It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White House formally tells Democrats it won’t cooperate with impeachment probe

page: 13
42
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

www.cnn.com...

But Pelosi has said that Democrats don't need to take a vote and has shown little interest in doing so after she announced last month the House would open an impeachment inquiry, accusing the White House of trying to play politics and arguing that House rules don't require a vote. The reasons Pelosi is not planning a vote are both practical and political: Taking the step of passing a formal impeachment inquiry resolution is a complicated and time-consuming endeavor that has political downsides, from drafting the exact language of the resolution, to holding a complicated floor debate and to putting some members in a tough spot. Moreover, having a vote on an impeachment inquiry resolution would give Republicans an opening to argue they should have subpoena power like in past impeachment proceedings, something that Democrats would almost certainly never allow. Pelosi has dismissed the calls for an impeachment vote from Trump and congressional Republicans as nothing more than a "Republican talking point." "If we want to do it, we'll do it. If we don't, we don't," Pelosi told the Atlanta Journal Constitution's editorial board Friday. "But we're certainly not going to do it because of the President."
well there is this from cnn but then goes into this

During the Clinton and Nixon impeachment inquiries, the House passed their inquiry resolutions so they could gain tools like more subpoena power and depositions, and included in those resolutions were nods to bipartisanship that gave the minority party subpoena power, too.
which would be some what ironic but then scotus may be ruling on this soon

Questions about the strength of Congress' subpoenas are also on the table at a federal court hearing in Washington Tuesday morning. In that case, Chief Judge Beryl Howell is considering whether to release secret grand jury information from the Mueller report to the House, which claims it's needed for the impeachment probe.



now this implies that they have to pass a resoloution first
papost.org...

Is there merit to this argument? The most recent precedent is the 1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton. And in that case, the record supports the core of the Perry-Keller argument: The House of Representatives voted on a resolution instructing the Judiciary Committee to investigate Clinton’s actions and recommend appropriate next steps back to the full House.
but this i feel will be the crux of the issue


One major difference between the Clinton impeachment and the current investigation into President Trump is that the Republican congressional majority in 1998 could refer to the extensive investigation into Clinton that was conducted over a period of years by independent counsel Kenneth Starr. It was the Starr report, after all, that included much of the material that ultimately was used to write the articles of impeachment against the 42nd president.
when the republicans were investigating Clinton there was an independent counsel appointed as far as i know there is not one for the trump situation and it seems in the past two there were IC's


What about the impeachment inquiry into President Richard M. Nixon? Before articles of impeachment were drafted by the House Judiciary Committee, the full House voted in February 1974 to authorize the committee to conduct an inquiry. That resolution read: RESOLVED, That the Committee on the Judiciary acting as a whole or by any subcommittee thereof appointed by the Chairman for the purposes hereof and in accordance with the Rules of the Committee, is authorized and directed to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of America. The committee shall report to the House of Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as it deems proper. But again, the committee’s work actually began months before, shortly after the infamous “Saturday Night Massacre” when Nixon ordered the firing of the independent counsel investigating the Watergate scandal.
so there was one for clinton and one for nixon BUT nixon fired his and that lead to the resolution starting the inquiry, trump has not fired the IC nor again has one been appointed as far as i know

and finally from wikipedia for what it is worth en.wikipedia.org... id quote it but im out of space if i do but id say the wild cards are there is no independent cousel yet and bluntly the house may impeach but its up to the senate to convict which i do not see happening and the dems have voted to impeach almost every republican president since Eisenhower ( not ford and nixon had bipartisan support ) so i guess 5 of the 6 last republican presidents would be the correct answer vs the meme that says the dems tried to impeach ALL of them




posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: smurfy

If there was a formal committee vote opening an investigation that the White House was now not complying with, you'd be right, but as there has been no votes anywhere giving legal sanction to anything ... any such impeachment vote would be a purely partisan political game.


IHMO, the matter is not about voting for anything thus far, we don't know about anything evidential that has already been gleaned thus far either, other than what is contained in the whistleblower's complaint.


We have the actual transcript of the call.

The first time a President has ever released a transcript of a privileged communication between two world leaders.

Did you miss that part?

