House Democrats would like to hold at least one impeachment hearing on findings from Robert Mueller's report, but must first sort out court challenges to witnesses and evidence from that investigation.
Roger Stone's trial, which ended in a guilty verdict on all seven counts, raised new questions about whether President Donald Trump perjured himself in written responses to the special counsel's questions, and Democrats may present that evidence and examine Mueller's findings on obstruction of justice, reported Politico.
A judge will rule by Monday whether former White House counsel Don McGahn must comply with a congressional subpoena, although his testimony would be delayed until any appeals are sorted out.
House Democrats have also filed a lawsuit seeking Mueller's evidence, and both that and McGahn's subpoena could wind up before the Supreme Court -- which would delay additional impeachment hearings even further.
That doesn't particularly thrill Democrats.
“I think that might be asking a lot for the American people to continue to go through impeachment for another six to eight months as we move forward toward a presidential election,” said Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA), a senior member of the Judiciary Committee. "I don’t think the American people want that.”
But even a lengthy court battle can't entirely smother Mueller's findings as part of the impeachment process.
“It’s going to be challenging depending on the timing, but we do have a lot of evidence in front of us and we’ll move forward with whatever we have based on the timing we have,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). “Hopefully, the courts continue to act quickly.”
Democrats are leaning toward presenting evidence turned up by Mueller, but they haven't decided whether to include any of that as possible articles of impeachment.
“That to me is the million-dollar question,” said a source close to the House impeachment process. “Is there a way to quickly process and dispose of that in this concise schedule? I’m not sure I know of a way, but there may be one."