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.

 

No House vote on impeachment at this time

page: 6
60
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66



Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors

all CLEARLY crimes
again YOUR contribution


Crimes are not a necessity of impeachment.

the constitution CLEARLY disagrees




Doubling down? Fine.

Above you will find a link to an official reference from LOC on Impeachment. You may consult that for clarification on your misunderstandings.

Hint: The Senate is not a criminal Court.




posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

That's not what the document says, clearly. As with the Constitution you are adding your own words.

Do you usually get away with such shoddy argumentation?



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
lol as if the following needs your clarification


"Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"

all crimes
unlike the drivel you contributed



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

No really, there's a section in the document above that clears up your confusion. Read it



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
what document?
the constitution?
it is clear
it does not need your spin



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
what document?
the constitution?
it is clear
it does not need your spin





I provided a report from the Congressional Research Service above. You can clear up your egregious error by simply reading it.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
nope
as if your spin is needed anyway
the constitution is pretty clear in this matter



"Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"

all crimes as opposed to your offering



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

What's the Constitutional definition of high crimes and misdemeanors? Not yours.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
obviously crimes
as opposed to the drivel you offered
at least as serious as treason or bribery



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Want to know why there is no floor vote? Because all House business would be confined solely to the impeachment process until completed. All those “work weeks in the home district” vacations would be cancelled until completed and kicked to the Senate.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
obviously crimes
as opposed to the drivel you offered
at least as serious as treason or bribery




Not your interpretation, the actual Constitution. What does that phrase mean? Does it include parking tickets? Littering?



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

I'd love to see that documented. Or are you expressing an opinion?



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
obviously crimes
as opposed to the drivel you offered
at least as serious as treason or bribery



Bribing foriegn leaders for personal gain is indeed a crime of high magnitude.

The house committee can investigate anything they want. They are currently investigating whether or not to hold a formal impeachment inquiry, which involves bringing any evidence they hold, to the whole house. After that the house votes on it. A house vote is not necessary to start an investigation, nor is the investigation subject to public release. You are a fool if you truly believe they don't have the right to do this.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Besides the fact that the authority for Committees to hold investigations and issue Subpoenas HAS been approved by a full House vote at the beginning of the Session.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Oraculi

Technically? Maybe, but then again, most folks understand the notion...


You realize "technically" in this scenario also means LEGALLY. Legally, the impeachment inquiry is underway. I understand what you're saying, but that argument you just made would lose you the case in court.

The fact remains that the impeachment inquiry is underway, legally, and every witness and their attorneys have understood this and have complied. You may also notice that the White House has not tried to put an injunction on any of the witnesses after they were subpoenaed, and that is because the White House ALSO understands this is all legal and is going to continue, regardless of the smoke and mirrors.

Process that again, the president who sues EVERYONE for EVERYTHING has not even tried to stop these testimonies apart from declaring he won't cooperate.

What does that tell you the White House really believes, if you're being honest?



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Jefferson’s Manual

But if you want an opinion. The impeachment is an election distraction ploy to dissuade swing voters from voting for Trump. And it actually works better if Impeachment fails for whatever reason because the narrative can be spun as “Trump is so corrupt that he skated justice.” If not the exact wording then definitely the sentiment. I know from years in these threads that you can see the spin being done given the players involved.
edit on 16-10-2019 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

Bribing foriegn leaders for personal gain is indeed a crime of high magnitude.

The house committee can investigate anything they want. They are currently investigating whether or not to hold a formal impeachment inquiry, which involves bringing any evidence they hold, to the whole house. After that the house votes on it. A house vote is not necessary to start an investigation, nor is the investigation subject to public release. You are a fool if you truly believe they don't have the right to do this.


The House did vote on an impeachment inquiry for Presidents Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon and even though we can say it is not necessary to start one it does show precedent in how things have been done before, and that is also important.

We both know the house will not vote, can not vote on it, so who is kidding who....There will be no vote period on this...end of story. If the house voted on it they will lose the house in 2020 as 13+ states are very close swing states and every Dem Reps in those states will lose if they vote in either direction. If they vote No they will piss off their liberal base and lose, and if they vote Yes they will piss off their conservative base and lose once again while the Republicans just voting No is a no brainer and holds no consequences for them. Pelosi knows this to be true, and will drag this out past 2020 if Trump wins again with ZERO votes.


edit on 16-10-2019 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

The democrats are using “Impeachment inquiry “ as a way to openly influence the outcome of an election.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
obviously crimes
as opposed to the drivel you offered
at least as serious as treason or bribery




Not your interpretation, the actual Constitution. What does that phrase mean? Does it include parking tickets? Littering?

lol
go sell your ridiculous bs elsewhere
bring a crime or suffer the electorate
and not just a crime one similar to treason or briberey



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
obviously crimes
as opposed to the drivel you offered
at least as serious as treason or bribery




Not your interpretation, the actual Constitution. What does that phrase mean? Does it include parking tickets? Littering?


You'd have to refer way back to the debates at the Philadelphia Convention and have a good understanding of the terms used in British Law at the time (from which they were taken) and also the reasons why 'maladministration' was rejected.

One thing for sure is that the language does not mean 'anything we like' and does not mean all misdemeanors in modern day language.


edit on 16/10/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join