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.

 

Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: thedigirati

How about you cite the rule or the law, that you keep saying exists, that requires a full house vote in order for The House committees to convene impeachment inquiries?

How about you cite the rules and procedure needed for committees to ensure their subpoenas are enforced.



Sookie, Redneck had already answered you succinctly with This Post

Why are you fighting against the fact that the House own rules state a subpoena can ONLY be enforced by a house vote? That is their own adopted and set rule, for a good reason.

Edit add: Therefore this current inquiry cannot force anyone via a subpoena thus by refusing such requests is a legal right and not obstruction.
edit on 10 10 2019 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



Doesn't the House have to vote on having the inquiry to begin with?


No, they don't have to, not since the rules changes in 2012. Most committee leaders have unilateral subpoena powers, as long as those subpoenas are approved by and signed by the Speaker of the House. That's all that's required, as I understand it.

Now, the Articles of Impeachment, that may be drawn up, must be voted on by The House to move forward to the Senate for trial. IF they don't pass the vote, it ends in The House. No trial in the Senate.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

there is nothing in the constitution that says so. there as the dems like to say about tax returns, there is a precedent both modern day presidents to be impeached there was a vote in the house first.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: toolgal462




again, for Sookie...When does the House vote on impeachment to get this thing moving?


When the impeachment inquiry is finished and the Articles of Impeachment are presented to The House for a vote.



So, all this is just BS to make the "orange man bad" crowd think they have a shot at impeaching and removing BAD ORANGE MAN...

thanks for confirming what I've been saying all along.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts



Sookie, Redneck had already answered you succinctly with This Post


No, he doesn't.



Why are you fighting against the fact that the House own rules state a subpoena can ONLY be enforced by a house vote?


Why can't you read? That's not what it says. In fact it says no such thing.


He's roundly debunked by Extorris in that thread.


4. The Speaker shall sign all acts and joint resolutions passed by the two Houses and all writs, warrants, and subpoenas of, or issued by order of, the House.

(d)(1) The Clerk shall attest and affix
the seal of the House to all writs, warrants, and subpoenas issued

www.abovetopsecret.com...

What you and Redneck are suggesting is that every subpoena issued from any committee must be voted on by the body of the House. There is no such rule. There is no evidence of that happening.


House Rule XI, clause 2(m)(1) and (3) authorizes House committees and subcommittees to issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents. Senate Rule XXVI, paragraph 1 authorizes Senate committees and subcommittees to subpoena witnesses and documents. In turn, most House and Senate committees have adopted in their own rules subpoena provisions containing procedures for exercising this grant of power from their parent chamber.

Committee rules may cover authorization, issuance, and service of subpoenas; may cover just one or two of these actions; or may be silent on exercise of the subpoena power. A subpoena must be authorized pursuant to committee rules—a decision to approve this legal order to a person to appear or to provide documents. Once authorized, if the committee wishes to take the next step, a subpoena must be issued pursuant to committee rules—signed and given to an individual to deliver the subpoena to the person named in it. To deliver a subpoena to the person named is to serve the subpoena

crsreports.congress.gov...

The rules are clear, committee leaders have subpoena power. There is nothing in the rules that state that the House body has to vote on whether or not a committee can open an investigation.

Again, please show me where any legal eagle, a legal scholar anywhere, besides here with Redneck, an ATS guy who thinks he's onto something, using this argument to say that the House has to vote to allow the various committees to issue subpoenas, and therefore, the House' committees have no authority to hold an impeachment inquiry, therefore, there is no impeachment inquiry.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Democrats got corn popped because their plan was to "Impeach" Trump based on the initial staged Whistleblower "Complain't.

They assumed Trump would never release the actual phone call transcripts. (OOoopps)

The Complaint was scripted and written well in advance and we now have some facts that effectively debunk the Complain't itself.

