For the past several weeks House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has been trying to get the grand jury transcripts from the Mueller investigation in order to further advance his political goal of a presidential impeachment.

However, Nadler has been stymied because the official -legal- House impeachment process has not been followed. A DC district court judge knocked down Nadler’s attempts.

The full House of Representatives has never voted to impeach the president, which would be the first step that authorizes Nadler to begin an “impeachment inquiry.” Nadler needs that authorization in order to gain legal authority and access to Mueller’s investigative evidence that underpins the highly political Mueller report as it relates to obstruction.

Keep in mind… The Weissmann/Mueller and overall special counsel team investigative effort was always designed to construct the obstruction case. A minimal amount of time was spent on Trump-Russia collusion, because it did not exist. The primary team effort was to assemble evidence that could give the impression of Trump-Obstruction; according to their map, that obstruction angle would ultimately lead to impeachment.

It does not seem accidental that Chairman Nadler was rebuked by the DC judge in mid-August; and then subsequently Adam Schiff steps forth with a mysterious “whistleblower” report and a fake Trump-Ukraine narrative surfaces.

Indeed, as many have noted, the Trump-Ukraine narrative and subsequent impeachment discussion has almost identical fingerprints as the Trump-Russia impeachment narrative.

Techno-Fog astutely notes the use of the faux-Ukraine narrative seems planned, designed and rolled-out to provide Nadler’s much needed Full House impeachment stimulus:

The Lawfare group and their media narrative engineers have been working overtime to position House Democrats to support a full house impeachment vote. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now referencing a pending announcement for this vote. The Trump-Ukraine narrative has been the booster fuel for this shift.

While the Full House vote would be framed around both the Trump-Russia obstruction case and the Trump-Ukraine influence case, it’s almost certain there is no “there” there with the Ukrainian angle for a successful run at impeachment.

Therefore the real goal is the House vote itself which will grant Nadler the legal authority to go back to court against the DOJ and demand all of the material gathered by Weissmann/Mueller and the corrupt partisan team of investigators…. including the grand jury material. Remember, all of this Mueller material was assembled over two years with the intent to create the illusion of ‘obstruction’. Access to this material was always what Nadler needed to enhance the optic of obstruction.

While the formal impeachment vote grants the House legal rights, including constitutionally enforceable subpoenas and access to documents that do not exist without the vote, the presidential impeachment inquiry is a political process. A process that holds value going into the 2020 election cycle.

Speaker Pelosi has been waiting for enough political momentum in order to advance an “official impeachment inquiry.” She did not have enough material from the faux Trump-Russia narrative; she needed more. Pelosi now has the work of Adam Schiff with the Trump-Ukraine narrative to advance the highly political legislative process.

It appears President Trump’s advisors have now caught on to larger Democrat scheme.

However, with Nancy Pelosi delivering a House impeachment announcement later tonight it may be too late:

Yes, frustrating… in the extreme.

Everything in this Democrat plan, including the original construct of the Mueller special counsel team and the continual goal of “obstruction”, is simply part of the Lawfare continuum. All of the names constructing the background information are the same.

All of the people assisting Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff -including their paid contractors and hired staff- are the same. All of the players (inside and outside government) are identical over the past several years. Reference this from 2018:

For more context, read the just-released report from @BarryBerke, @NoahBookbinder, and @NormEisen: "Presidential Obstruction of Justice: The Case of Donald J Trump.” https://t.co/5hGt5Ve2Rr — Brookings Governance (@BrookingsGov) August 22, 2018