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.
When Nixon was impeached, an inquiry vote was taken because the House committees did not have subpoena power. The vote was needed to grant those powers. Several years ago, when the Republicans held the majority in the House, they voted a rule change that gave the majority permanent standing subpoena power. Therefore no inquiry vote is needed today because it would be redundant, the committee majority already has all the subpoena power they need.
Nothing in the Constitution requires a full House vote to initiate an impeachment inquiry.
Read this post again, those of you who can't understand why the House can investigate without a vote first. Note that the rule change was passed by Republicans.
Because investigations don't have to put up for a vote.
Why not ask the same about all the Wars and everything else?
Actual Impeachment probably needs a vote. But not investigations. Yeah, I know, you want to discredit it. But it won't work......because there is a there there and everyone knows it. You do too. You just don't want to hold a crook responsible for his actions.
As I understand this, the hearings are like a grand jury that gathers evidence to decide if a charge will be filed. In this case, hearings will likely lead to impeachment, because we all know the things Trump has done. I expect him to be charged with multiple crimes. But they won't send articles of impeachment to the senate with out supporting evidence. They are gathering evidence now.
Once the articles are voted on, they will be sent to the Senate, if the House votes to impeach.
By the way, no one tries to block testimony that exonerates him. Just remember this when Trump tries to block people in his administration from testifying. Nixon claimed "executive privilege" to no avail during the Watergate investigation.
There will be a vote. The process is just not there yet.
"The process takes on the form of a trial, but the trial takes place in the House of Representatives and the Senate, not the courts. The result is a blend of law and partisan politics in an often months-long process."
A vote would force him to cooperate, if he didn't then democrats would legitimately have their first impeachable offense.
Exactly. The Dems want to be able to say Trump is obstructing, but refuse to compel him. All a game to keep it going for longer. It will end the same way as Russia, with egg on the Dem faces.
Well, for starters, Adam Schiff, his staff, and anyone that had contact with this "whistleblower".
Already been documented that a staff member did in fact speak to the whistle blower and advised him to get a lawyer, go ahead and subpoena the staff member. A better questions would be what Trump spoke to Sondland about the day after the threat to withhold funds.
Simply because they don't have to. It would require extra steps and there is no law that says they have to.
Are you freakin kidding me? That is going to be the best non answer answer in this thread.
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.
