Drumcollie
* See DC's list of Kook posters*
You are a gracious loser.
Andy McCarthy makes a great point re: impeachment inquiry...
- Thread starter Raoul_Luke
- Start date
YouCantHandleDaTruth
Governor
Nah, dems will make it law that rules be set back to where they were before Ryan and Moscow Mitch changed all of them.
Things were better back then no?
tia
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Do you even voter to read what you link to? From your link:This is false on its face !!
Nuclear option: Why Trump's Supreme Court pick needs only 51 votes
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nuclear-option-why-trumps-supreme-court-pick-needs-only-51-votes-in-the-senate/
The Senate rules were changed for Supreme Court nominees, allowing them to be confirmed by a simple majority. The conservative Gorsuch was confirmed days later to the Senate in a 54-to-45 vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAGA Suckers only listen to winger news and constantly end up on the wrong side of reality
Did they use the nuclear option?
No. Republicans increased their Senate majority in the 2004 elections and the nuclear option was largely taken off the table. However, in 2013, Democrats were in charge of the Senate and White House, and it was the minority Republicans who were filibustering their judicial picks en masse.
So the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Nevada's Harry Reid, decided to pull the trigger. The nuclear option was implemented for the first time, and the Senate rules were changed so nominees for cabinet posts and federal judgeships could be confirmed with just 51 votes.
So first off, it wasn't the Republicans who used it (first), but rather your Democrats. And secondly, in fact it wasn't a formal "rules change," because there never was a rule that required a 60 vote majority, but rather simple precedence.
Nostra
Governor
Dimwingers in Congress: Open and shut case. Trump should be impeached.
Thinking people: Why don't you vote on it and not conduct some kangaroo court where you don't even give the minority the ability to question witnesses as has been done forever?
Dimwingers in Congress: Because Nazi Pelosi is Speaker.
Thinking people: So, you are going to try to overturn an election based on the third hand knowledge of a proven liar who is a Dimwinger operative who refuses to actually testify in person?
Dimwingers in Congress: Uh......duh.....yeah.
Good luck with that you freaking morons.
Thinking people: Why don't you vote on it and not conduct some kangaroo court where you don't even give the minority the ability to question witnesses as has been done forever?
Dimwingers in Congress: Because Nazi Pelosi is Speaker.
Thinking people: So, you are going to try to overturn an election based on the third hand knowledge of a proven liar who is a Dimwinger operative who refuses to actually testify in person?
Dimwingers in Congress: Uh......duh.....yeah.
Good luck with that you freaking morons.
YouCantHandleDaTruth
Governor
Irrelevant, you said "...They didn't change the rules,..."
That's false on its face, Republicans ... DID ... change the rules. Whether or not they used them is irrelevant.
Republicans unilaterally changed the rules in the congressional bodies and so can democrats...
Any questions?
tia
Spamature
President
Are they violating the House rules ?
EatTheRich
President
She didn’t change the rules or purport to. You are just complaining that she is going by the rules that have long been in place, which you now find inconvenient.
EatTheRich
President
Your link specifically says that the current procedure is traditional and included in the rules of the House.
A number of rules have been adopted by the House and Senate, and are honored by tradition.
Jefferson's Manual, which is integral to the Rules of the House of Representatives,[16] states that impeachment is set in motion by charges made on the floor, charges proferred by a memorial, a member's resolution referred to a committee, a message from the president, or from facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House. It further states that a proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business.
The House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House[17] is a reference source for information on the rules and selected precedents governing the House procedure, prepared by the House Parliamentarian. The manual has a chapter on the House's rules, procedures, and precedent for impeachment
A number of rules have been adopted by the House and Senate, and are honored by tradition.
Jefferson's Manual, which is integral to the Rules of the House of Representatives,[16] states that impeachment is set in motion by charges made on the floor, charges proferred by a memorial, a member's resolution referred to a committee, a message from the president, or from facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House. It further states that a proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business.
The House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House[17] is a reference source for information on the rules and selected precedents governing the House procedure, prepared by the House Parliamentarian. The manual has a chapter on the House's rules, procedures, and precedent for impeachment
Nostra
Governor
EatTheRich
President
How could they be fascists bent on destroying capitalism when the whole point of fascism is to rescue capitalism?
EatTheRich
President
Who has argued that they do? No one? Stop with the straw men then.
EatTheRich
President
Because the procedure outlined on Findlaw is the procedure being followed. There was no vote to change the rules because they are proceeding under the rules that had long been in place.
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Apparently there are no rules.
llovejim
Current Champion
again, trumpers, learn to read and then try to comment...the House is free to decide how to impeach the president, by the Constitution, as written here....everything you trumpster are claiming is bullshit. everything you want to know about how the House should impeach the president, according the Constitution, is right here-
Article I § 2 of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach (make formal charges against) and Article I § 3 gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. Article II § 4 of the Constitution provides as follows:
"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Who sets the rules for impeachment?
White House counsel Pat Cipollone said in the letter that Pelosi's inquiry has broken with precedent and that Democrats' impeachment inquiry isn't legitimate because it hasn't had a vote by the full House.
But Pelosi, whose party controls the majority in the chamber, controls the rules for this stage in the process.
The Constitution states clearly that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."
What "impeachment" means in this context is, effectively, indictment — the House has the power to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to spur a trial that would then take place in the Senate.
That's pretty much all the Constitution says on the matter, according to University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck.
He told NPR's All Things Considered on Tuesday that "the Constitution actually says nothing about the process the House is supposed to follow when it comes to impeachment inquiries, other than that it eventually has to approve articles of impeachment before sending the matter to the Senate."
That gives House leaders a lot of discretion, which Pelosi says she's using.
Must the House vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry?
Cipollone wrote: "the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the President without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step."
Pelosi has not called for such a vote but announced last month that the House is conducting "an official impeachment inquiry."
However, a former senior House Republican aide told NPR that "there is a difference between what the House should do and what the House has to do."
The former aide, an expert on House rules who asked not to be identified because he is criticizing his own party, argued that it's best practice to have a vote of the full House.
But there is nothing in the Constitution or in the rules of the House that compel a full House vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry.
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/09/768540896/who-sets-the-rules-when-is-it-real-and-other-big-questions-on-impeachment
llovejim
Current Champion
the fact of the matter is, there are no rules or laws in place. period. if there were, repubs and its propaganda site Fox would have given links to where such rules are written down. why do obvious facts like that escape Trump voters when they believe goofy shit like the rules of impeachment are written down somewhere and must be followed?
Nutty Cortez
Dummy (D) NY
You are confused.
There's a difference between House Inquiry and Committee Inquiries
Since there is NOT a House Inquiry (voted on by the House)
There is no House Subpoena power.
Why do you think Schiff etc look so silly tossing out these meaningless subpoenas? Ones that can be litigated and ignored for years.
Nutty Cortez
Dummy (D) NY
Correct. The HOUSE. As a whole.
Not Democrat Committees.
Right now, since the House as a whole has not formed a formal impeachment inquiry- the subpoenas and babbling you have heard for 2-3 weeks is meaningless.
Pelosi knows this. Most leftists do not.
I think they may be just a little afraid the full House won't have enough votes to proceed with the Kangaroo Court inquiry.
Bottom line is: If the House Democrats believed they actually had a legitimate case against the president, they would have put the impeachment inquiry measure to a vote of the full House long before now.
They know they are pissing up a rope and are just stalling for time.
This whole pile of horseshit will dry up and blow away just like their chances of winning the White House blew away months ago.