Joke's on Democrats again for the umpteenth time 😃




posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

there is nothing in the constitution that says so. there as the dems like to say about tax returns, there is a precedent both modern day presidents to be impeached there was a vote in the house first.


It's the city of New York that want his tax returns, the reason Democrats are dragging their heels over impeachment is to throw that, plus large chunks of the Mueller Report that found him guilty of different offences in, along with the Ukrainian call and live TV pleading of China.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: madmac5150

I think it's tragic.


it's just underwear. Don't be so melodramatic.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: contextual
dems are still wanting his returns up on the hill in the middle of the swamp,

here a couple of links. House Dem asks IRS for 6 years of Trump's tax returns, setting up showdown with White House




The United States House Committee on Ways and Means has formally requested from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) six years of Trump's returns. As of April 23, 2019, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has refused to comply with the second deadline given by the committee.[12][13] On May 10, 2019, committee chairman Richard Neal subpoenaed the Treasury Department and the IRS for the returns and seven days later the subpoenas were defied.[14][15] On May 20, 2019, a judge upheld the House subpoenas and rejected a lawsuit which Trump filed to keep his tax and financial records secret.[16][17] The judge also denied a requested stay of his order.[18] A draft IRS legal memo, written in fall 2018 and reported in May 2019, concluded that the IRS must provide the requested tax returns to Congress unless Trump invokes executive privilege, contradicting the administration's justification for defying the earlier subpoena.[19]

Tax returns of Donald Trump


now if the house has given up there is no headlines or stories stating as much.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
The House Impeachment Inquiry is in "Name Only".

They are investigating and "following up" on the Whistleblower(s) Complaints (or "ain'ts 😀).

Full blown Impeachment hearings need full subpoena powers and full equal representation to be genuine 😀

Anything less is just another Democrat scam 😀

They are only fooling fellow Democrats (great ! 😀)



100%

And THATS why the White House is saying "Whatever... go jump! We aint complying". Because they have every right to.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

that poster is nothing but a liar. Why are liars allowed to post repeated lies? Does anything ever happen to people who constantly post lies?



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462

well to be fair he is a brit, at least his profile say so. i don't stick my nose in brit politics, maybe he should do the same.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody

Shortly after the Judicial Committee received information about the whistle blower complaint, when Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, announced and explained that the House was officially conducting impeachment inquiries in various committees, and that she authorized all the committees' subpoenas, according to the House Rules.

There is no rule that says that the House of Representatives has to vote on or announce and/or get permission from the House body for committees to do inquiries and oversight into the Executive Branch.




so "officially" it began from the speaker of the house at a press conference?
Thanks!




Officially, any question as to whether or not the House and its perspective committees had the authorization to investigate and subpoena the Executive office was put to rest that day.



"officially" the subpoenas they issue for such are not worth the paper printed on
but that wont stop them from flailing away



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: tanstaafl
"Because The House of Representatives has not officially started one yet?"

According to whom?

The Constitution.


They certainly have according to the House of Representatives.

No, they have, according to the Speaker of the House and a few radical-leftistwing-nuts.

When 'The House of Representatives' speaks, it is by a formal vote on a bill/resolution submitted to the whole House for vote.

Wake me up when this happens.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Don't trust extreme left wing or right wing media for that matter.

Actually, trust no one.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Probably lies about that too. Plus, that isn't an excuse to blatantly LIE. I'm not saying he doesn't know what he is talking about, I'm saying he is flat out lying.

There should be rules against repeatedly posting proven lies.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl




The Constitution.


Citation please?



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

you need a citation to the Constitution now?



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




"officially" the subpoenas they issue for such are not worth the paper printed on


Why exactly? Why does the Executive Branch have the right to ignore congressional subpoenas?



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: Sookiechacha

you need a citation to the Constitution now?


I need a citation to the exact quote in the Constitution that says what tanstaafl claims it says. Just because someone says the Constitution says something, doesn't make it true.

In fact, tanstaafl's constitutional claim is false.
edit on 10-10-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join