Technically the entire world knows more about the phone call now then the "whistle blower" (actually a CIA Democratic operative).

Since all that person's information was second hand information and news reports.

So what, exactly, are we going to do with that person's information?

Since it's not considered actual evidence in a court of law?




edit on 8-10-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: thedigirati

I actually have a theory that Biden is only running so he can't be investigated because it could be seen as conspiring against a political rival.


It’s beyond that. Biden was propped up by the DNC specifically to try to trap
Trump because they know, and knew, they are all under investigation.
Biden doesn’t have it, he would have fizzled out just fine all on his own.
A sacrificial idiot, so to speak. Any R’s who are behind this are basically being
blackmailed in no uncertain terms (imo).

What we are witnessing is simply an extension of the coup (and pre-election
assassination) coupled with a globaliss progressive media and DNC steamroll pincer
move designed to topple Trump, destroy all political affiliations with him,
and simultaneously escape Obama cult investigations.
Disable and bind him from all sides, and attack, hoping this will turn into a public
outcry for impeachment. The media will never again be regarded as anything other
than evil; as and the bearers of the obfuscation if not wholesale perversion of truth and objectivity.
They are hoping like their lives depend on it that we are blind and actually tune in
in order to listen to them, and not to monitor them. That ship sailed decades ago. At this stage
they ought to be in hiding. Hence, the nonstop fomenting of what they plan to
emerge as a ‘civil’ war. Well, they are ramping up the social issues once again. Remember when half
of ATS was mutilated posters with their feet in stirrups, inviting us to hear about their new vagina? This will
make a come back, should they succeed, but first they hit us with a few Gretas, Hoggs, maybe a few more mass shootings however they can manufacture them. When they deem us ‘ready’the trans crowd
will re-emerge, and bid us to gather round the campfire if only keep their strange new holes from cauterizing.
They are trying to save their collective fat progressive globalist ass. This is deep state. Globalist deep state.

See, if we are all fighting each other in the streets, it would mean we have forgotten exactly
who is at fault for promotion of the injustices (all the while burying them for the DNC).


It is sad...swinging this dead cat in the name of nostalgia for the 70’s,
like it’s the reunion of the beatles. I am pretty sure the public aren’t buying it,
and worse, they are taking notes.

# 1051
edit on 8-10-2019 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2019 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2019 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2019 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: thedigirati

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

The subpoenas hold no weight unless there is a vote taken, but a vote isn't required to begin an investigation.


Then what is the point?
A side show?






Probably to have something to hold against the people who refuse the subpoenas. Because while they can't legally be compelled to appear, they can still be held liable for obstruction if they don't.

As long as there is an investigation going on they can be held liable for obstructing that investigation. Whether a vote has been held or not. It just gives the Trump admin more time to mess up.


what court will uphold that?? what if the GOP and Trump Say No

what can the Democrats do?? seriously.


Nothing right now. Trump and everyone else can disregard the subpoenas they get until the house holds a formal vote.

But it isn't a good look for Trump to do that. Disregarding a co-equal branch of government only adds to how bad Trump is going to look by the time this gets to the Senate. And it opens them up to more charges of obstruction

Oh yeah, how so? Do you have some magic wand that turns a legal action into a charge of obstructing justice?



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: mtnshredder

Oh, the dems will absolutely write an article about trump obstructing. It will be baseless. In fact, I expect they'll write five or six different ones. It doesn't matter, he's not going anywhere. The point of this is to exact the most political damage on trump. We've seen they love to do the numbers game (kavanaugh accusers 1-6, a few whistleblowers, etc) so they'll likely file more articles of impeachment than have ever been filed and claim it's evidence of how bad he is.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Well, that was probably the most stupid move they could possibly make. They just insured his impeachment.

It doesn’t matter how much you like Trump or what he has done. This country is built upon checks and balances. One branch of government can’t unilaterally decide it doesn’t have to obey the Constitution.

But don’t take it from me, take it from Senator Lindsey Graham

Video Link


The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury

edit on 8-10-2019 by Gorgonite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Gorgonite

Of course there's no impeachment happening, it's just a charade. Once they actually vote on it, he'll comply. He even said so.

