Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Supreme Court has acknowledged the inherent Constitutional authority for Congress to issue subpoenas and hold those who refuse to comply in contempt for nearly 200 years. Read Anderson v. Dunn and its progeny. Educate yourself.
So, someone not in congress tried to bribe a person in congress and this relevant, how?
And what does descendants of children or offspring of animals have to do with this (progeny)?
Gee, you better inform Mike Pompeo quick, given that he "acknowledges receipt of the subpoena" on page 2 of his letter to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Gee you should reread it where he refers in the Para above that that it's a Voluntary Appearance since no Subpoenas have been issued.
He acknowledges he received a letter saying the were going to send one but Schiff has yet to send it.
You know why? Subpoenaes can be contested in court and Schiff does not want to explain to a judge why he needs one when there is not truly an Impeachment Investigation going on.
The letters and threat of Subpoena were just a way to Bully the people to show up and cooperate. Still no Subpoenas as of today. Sorry.
The Supreme Court has acknowledged the inherent Constitutional authority for Congress to issue subpoenas and hold those who refuse to comply in contempt for nearly 200 years. Read Anderson v. Dunn and its progeny. Educate yourself.
You are quite the *******. Any normal person would observe that that's what I'm doing RIGHT NOW.
Gee you should reread it where he refers in the Para above that that it's a Voluntary Appearance since no Subpoenas have been issued.
He acknowledges he received a letter saying the were going to send one but Schiff has yet to send it.
You know why? Subpoenaes can be contested in court and Schiff does not want to explain to a judge why he needs one when there is not truly an Impeachment Investigation going on.
The letters and threat of Subpoena were just a way to Bully the people to show up and cooperate. Still no Subpoenas as of today. Sorry.
In those preceding paragraphs, Pompeo is referring to the letters sent to the 5 current and former State Department staffers/ambassadors requesting a voluntary appearance, not the subpoena to Pompeo - which is something entirely different. Jeez, people need a lot of hand-holding on this site.
You are incorrect. formal Inquiries NEED to be by House vote.
This is informal. Nancy made it up.
There isn't any PRECEDENT for what she is doing.
There is PRECEDENT from the three , the only three , Impeachment cases to be heard for a President in American history.
Precedent dictates procedure.
i believe Nancy Pelosi knows what she is doing better than you do. Case closed.
Congressional oversight authority begets the inherent Constitutional power to issue subpoenas related to that authority.
"Progeny" in the legal world refers to cases that cite and rely on the same precedent set by one original case. In this example, it would be referring to the dozens, if not hundreds, of Federal trial and appellate cases that relied on the Supreme Court's holding in Anderson that Congress has the Constitutional authority to issue subpoenas.
The assumption that this hurts Biden is that Biden is found guilty of something.
This administration was not concerned enough with the accusations to lodge a form request for an investigation. Trump was having his personal attorney look into it (a man clearly passed his prime - -lol).......
Biden is not the House's business. He's a private citizen. He can't be impeached.
Trump has the DoJ. He can have them and the FBI look into it.
But impeachment is a lose-lose proposition for the Democrats, and Pelosi knows it--which is the reason she had dragged her feet on it for so long.
If the attempt fails, then Trump looks like a champion boss going into the election.
If the attempt succeeds, Trump gets replaced by a candidate who is better able to attract independents and moderates.
Impeaching Trump does nothing good for the Democrats going into the election.
Biden is not the House's business. He's a private citizen. He can't be impeached.
Trump has the DoJ. He can have them and the FBI look into it.
But impeachment is a lose-lose proposition for the Democrats, and Pelosi knows it--which is the reason she had dragged her feet on it for so long.
If the attempt fails, then Trump looks like a champion boss going into the election.
If the attempt succeeds, Trump gets replaced by a candidate who is better able to attract independents and moderates.
Impeaching Trump does nothing good for the Democrats going into the election.
Trump almost certainly will be impeached by the house because this is just partisan politics but he won't be removed from office because there's no actual crime that he's committed. As such, despite the impeachment, he'll easily win re-election and honestly the fallout from the failed coup likely leads to Republicans taking back the house... which is why Pelosi didn't want to do this and had to be bullied into it by the absolute morons that comprise her party.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
