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.
So what you are saying is you don't even know the difference between an investigation and an indictment.
Why should anyone take your opinion seriously when you lack vital basic knowledge and flog that ignorance in a farcical real time display of the Dunning-Kruger effect? Easy answer: they don't.
Well they are moving forward based on the US Constitution which gives them the power to Impeach.
If it isn't Impeachment, by what other Constitutional dictation are they proceeding by ?
Here’s how it works Fuele. It ain’t Impeachment until articles are drawn up AND Pelosi decides to forward it
The presidential impeachment process
An impeachment proceeding is the formal process by which a sitting president of the United States may be accused of wrongdoing. The articles of impeachment are the list of charges drafted against the president. The vice president and all civil officers of the U.S. can also face impeachment.
The process begins in the U.S. House of Representatives, where any member of the House may make a suggestion to launch an impeachment proceeding. It is then up to the speaker of the House, as leader of the majority party, to determine whether or not to proceed with an inquiry into the alleged wrongdoing.
"The critical determination comes to the speaker about whether or not to forward it," Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina who authored a book on the impeachment process, told ABC News in 2017.
They probably should not have passed a law increasing taxes on Republican voters. Just a crazy thought here....
Look at how much this thread is blowing up. Anybody who read the 15 page statement from the ambassador knows Trump's chances of impeachment are 100%
Totally agree. There is a reason that Gaetz is storming the SCIF complaining about process. There is a reason Trump is inaccurately claiming that there needs to be a full House vote before an investigation can be started. There is a reason Trump sycophants on this thread are whinging up a storm about how unfair the process is.
The reason is that they are trying to distract the public from the absolutely damning testimony given so far. There is no doubt in my mind Trump will be impeached. Moreover, I bet there are going to be more than a handful of Republicans voting for impeachment.
Actually, you are wrong on all counts. First, the Supreme Court has long-recognized the power of the House to issue subpoenas as a corollary to their impeachment powers. A judicial subpoena is an entirely different and completely unrelated thing. Second, there has never been a requirement that an impeachment investigation commence with a full vote of the House. Constitutionally, that is only required for an impeachment vote, not an investigation. Third, House Committee heads have absolute discretion as to who is and is not permitted in the committee room.
So, bucko, 0 for 3.
The Supreme Court did not rule on this exact circumstance.
There is a requirement that in order for a matter to proceed, it must have a majority of yea votes.
Three times voted down.
House Committee Heads who are proceeding in violation of an established practice don't have any discretion. That's' why Schiff is now publically being called out on it.
You think the Repubs went into that room today as a lark ?
Here’s how it works Fuele. It ain’t Impeachment until articles are drawn up AND Pelosi decides to forward it
The presidential impeachment process
An impeachment proceeding is the formal process by which a sitting president of the United States may be accused of wrongdoing. The articles of impeachment are the list of charges drafted against the president. The vice president and all civil officers of the U.S. can also face impeachment.
The process begins in the U.S. House of Representatives, where any member of the House may make a suggestion to launch an impeachment proceeding. It is then up to the speaker of the House, as leader of the majority party, to determine whether or not to proceed with an inquiry into the alleged wrongdoing.
"The critical determination comes to the speaker about whether or not to forward it," Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina who authored a book on the impeachment process, told ABC News in 2017.
Then why were there three previous votes , and each time they didn't proceed ?
They probably should not have passed a law increasing taxes on Republican voters. Just a crazy thought here....
Look at how much this thread is blowing up. Anybody who read the 15 page statement from the ambassador knows Trump's chances of impeachment are 100%
Ya know, looking at all of this from 20,000 feet, it’s interesting to me that one Trump tweet or one Trump phone call or one Trump of a Sharpie note leads to a million hours of discussion and a billion brain cells spent on defending said tweet, call or Sharpie note
Is all of this MAGAing?! Doubtful
Damn, I wish I’da gone to law school - I bet EVERY lawyer in America has more work than they can handle. It’s well-known that Trump doesn’t pay his lawyers - apparently he thinks that he’s doing them a favor by letting him represent him and therefore they don’t deserve to be paid.
If I was a lawyer and Trump asked me to represent him, I’d insist on a retainer and when the retainer runs out I’d ask for another retainer....or quit.......seriously
The Supreme Court did not rule on this exact circumstance.
The guy who 20 minutes ago didn't know the difference between a judicial subpoena and a congressional one now seeks to lecture me on Supreme Court precedent? GTFO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuele
There is a requirement that in order for a matter to proceed, it must have a majority of yea votes. Three times voted down.
Not only are you incorrect that a full House vote is required to proceed with an impeachment inquiry (as opposed to impeachment itself), but they also only held one vote, as the other two proposals did not make it to the floor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuele
House Committee Heads who are proceeding in violation of an established practice don't have any discretion. That's' why Schiff is now publically being called out on it.
You think the Repubs went into that room today as a lark ?
Even today, after he stormed the SCIF, Republican Chris Stewart acknowledged Schiff was acting within House rules by holding closed door hearings before the bi-partisan members of three House committees. ("This may be within House rules, that’s not the question."). So, I guess you remain wrong on that point too.
But go ahead and keep arguing process. The rest of us are focused on the damning testimony that appears to get worse and worse for Trump by the day.
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.