Also, let's not forget, nixon wasn't even impeached. He resigned.
edit on 8-10-2019 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: mtnshredder

Oh, the dems will absolutely write an article about trump obstructing. It will be baseless. In fact, I expect they'll write five or six different ones. It doesn't matter, he's not going anywhere. The point of this is to exact the most political damage on trump. We've seen they love to do the numbers game (kavanaugh accusers 1-6, a few whistleblowers, etc) so they'll likely file more articles of impeachment than have ever been filed and claim it's evidence of how bad he is.


If the Trump White House refuses to hand over documents requested by Congress which the Constitution gives them the absolute right to ask for, how would an obstruction impeachment be baseless exactly?

Is it because you personally feel like it’s unfair?



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gorgonite

Of course there's no impeachment happening, it's just a charade. Once they actually vote on it, he'll comply. He even said so.

Also, let's not forget, nixon wasn't even impeached. He resigned.


Please show me in the Constitution where it states there must be a vote? It’s not there.

Just like the Republicans were able to change the rules on approving Supreme Court judges and other processes, the House can also decide how they conduct their business.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Well the democrats are getting called out, and are now under investigation. White House is getting high power on the house now. Let’s not forget folks we knew the democrats were going to be doing this the whole time they had the house when they got elected as the majority.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gorgonite

Of course there's no impeachment happening, it's just a charade. Once they actually vote on it, he'll comply. He even said so.

Also, let's not forget, nixon wasn't even impeached. He resigned.


Also, once your arguments have devolved into “process” arguments you know you have a weak hand.

“Yes, we know you have a note written in blood, The murder weapon, 25 signed affidavits, and DNA evidence all showing my client is the murderer but when you called this trial to order you didn’t say the preamble correctly”



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Gorgonite


Due process 🤦‍♂️

Lol rights of a citizens civics 101. Are you a us citizen?



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
Well the democrats are getting called out, and are now under investigation. White House is getting high power on the house now. Let’s not forget folks we knew the democrats were going to be doing this the whole time they had the house when they got elected as the majority.


It’s all a distraction.

I don’t understand why any American would be happy to see the presidency attempting to put itself into the position of absolute power.

But hey, maybe an autocracy would be fun for a while.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: Gorgonite


Due process 🤦‍♂️

Lol rights of a citizens civics 101. Are you a us citizen?





Someone needs a civics class. Due process doesn’t take place until trial, not investigation. I’m sure you knew that, you were just testing me right?



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Gorgonite

I don’t agree with democrats accusing a president of high crimes without proof, flooding the liberal media with propaganda, creating stories on what appear to be lies in fisa courts and some serious corrupt actions. Has zero to do with absolute power.

Oh boy, media has done well brainwashing people..



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Democrats are hindering due process 😃



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: Gorgonite


Due process 🤦‍♂️

Lol rights of a citizens civics 101. Are you a us citizen?





It’s insane how easily controlled some people are. You latch onto whatever you are told without doing a lick of research yourself.

“Trump is not getting due process from the House impeachment investigation!!”

“Yeah! How dare those evil democrats!!!”

It’s sad really, so sad that you are so easily played.

read up



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Gorgonite

Whatever.. your in Lala I am done looking down.. Good luck with putting your hopes and dreams into the democrats.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: Gorgonite

I don’t agree with democrats accusing a president of high crimes without proof, flooding the liberal media with propaganda, creating stories on what appear to be lies in fisa courts and some serious corrupt actions. Has zero to do with absolute power.

Oh boy, media has done well brainwashing people..



It doesn’t matter what you agree with. So far, the Democrats have begun an investigation into a whistleblower complaint against Trump. That is their job. Trump doesn’t have any rights to tell them they can’t do their job and he doesn’t have any rights to tell them how to do their job.

This country was built on separation of power and checks and balances. Right now the executive branch thinks it is above the law. It doesn’t matter one lick what you feel. That’s a fact and he will lose badly in the courts. I will say it right now, the Supreme Court will rule unanimously against him. Mark my words.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: Gorgonite

Whatever.. your in Lala I am done looking down.. Good luck with putting your hopes and dreams into the democrats.





Let me know when you figure out due process.




top topics



 
42
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join