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.

 

Impeachment Resolution ‘Loophole’ Allows Democrats to Reject White House Witnesses

page: 1
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+14 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:40 PM
link   
The House has passed it's H.Res 660 Impeachment Inquiry set of rules.

Many Democrats are claiming the Rules are favorable to Republicans but guess what?

They really are not favorable !!

The Due Process thing is again stomped upon.

Yes, Republicans can "ask" for witnesses, but the Committee Chairs and the Committees can override !!!!

Democrats think this will set up a Democrat victory in the 2020 elections.

Republicans will go along for the ride with this and wait for the failure and the Joke will be on Democrats as usual when the actual Articles of Impeachment turn into cinders in The Senate when the "Timing" is right 😃

Every Democrat witch hunt has ended in failure worse than every previous Democrat witch hunt 😃



H.Res.660



Impeachment Resolution ‘Loophole’ Allows Democrats to Reject White House Witnesses

The impeachment inquiry resolution put forth by House Democrats includes a “loophole” that would give the majority party, or Democrats, on the Judiciary Committee the power to reject witnesses requested by the White House, Roll Call reports.

Democrats released the text of the inquiry resolution on Tuesday, which Republicans say does little to nothing to address their concerns moving forward.

According to Roll Call, a provision in the resolution gives Democrats the ability to block key witnesses requested by the White House as the process moves to the House Judiciary Committee, led by chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY).






posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
That is how investigations work...

When it gets to trial Trump's team can call witnesses, his legal team could also talk to witnesses now without the bother of doing it in-front of congress to get evidence and testimony.


+3 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Democrats think this will set up a Democrat victory in the 2020 elections.

I work in an office filled with Dembos. None of them are enthusiastic about getting out to vote. I think our local pols are going to be greatly impacted by a lack of lefty turnout. I just add to their dis-encouragement by saying, "I don't blame ya."

So much the better.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Would it not be more tax payer cost efficient to investigate all witnesses and discover the truth before escalating a case to the Senate for trial? I mean it is rediculous to believe it is okay to ignore witnesses, evidence, or facts that prove that someone is innocent just to put on a big show at America's expense!



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
That is how investigations work...

When it gets to trial Trump's team can call witnesses, his legal team could also talk to witnesses now without the bother of doing it in-front of congress to get evidence and testimony.


But why are Democrats "allowing" Republicans to ask ?

And then have the "power" to over ride 😃 🥥 😃



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

It’s become painfully obvious, they don’t care about wasting our tax dollars.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Impeachment is not a trial.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts
discover the truth before escalating a case to the Senate for trial?

Mitch McConnell would simply say, "Innocent until proven guilty. There's no proof, so he's not guilty. President Trump is declared innocent."

What would that take? 13 seconds?



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Pyle
That is how investigations work...

When it gets to trial Trump's team can call witnesses, his legal team could also talk to witnesses now without the bother of doing it in-front of congress to get evidence and testimony.


But why are Democrats "allowing" Republicans to ask ?

And then have the "power" to over ride 😃 🥥 😃


Is that a quote from the Resolution? Or your "interpretation"?


+9 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
That is how investigations work...

When it gets to trial Trump's team can call witnesses, his legal team could also talk to witnesses now without the bother of doing it in-front of congress to get evidence and testimony.


If this is how impeachment inquiries work...

Then how come this one is so different from the last 2?

I'll give you one guess and it starts with "Democrats need to control the narrative because they have no actual crime to impeach."




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deplorable

originally posted by: CynConcepts
discover the truth before escalating a case to the Senate for trial?

Mitch McConnell would simply say, "Innocent until proven guilty. There's no proof, so he's not guilty. President Trump is declared innocent."

What would that take? 13 seconds?


So you're in favor of trampling the Constitution then?

The Chief Justice will be presiding. Mitch won't be able to say boo without permission.


+12 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Impeachment is not a trial.


Kinda odd then that the last 2 impeachments allowed for the President's council to be involved in the House investigations, both parties were allowed equal access to witnesses and the actual questioning was in public.

Partisan hack much?




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Impeachment is not a trial.


Kinda odd then that the last 2 impeachments allowed for the President's council to be involved in the House investigations, both parties were allowed equal access to witnesses and the actual questioning was in public.

Partisan hack much?



Partisan hack for stating the truth? Perhaps from your perspective.

Impeachment is not a trial. Dispute that if you can.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Anyone interested can actually read the Resolution to initiate impeachment against Bill Clinton.

Resolution to Impeach Clinton

There is zero notations that Clinton was able to "have his attorneys present" or any simliar nonsense.

Read it.


+3 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Impeachment is not a trial.


Kinda odd then that the last 2 impeachments allowed for the President's council to be involved in the House investigations, both parties were allowed equal access to witnesses and the actual questioning was in public.

Partisan hack much?



Partisan hack for stating the truth? Perhaps from your perspective.

Impeachment is not a trial. Dispute that if you can.


They are not following the procedures already laid out in the Nixon and Clinton impeachments.

But you're OK with continued close door testimonies and forced limits on what the Republicans can do.

So yes, partisan hack from my perspective.

A perspective shared by a lot of Americans.

If you want to impeach, why not involve the actual public?




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Investigations are not about covering up the truth, sorry. That is how corrupt railroading investigations work.


+1 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Anyone interested can actually read the Resolution to initiate impeachment against Bill Clinton.

Resolution to Impeach Clinton

There is zero notations that Clinton was able to "have his attorneys present" or any simliar nonsense.

Read it.


Anyone interested in history knows that it was a bipartisan effort.


The cooperative deal for the Clinton inquiry was struck by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde of Illinois, and the top Democrat on the panel, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., of Michigan.

“Mr. Chairman, you and I have worked more closely together than at any other time in our careers,” Conyers told Hyde at the launch of the first impeachment hearing, which was open to the public.

“And I want to thank you for the many untold efforts that you have made, including providing Democrats the Watergate rules of operation which we sought.”

Conyers at the time praised a largely bipartisan process to develop many of the rules for the impeachment inquiries.

“You know as well as I,” Conyers told Hyde, “that whatever action this committee takes must be fair, it must be bipartisan, for it to have credibility. The American people deserve no less, and history will judge us by how well we achieve that goal.”

Conyers was afforded the right to request or refuse subpoenas, an unusual right for the minority party, although Republicans had the final say if Conyers and Hyde disagreed.


Washington Examiner

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty happy that Democrats are doing this.

It just makes them look petty and underhanded to the average American voter.

Win/Win for me...



+2 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

In the Clinton investigation could both Democrats and Republicans subpoena witnesses without being able to be overridden?
In the Trump investigation can both Democrats and Republicans subpoena witnesses without being able to be overridden?



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

No, they aren't. There's nothing that requires them to as we have beaten to death here on multiple occasions.

I would bet that the Nixon resolution is different from the Johnson resolution as well.

Have you read them? I linked the one for Clinton above; you can see that there's no reference to "the President's attorneys."

Why don't you link Nixons? Back up your claim for a change.

I'm not too distrubed by what you think, you don't speak for a lot of Americans.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle
That is how investigations work...

When it gets to trial Trump's team can call witnesses, his legal team could also talk to witnesses now without the bother of doing it in-front of congress to get evidence and testimony.


If this is how impeachment inquiries work...

Then how come this one is so different from the last 2?

I'll give you one guess and it starts with "Democrats need to control the narrative because they have no actual crime to impeach."



The other 2 times had Special Prosecutors do the investigation, the house is having to investigate the Ukraine matter on their own.

So different circumstances leads to different actions.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join