Several years ago the architect of Obamacare, Jonathan Gruber, admitted on camera the Democrats who were assembling healthcare legislation were “relying upon the stupidity of the American voter”…. Fast forward to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2019 and her “official impeachment inquiry” by decree; she’s doing the exact same thing.

Speaker Pelosi, working through a carefully constructed political dynamic assembled by the hired staff from the Lawfare alliance, has sold her constituency on an impeachment process that structurally doesn’t exist.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi could never succeed in the scheme were she not assisted by a compliant media.

In the last week you’ve probably heard the media sell a narrative that Speaker Pelosi’s House Committee teams are sending out subpoenas to the State Department and White House. However, has anyone actually looked for those “subpoenas”, or read the language of the written communication from those committees’?

Using the House Oversight Committee as the example (because that’s the one most cited and all of the letters are formatted identically), take a careful look at how they frame their undertaking.

As you read this, remember: these carefully chosen words come from the Lawfare Alliance:

(Source)

Notice the phrase “sent a letter conveying a subpoena“?

That statement is not the same as ‘sent a subpoena’; actually, it’s not even close – it is pure parseltongue. You can call any car a Ferrari, but that doesn’t make it so.

Things get a little technical and wonky but essentially the term “subpoena” literally means “under penalty“. A subpoena duces tecu, requires you to produce documents. In this example a congressional subpoena literally, and only, means: a request for the production of documents with a penalty for non-compliance. Read the letter HERE:

(Page 1 – screengrab, source pdf)

The House has no independent enforcement mechanism, so each time the House of Representative wants to send a subpoena with an enforcement bite – they need to go to the judicial branch (court system) for an enforceable order. However, notice in these letters the enforcement mechanism is internal. It is a self-fulfilling ‘obstruction‘ scheme.

Speaker Pelosi does not want to engage the judicial branch, nor does she want to give the target (President Trump) the opportunity to engage the judicial branch, ie. court.

The judiciary would likely upend her House committee “official impeachment inquiry” scheme, just as D.C. District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell recently did to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler for “gaming the system“. Speaker Pelosi’s unilateral decree for an “official impeachment inquiry” without a House vote will not pass court review.

Remember when Democrats were recently delegitimizing the Supreme Court through attacks against Justice Kavanaugh? Well, how likely is it that any legal test of this arbitrary “impeachment inquiry” is going to end up at SCOTUS? Things making more sense now… I digress.

As a result of all the above these are political subpoenas, demand letters as weapons; constructed for optimal political value, and framed to create obstruction articles of impeachment.

This is a carefully constructed subversion of the constitutional processes and procedures.

After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare Group members to become committee staff. Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link), all are within the Lawfare network.

As a result of the need to create the optics of something that doesn’t exist; and following the roadmap they outlined in 2018 [See Here and Here]; the Lawfare contractors within the committees’ needed to construct a penalty mechanism that benefits the impeachment agenda but avoids the court system. As a result we see this:

Nice Lawfare trick huh?

The failure to comply with a non-official subpoena (essentially a letter); for documents relating to a fake “official impeachment inquiry” (Pelosi decree); that the House specifically never intends to enforce in any court (because they would fail); results in the House committee finding of “obstruction.” An enhancement for their impeachment articles.

Gee, where did the House Committees’ come up that that idea?

(LAWFARE Direct Link – DATE September 2018)

Anyone noticing a consistent pattern yet?

In 2018 we noted the significant House rule changes constructed by Nancy Pelosi for the 116th congress seemed specifically geared toward impeachment. {Go Deep} That impeachment plan was made at the same time as the “Lawfare Obstruction Roadmap” was drawn up.

With the framework of the current effort, those changed rules are now being used to subvert historic processes and construct the articles of impeachment. Without a vote to initiate an impeachment inquiry, the articles of impeachment can now be drawn up in committee without any participation by the minority; and without any input from the executive branch. This was always the plan visible in Pelosi’s House rules.

These letters from congress, they are calling ‘subpoenas’, are specifically designed to avoid the courts because of the unilateral nature of the investigations which underpin their content. Quite a scheme:

The House Committee impeachment investigations are structured around unilateral rule changes made by Pelosi’s scheme team in 2018 designed to block republicans.

In 2019 Speaker Pelosi then launches a unilateral “official impeachment inquiry” by decree. Again designed to block republicans.

Then Pelosi combines the unilateral rule changes with unilateral committee assignments, and designs an obstruction path within a unilateral investigation, again completely carving out republicans.

There will likely be more articles other than just “obstruction of justice” (Muh Russia) and “corruption of office” (Muh Ukraine), but those two are easily visible. Emoluments may also play a role.

Once the committees’ have assembled their evidence, assuming the public becomes aware of the partisan construct, Pelosi will likely initiate the full House vote to proceed with the assembly of articles of impeachment. However, the committees’ will have already done the investigative work without republican involvement, so the full House vote will essentially be a moot point.

You are detained and questioned extensively. You answer all the questions. At the conclusion of your inquisition you are read your rights. Your attorney shows up; questioning stops. A week later you are indicted and the material evidence against you is your statements. This is what Pelosi/Lawfare are constructing. It doesn’t matter that the trial judge will throw it out, what mattered was the indictment.

This is why there is such a massive narrative push by Pelosi, committee leaders and their media allies right now… they need to assemble evidence while republicans remain locked out of the process and committee staff (hired Lawfare) construct the articles. The goal is impeachment. They achieve that goal via a majority House vote on any individual article.

The ‘Resistance‘ and ‘Deep State‘ facilitators (writ large) are all-in on this impeachment effort. Additionally, impeachment as an offense is their best defense to anything being investigated by U.S. Attorney John Durham, Attorney General Bill Barr and DOJ-IG Michael Horowitz.

Yes, this entire group is also racing the clock. They need the Trump indictment, aka ‘impeachment‘, to construct a retaliation narrative that protects them -all of them- from any downstream consequences of Barr, Durham or, to a lesser extent, Horowitz.

References:

Pelosi Rule Changes