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: 2
32
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
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?


Not from what I read between the two.

In Clinton, the Chair and Ranking Member have to agree. IF they don't agree, either can act on their own to bring the question to the rest of the Committee.

Since Democrats are in the majority, we can fairly well guess how that would go ... so I guess it's about the same in practice if not in form.




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
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.



I don't think you actually understand what "public hearings" means.

Did all of America have access to the questions being asked and answered in the House investigation of Clinton?

Do they have the same access in this current "impeachment inquisition?"

Think harder.




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
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?


Not from what I read between the two.

In Clinton, the Chair and Ranking Member have to agree. IF they don't agree, either can act on their own to bring the question to the rest of the Committee.

Since Democrats are in the majority, we can fairly well guess how that would go ... so I guess it's about the same in practice if not in form.

So if they do not agree, EITHER could act on their own in the Clinton investigation.
If they do not agree in the Trump investigation, can Republicans act on their own? BOTH parties in the Clinton investigation could subpoena. Can they both do it now?

This is the first time a completely partisan investigation like this has happened. I have read reports Schiff is instructing witnesses to not answer Republican questions.
edit on 31-10-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

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.


So they are unable to use a Special Council this time?

Why not?

It isn't like they haven't done THAT before...



edit on 31-10-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

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.

So why is it they are not following the same path it was done before?



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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.


Hm. How exactly would this be trampling the Constitution? The rules say the Senate can determine how they want to handle the process without interference from anyone else.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

LOL, you're desperately trying to spin now. Anyone reading knows that I understand what "public hearings" means.

Stop the ridiculous BS.

I see you don't want to post information about Nixon's impeachment either. You really should ... the facts would back up part of your argument.

A small part, but a part.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Pyle

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.

So why is it they are not following the same path it was done before?


Because the laws pertaining to Special Prosecutors expired in 1999.


Since the expiration of the independent counsel statute in 1999, there has been no federal statutory law governing the appointment of a special counsel. Upon the law's expiration in 1999, the Justice Department, under Attorney General Janet Reno, promulgated procedural regulations governing the appointment of special counsels.


Right now for them to do the right thing and get a Special Council to start the process they would have to have AG Barr start it.

Which is a non-starter because the AG would need to be shown where a crime has been committed and they are still fishing for one.

So they have just decided to use the Democrat side of the House to pretend to do one anyways.

Laws... they don't need no stinking laws!!!




edit on 31-10-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Does anybody really love Trump. I voted for him but I don't love the guy..meh. All I know is all the candidates they are throwing at him could be Cambodian military officers from the 60's. I feel they they all truly despise me for working hard, earning an education, bettering myself, going from low income to upper middle. They freaking hate me for some reason. Warren's medicare plan frightens the crap out of me. Go look at the tax rates.

I would basically be working to pay taxes. I would have no disposable income or time to even go to the doctor. I'd rather just die but some of them won't even let me do that. Want to take guns. Can't I just keep it in case you are elected? At least give me that dignity.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Lumenari

LOL, you're desperately trying to spin now. Anyone reading knows that I understand what "public hearings" means.

Stop the ridiculous BS.

I see you don't want to post information about Nixon's impeachment either. You really should ... the facts would back up part of your argument.

A small part, but a part.



So if these proceedings in the House are not done in a public venue (you know, excluding the public) then that is just fine with you?

Who do you think is spinning what now?




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: HalWesten

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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.


Hm. How exactly would this be trampling the Constitution? The rules say the Senate can determine how they want to handle the process without interference from anyone else.


Does the Constitution say that? Or does it say there will be a trial on the Senate when Impeachment is delivered administered by the Chief Justice?

I'll be glad to link it for you.



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

Democrats didn't roll over and die for the Republicans. Big deal. Republicans do exactly the same thing to Democrats when they are in the majority. Stop whining about it.



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

originally posted by: Stupidsecrets
Does anybody really love Trump. I voted for him but I don't love the guy..meh. All I know is all the candidates they are throwing at him could be Cambodian military officers from the 60's. I feel they they all truly despise me for working hard, earning an education, bettering myself, going from low income to upper middle. They freaking hate me for some reason. Warren's medicare plan frightens the crap out of me. Go look at the tax rates.

I would basically be working to pay taxes. I would have no disposable income or time to even go to the doctor. I'd rather just die but some of them won't even let me do that. Want to take guns. Can't I just keep it in case you are elected? At least give me that dignity.


I don't know anyone that really "likes" Trump on a personal level.

I know a lot of people that like what he is doing for the country though.

I do know some people that actively hates him every waking minute of their lives and REALLY don't care about what he is doing for the country.

Kinda odd that, all the hatred flowing out of the party of love and tolerance...




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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


Go ahead and keep thinking that way. Please.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

You made a claim about the Resolutions to impeach Clinton and Nixon stating that both allowed the President's attorneys to be involved.

SInce you can't be bothered to back up your claims I'll answer for you: wrong on Clinton, right on Nixon.

NOW, you're asking my opinion about the matter of public hearings. I'll be glad to answer.

Everything the Democrats do differently than the previous impeachments will constantly lambasted by those whose only intention is to sow discord. Therefore, if I were the Speaker of the House, everything would have been done as much as possible to the letter of the precedents. I think the American people want to see the proceedings, yes. Sure, televise it.

However, the trial will happen in the Senate. THAT is where the rubber meets the road. That is what needs to be conducted very openly and clearly.

edit on 31-10-2019 by Gryphon66 because: Format



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: HalWesten

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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


Go ahead and keep thinking that way. Please.


LOL. Okay.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:36 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.


And until then, only Democrats can leak garbage as they parse it to look bad for Trump. Which is totally fair. At least with someone who has nofaking integrity.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: xuenchen

Democrats didn't roll over and die for the Republicans. Big deal. Republicans do exactly the same thing to Democrats when they are in the majority. Stop whining about it.


A couple of them did. I think 4 of them didn't even vote. That's fairly substantial when they were saying all these Republicans were going to turn. None of them did. I think a couple however did not vote.

Writing is on the wall though. This will die a vicious death in the Senate. Another waste of time but I do commend the Democrats for at least trying something. Dude is like a freight train. Throw something on the track and try to derail it.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Democrats only want to hear witnesses that indict Trump.

They don't want to hear any evidence to the contrary.

Kangaroo Court.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Why aren't the Republicans "leaking" again?



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join