Strategy to avoid impeachment .

a reply to: shooterbrody

mr green got a vote
that alone is precedent for this session

Mr Green actually submitted Articles of Impeachment to be voted on.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

so I'm used to baby sitting.

of course you are

til it is time to not

a reply to: Sookiechacha
thanks
which time?

Lawmakers voted 332-95 to table Green’s resolution, which was widely opposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other top Democrats worried that the measure would force vulnerable swing-district lawmakers into peril ahead of the 2020 elections. The bipartisan vote shelved any chance of bringing forth articles of impeachment against Trump in the near future.

did you notice this part

The bipartisan vote shelved any chance of bringing forth articles of impeachment against Trump in the near future.

your quote

Mr Green actually submitted Articles of Impeachment to be voted on.

???

a reply to: shooterbrody

You can disagree with the wording in the Constitution all you want, it doesn't make a difference in the least since that's what governs the process. All of the pissing about a vote just shows how far people will stick their heads up their asses to follow their party's narrative and completely disregard reality or the facts.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
of course you are
til it is time to not

Most of the time I post on here I feel I'm talking to children.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
who will enforce the committees subpoenas?

why would one comply with such a sham process?

how will they impeach with no evidence?

Nancy Pelosi has settled on abuse of power as the grounds to impeach.

www.nbcnews.com...

WASHINGTON — House Democrats are zeroing in on a framework for their impeachment case against President Donald Trump that will center on a simple “abuse of power” narrative involving the president's actions regarding Ukraine, according to multiple people familiar with the deliberations.
As Democrats continue closed-door depositions with critical witnesses and prepare to move to the next phase of public hearings, they are wrestling over which elements and evidence to bring in, which to leave out. The goal is to explain to the public the reasoning and relevance of any eventual impeachment charges.

More at the source.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You can disagree with the wording in the Constitution all you want

Oh I don't disagree with it at all.
I do disagree with your interpretation of such.

All of the pissing about a vote just shows how far people will stick their heads up their asses to follow their party's narrative and completely disregard reality or the facts.

Sorry that precedent thing is kind of a big deal for me.
Otherwise imo the speaker singlehandedly implement an inquiry for the entirety of the session.
As to the "party" accusation , I voted for obama his first term, I am not really one for "labels"
dick 'le orange was simply less repulsive than the opposition

if the house puts forth evidence of an actual bribery treason high crime or misdemeanor i hope they remove him
until that day all I ask is that they act fairly and within the rules

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I do disagree with your interpretation of such.

I didn't offer an interpretation. I said, 'Here is what's written, show me where it says a vote is required'. You didn't.

Sorry that precedent thing is kind of a big deal for me.

Get over it, it's not relevant.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Detectives seldom tell the suspect what they are investigating. The case, when the time comes is laid out by the prosecutors and at that time the defendant is entitled to discovery.
Now this is like you said not a court trial but it is a trial.
The case will be finalized and voted on by congress and then the senate will be judge and jury to whatever is laid out for them.
Polls are showing that more than half of the people asked are in favor of impeachment and... AND removal from office.
It is said that trump has been informed that he will definitely be impeached. There is no getting around that at this point.
They are saying that the only thing between him and that ultimate outcome are 53 republicans.
What is his approval amongst them? And what is in their secret thoughts?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Trump has something like 88% approval among Republicans asked.

Frankly, I am terrified for something to be revealed that the President has done that would make the Republicans break ranks and remove him because ... what would that be?

What would be unimaginable enough to force them to act?

a reply to: Sillyolme

The goal is to explain to the public the reasoning and relevance of any eventual impeachment charges.

good luck with that
treason bribery high crimes and misdemeanors
and disagreements with diplomacy and foreign policy discussions

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I didn't offer an interpretation.

sure you didn't.....

All of the pissing about a vote just shows how far people will stick their heads up their asses to follow their party's narrative and completely disregard reality or the facts.

as I posted previously it is a simple disagreement

Get over it, it's not relevant.

no thanks
at least not on your word alone

originally posted by: shooterbrody
sure you didn't.....

That's called an opinion, not an interpretation.

I'm still waiting on where you show how the Constitution requires a vote prior to an inquiry beginning.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's called an opinion, not an interpretation.

ah
pardon my mistake

I'm still waiting on where you show how the Constitution requires a vote prior to an inquiry beginning.

here you go

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

it is why the last 2 events were handled the way they were
the house of representatives

originally posted by: shooterbrody
here you go

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Nothing about a vote then, is there?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
prey tell how does the house show action?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Mr Green actually submitted Articles of Impeachment to be voted on. ???

While Nancy's committee has not. That is the difference. He submitted articles to be voted on.
Nancy is not quite ready to do that but it appears she is nearing that decision.
Then, you will get your vote.
For the historical record, the first impeachment did not include a vote on whether to investigate the president or not. They just went ahead and launched that in light of Johnsons outright snubbing of the law. The outcome was a narrow vote to save his presidency but he lost the election that followed.

a reply to: Sillyolme

While Nancy's committee has not.

what committee is that?

and the modern 2 have had votes
there was a reason for such
and none had secret hearings

but hey
lose any way you like

originally posted by: shooterbrody
prey tell how does the house show action?

On impeachment? However they choose to. The only Constitutional requirement is a simple majority before sending the President over to the Senate for trial.

a reply to: shooterbrody

In that case precedent was set with the first impeachment which did not vote on whether to investigate what Johnson was doing. They just investigated him and when they decided that he was acting like the law didnt apply to him they impeached.