. [Again, check dates]

19) Absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no process to engage an appellate review by federal courts.

This was not accidental. This was the purposeful trick within the Pelosi/Lawfare road-map.

20) Pelosi and Lawfare’s plan was designed for public consumption; she/they were creating the illusion of something that did not exist.

They could not have the Judicial branch deconstructing their impeachment arguments. So they avoided the courts.

21) Because the Lawfare/Pelosi roadmap intended to work around judicial enforcement authority, the impeachment process was destined by design to end up running head-first into a constitutional problem; specifically separation of power and executive privilege.

22) The Lawfare impeachment road-map was designed to conflict with the constitution. It was a necessary -and unavoidable- feature of their sketchy impeachment plan, not a flaw.

23) Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Lawfare allies changed House rules.

theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/28/pel…

24) Pelosi and Lawfare changed House impeachment rules.

theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/07/hou…

25) Pelosi/Lawfare changed committee rules:

theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/07/hou…

26) Amid all of these rule changes Pelosi/Lawfare removed House republicans from the entire process…

theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/08/jor…

27) However, what Lawfare and Pelosi could not change was The U.S. Constitution, which they were destined to collide with.

28) Speaker Pelosi’s ‘Lawfare House rules‘ and/or ‘Lawfare impeachment rules‘ could not supersede the constitutional separation of powers.

Make no mistake, she was well aware of this.

29) Nancy Pelosi could not decree an “official impeachment inquiry”, and as a consequence nullify a constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch.

30) Speaker Pelosi knew this. You see, Pelosi’s impeachment scheme required a compliant media to support her construct and deceive the democrat base.

The media complied with her requests.

31) ...And that's why the articles of impeachment were structurally deficient upon submission; and why Senator Chuck Schumer is now trying to backfill the defects.

The entire impeachment road-map required the extra-constitutional senate process.

32) And that's what we are seeing play out today with Schumer's antics trying to gain evidence that was not attainable because the House lacked authority.

Again, this was by design. They planned to do this all along. These impeachment defects are material & intentional defects.

33) This is why it is critical for Republicans in the Senate to hold firm on process issues.

They are not really "process issues", they are "constitutional issues". The House is attempting to usurp a constitutional impeachment process.

The Senate *MUST* hold firm!

/END

34) Addendum - McConnell appears to be informing his senators about this inherent issue.

It is a critical constitutional issue because if not stopped, the same fraudulent process could be attempted to remove a Supreme Court Justice (or other) etc.

35) Patrick Philbin, a member of President Donald Trump’s White House legal team, explains the facts within is thread to the Senate during his remarks. Beginning at 03:20 of remarks. [Prompted, just hit play]