And johnwk is confounding an inquiry with an impeachment.
When the house begins an impeachment, she can schedule a vote. This is an Impeachment Inquiry – made necessary by DOJ declining to investigate the Whistleblower complaint. We are at an entirely different point than in the Nixon and Clinton impeachments because there has been no Special Counsel investigation.
The Constitution doesn’t say the Majority Leader of the Senate shall refuse to bring any legislation passed by the House to the floor.
The Constitution doesn’t say that the Speaker of the House say refused to bring any legislation to a vote unless it has the support of a majority of Republicans.
Never saw you typing boldface denunciations of those actions.
Everything that is Constitutional is not proper nor acceptable and, yes, I and others can express our opinion.
Does one Congressperson get to decide that they are going to issue subpoenas for every document the executive has? Arguably, until the house votes this is an impeachment, it is not an impeachment process. Anyway, they could apparently get cooperation just by setting up an impeachment process that the Congress as a whole decides on. As they have not done that let the courts decide and enforce the subpoena.
Sure, the House can then call the executive wanting to go through the legal process of the courts an “obstruction” if they wish. The Senate is likely to call it something else.
With the Nixon inquiry, the floor vote didn’t occur until months after the committee was already investigating.
As soon as you start to complain about Mitch McConnell deciding by himself that the Senate will not consider a Supreme Court nomination and following that by refusing to allow any of the bills passed by the House in the past year to come to the floor, then I will take you seriously about worrying about a Committee Chairman acting solo.
Remember, House procedure ALWAYS was to require both the Chairman and the senior minority member to sign off on subpoenas until the Republicans changed that to Chairman only to enable their repeated investigations into Hillary Clinton. Until you show me the posts where you denounced that don’t expect me to take your whining about Adam Schiff using the power the Republicans established seriously.
Your running into the difficulty that you cannot argue for principles unless you are willing to apply then across the board…so show me you have a basis for arguing from principle.
And then we’ll get around to how your suddenly deciding that everything in the Constitution is “not proper nor acceptable” demolishes the conservative “principle” that the courts should be limited to applying the Constitution as originally intended.
Come on Doug. Donald Trump is in trouble and he needs a much stronger defense than you are providing.
3 Likes
They can take that attitude. Won’t get them the documents they want, but they can take it.
This whole thing is a political issue, not an impeachment issue. They know they aren’t going to get a conviction.’
1 Like
You are not paying attention my friend. The House has already rejected wasting taxpayer’s money on impeachment. On July 17, 2019, the House of Representatives voted to kill a Resolution to waste time and resources to proceed with impeachment of the President.
Nancy Pelosi is ignoring the House vote ___ the House, not Nancy, having sole power over impeachment ___ that rejected moving forward with spending time and resources on impeachment.
JWK
They are not whistleblowers. They are shadow government political operatives who are working to take down a president who refuses to cave into domestic communists, socialists, and international GLOBALISTS who have been plundering America’s wealth for the past two generations.
1 Like
I read what you wrote. I replied that Pelosi was responding to new information… in July she was opposed to impeachment. That vote did not bind the house for all time. I’ve also pointed out that the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader often act without the explicit consent of the entire body… and you ignored those examples. So who’s the one not paying attention.
And by the way, someone who files a whistleblower complaint in a way consistent with the whistleblower law is a whistleblower. Boldface does not overturn laws.
[quote=“johnwk2, post:57, topic:214866, full:true”]
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/498/text
For those that are interested in specifics instead of hyperbole. The link is to the text of the impeachment bill that was voted on July 17, 2019.
It had nothing to do with the present impeachment inquiry into Trumps abuse of power by attempting to blackmail a foreign country into making public statements about a political opponent’s sun as a means of furthering his personal reelection campaign. Said blackmail being the withholding of nearly $400 million in badly needed aid to help hold off Russian incursion and fighting.
The vote in July was specifically about racist comments that Trump made.
The current inquiry is into abuse of power that has come to light since that vote was taken.
.
.
.
.^^^^
Well then, put that “new information” into a Resolution to vote to start an impeachment process.
The House has sole power over impeachment! Not Nancy-Botox-Pelosi. Pass a Resolution to proceed.
JWK
We all know who the whistleblower is. It’s shifty Schiff in drag.
1 Like
Not required by the constitution, by statute or the house rules… get over it…
Not a requirement for the inquiry. The Nixon and Clinton impeachment’s were preceded by lengthy investigations and even so in Nixon the House worked for five months before it passed a resolution to proceed.
When it shifts from inquiry to impeachment a vote will be required.
“The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”
Seems crystal clear our Constitution commands “ The House of Representatives shall … have the sole Power of Impeachment.”
It doesn’t say that the Speaker of the House shall have the power over impeachment.
JWK
It’s not a “Deep State”. It’s a subversive socialist/communist “Shadow Government” which began to entrench itself during Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Its mission being, to advance GLOBALIST and socialist policies, and obstruct attempts to roll back such policies.
1 Like
Blame Mitch for this.
“ …and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,…”
Seems crystal clear our Constitution commands “ *** with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, ”***
It doesn’t say that the advice and consent of the Majority Leader and (s)he shall have sole power of advice and consent. It says the Senate and McConnell took that power upon himself
WW
.
.
.
.^^^^
1 Like
.^
Watch what we start.
The same tactics will be used against us.
.
.
.
.^^^^
3 Likes
It doesn’t say that the Majority Leader of the Senate can unilaterally block a hundred bills based by the House from coming to the floor, but somehow that never seems to bother you. If the House objected to Pelosi’s actions they have means to reverse her actions.
Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and Pete Sessions sold America’s Ukraine policy for $650,000.
Not required by the constitution, statute or house rules… get over it
we are talking about rules and procedures to allow subpeona power to the minority group. This was extended before any impeachment vote.
yeah that is exactly right. at some point one of the sides has to start looking at mending fences. Pelosi is in a terrific position to do so. She can extend a vote to allow subpeona powers to the minority and allow them to call their witnesses. This would certainly look more like congress doing their job than created a campaign commercial for the democrat party.
1 Like
