wasn’t that report suppose to come years ago
3 Likes
Nah,Thursday is Halloween.
Reminds me of the kid who passes and ice cream shop and bugs his mother for an ice cream cone. He gets him one and he is temporarily happy. As they have walked 4 blocks away from the ice cream shop.
“I want sprinkles too.”
Allam
1 Like
When pigs fly. 
2 Likes
Outrage. Us.
Congratulations! This is what you wanted. Happy you have your wish granted by Mrs. Pelosi. Bring it, enough talk bring it on
6 Likes
Is it? I hope it does, honestly.
Nothing fake about it, this just stops the whinging and obstruction of the White House and the GOP members of congress.
Now, the GOP will use this vote to instantly post ads in every purple or reddish district where a Democrat serves. It is the sole reason they are insisting on a vote. They could care less that the impeachment didn’t have a vote, they want that yummy PR.
Pelosi will either go all in or allow her most vulnerable members to opt out. Not sure how she goes with this one. That lady is a great vote counter. The only reason she is doing this now is that she feels the damage will be minimal if she handles it right, and she will. Plus, I am sure she has seen the transcripts to this point and must feel that the evidence is so strong her caucus can reasonably say they had to vote for it.
Which is a shame for the Right, that was the one talking point you guys had and now it will be gone. Now you guys have to defend the indefensible.
5 Likes
So is it fake anymore if they legitimize it?
1 Like
This will make the inevitable request to the Supreme Court to expedite rulings on subpoenas that much more solid. Careful what you wish for…
1 Like
Yep. Prolly passes with about 10 votes to spare. Say 222-213.
Yeah I like that number.
She has already done the count.
Allan
1 Like
She really took advantage of these last few weeks to pad the argument about impeachment, it gives vulnerable members a lot of ammunition to take back home. Had she initiated the impeachment with a vote they would not have had that ability to defend their vote.
It’s smart politics.
1 Like
Wouldn’t be in the news if she didn’t have the votes.
Watching her play Trump is like watching Jascha Heifetz.
1 Like
They are in for a world of hurt. This isnt mueller…just wait till the redacted stuff get sin their hands…
It’s a twofer. All the snivelling about it not being formalized with a vote will now add to the weight of it being formalized, giving even more urgency to the subpoenas as they’re defended in court. We know they’ll be defended in court because the only thing left for the administration is to try to suppress information.
McCarthy and friends will surely be moving the goalposts.
1 Like
No question… I think this really a maneuver to give Supreme Court no option on enforcing the subpoenas. Imagine the precedent they will set if they allow anything other than very, very narrow executive prívela he rights at most.
The problem is that they are operating on an impeachment vote they lost in July. Graham called them on it, so now they have to follow the precedent process.
The House overwhelmingly blocked a vote to move ahead with articles of impeachment against President Trump on Wednesday, after Democratic Texas Rep. Al Green introduced the measure on Tuesday evening.
The vote was 332 to 95, with most Democrats voting alongside Republicans to table the measure. The 95 Democrats who voted not to table the measure would have supported moving ahead with the articles of impeachment, either by holding a vote on them today or referring them to the committee.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler was one of the representatives who voted to move forward. His committee would be the one to initiate impeachment proceedings. He has not publicly said he supports impeachment.
Failure to move this to the Judiciary will be just as problematic and now we will have a record of the rogue Congress members.
Very exciting. Should be a big day Thursday.
The house can vote every month on impeachment if they desire… There is no limit and there is no problem with this vote. Do you really think Pelosi would be calling for the votes if she didn’t have enough for it to pass?
She has the votes. Didn’t you want transparency? What’s the issue now?
https://twitter.com/speakerpelosi/status/1188930794515062786?s=21
3 Likes
Yeah. You got the explicit language in Constitution about the role of the House in impeachment versus the undocumented, unmentioned principle of “Executive Privilege.”
Rubber, meet road.
Nail, meet hammer.
1 Like
