Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
ExpandMyMind

Democrats set out rules for Trump impeachment

59 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

hacktorp
4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Well obstruction of congress is an impeachable offense for sure and while there are a shitton of variables that can change the answer to your question in general yes contempt of congress is a crime. How enforceable is it is another question and how it goes about being enforced is yet a whole other story however. 

Considering the DOJ is corrupt there would be no assistance from them so there's that too. 

Legally enforceable subpoenas would make things much easier for Schiff.

So, either he didn't think of that, or he is afraid to go down that road.  Methinks it's the latter.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
and then
On 10/30/2019 at 3:59 AM, RAyMO said:

Following rules put in place by Republicans - seems fair enough to me.

Citation, please?  The last example of this process was against William Jefferson Clinton and the two processes look NOTHING alike.  What rules are you speaking of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 10/30/2019 at 3:00 PM, Agent0range said:

What has been leaked from the private inquiries that has not been said to reporters in public?

Well, that's the 64 million dollar question, innit?  We have no idea what the totality of those interviews have to say.  They have been picked over and selectively leaked.  Have you seen a single, positive report attributed to any of them?  ANY exculpatory statements whatever?  What is happening now is the quick grasping for a fig leaf to try to calm the pesky voters who sense something isn't "fair".  It is doomed to fail but the very fact Nancy was compelled to try something to blount growing public disaffection is a victory.  The REAL victory happens in a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 10/30/2019 at 7:07 PM, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

That’s just so they can milk “we’re impeaching Trump!” a little while longer in the press.

The most sobering aspect of all of this is that they think so little of the intelligence of their base or the independents they depend on once every 4 years :(  that they think this sham vote will convince them that everything in the process is now above reproach while refusing to admit there was ever a problem to begin with.  Mind boggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77

Trump's defense is totally incoherent — and Steve Bannon riding to the rescue won't help

 

Quote

They will also project their own behaviors back on to their accusers, which will be echoed and repeated in the feedback loop that goes through Fox News, the White House and talk radio. Take, for example, this absolutely astonishing comment from Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., on the floor of the House before the vote on Thursday:

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
11 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I actually had that on in the background live and didn't know who was speaking. I honestly thought someone was talking about Trump and Republicans. They have ZERO self-awareness.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
On 10/31/2019 at 8:38 PM, and then said:

Citation, please?  The last example of this process was against William Jefferson Clinton and the two processes look NOTHING alike.  What rules are you speaking of?

Here's the text of resolution 581 impeachment rules for Clinton and resolution 660 impeachment rules for Trump.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/house-resolution/581/text

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/660/text

Now let those that say the rules are the same let them read the context of both rules and decide whether or not they are the same.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
37 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Here's the text of resolution 581 impeachment rules for Clinton and resolution 660 impeachment rules for Trump.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/house-resolution/581/text

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/660/text

Now let those that say the rules are the same let them read the context of both rules and decide whether or not they are the same.

Sure looks like they are the same. The majority party had the final say in the Clinton impeachment , same thing here.

 

Quote

(b) Such authority of the committee may be exercised--
            (1) by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly, 
        or, if either declines to act, by the other acting alone, except that in 
        the event either so declines, either shall have the right to refer to 
        the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be 
        so exercised and the committee shall be convened promptly to render that 
        decision; or
            (2) by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee.

 

 

 

Quote

(B) In the case that the chair declines to concur in a proposed action of the ranking minority member pursuant to subparagraph (A), the ranking minority member shall have the right to refer to the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be so exercised and the chair shall convene the committee promptly to render that decision, subject to the notice procedures for a committee meeting under clause 2(g)(3)(A) and (B) of rule XI.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.