The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (17 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 18 (members: 0, guests: 18)
    Andrus

    Andrus

    Admin
    Staff member
    Joined
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages
    2,268
    Reaction score
    944
    Age
    65
    Location
    Sunset, Louisiana
    Offline
    By Laura Bassett

    After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

    “Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

    Read the Full Story - InStyle
     
    amp.cnn.com

    Trump raised Biden with Xi in June call housed in highly secure server

    When President Donald Trump suggested — without prompting — that China should investigate Joe Biden and his son, he thrust another political grudge into what was already the world's most complicated and consequential relationship.
    amp.cnn.com amp.cnn.com


    Thursday's comments weren't the first time Trump has injected Biden into his relationship with China, though he said Thursday he has never pushed Xi to investigate the former vice president. Nor is it the first time he has sought to trade favors with Xi, who this week celebrated the 70th birthday of his communist state with a note of congratulations from Trump.​
    ​
    During a phone call with Xi on June 18, Trump raised Biden's political prospects as well as those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who by then had started rising in the polls, according to two people familiar with the discussion. In that call, Trump also told Xi he would remain quiet on Hong Kong protests as trade talks progressed.​
    ​
    The White House record of that call was later stored in the highly secured electronic system used to house a now-infamous phone call with Ukraine's President and which helped spark a whistleblower complaint that's led Democrats to open an impeachment inquiry into Trump.​

    There is a clear pattern emerging here: Solicit foreign officials to manufacture dirt on political rivals while hanging things of value over their heads. Then covering those conversations up by improperly using electronic classification systems to limit their exposure outside of the most inner Trump officials.

    And before it gets recycled again, the US exercises jurisdiction over all US citizens abroad: If you are a US citizen and commit a federal crime while living/working elsewhere in the world, the US reserves the right to prosecute you for that crime within the US.

    So, if there is a legitimate allegation of corruption to be made against baby Biden (or against Joe Biden himself, which there hasn't been), then federal investigative bodies can look into it under due-process(though that itself gets complicated given the recent revelations about Barr's actions at DOJ). Not going through proper investigative channels to solicit a foreign leader for personal gain(as the attempt to cover up these conversations leave little alternative explanation for) directly runs afoul on ethical and legal grounds.
     
    Last edited:
    yuyi64 said:
    Not true at all. The minority party does not have subpoena power in Congressional investigations and the Democrats would never subpoena anyone who would undermine their objectives.
    Click to expand...
    You seem to have a limited understanding on how any of this actually works.

    First of all, stop listening to trump, he has no idea how government works either. In order for anything to reach "the floor" it must clear committee. That is regular order.

    Secondly, congressional subpoena power resides within their committees and sub committees. Those powers are not governed through the US Constitution, but through SCOTUS precedent. Subpoena's are not pass out like candy, there are benchmarks that must be met in order to obtain a subpoena.
    If the ranking member has a valid reason to issue a subpoena, that committee member should bring it to the chair so that the investigation can move forward.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    You seem to have a limited understanding on how any of this actually works.

    First of all, stop listening to trump, he has no idea how government works either. In order for anything to reach "the floor" it must clear committee. That is regular order.

    Secondly, congressional subpoena power resides within their committees and sub committees. Those powers are not governed through the US Constitution, but through SCOTUS precedent. Subpoena's are not pass out like candy, there are benchmarks that must be met in order to obtain a subpoena.
    If the ranking member has a valid reason to issue a subpoena, that committee member should bring it to the chair so that the investigation can move forward.
    Click to expand...
    You obviously don't understand how things work in real life or are being intentionally deceptive. All your flowery prose and theory is nice but a chair like Schiff would never allow a ranking member to issue a subpoena that would not serve his political objective. He would simply tell the ranking member the reason is not valid and thus the request is denied. Now can we get back to the real world please?
     
    yuyi64 said:
    You obviously don't understand how things work in real life or are being intentionally deceptive. All your flowery prose and theory is nice but a chair like Schiff would never allow a ranking member to issue a subpoena that would not serve his political objective. He would simply tell the ranking member the reason is not valid and thus the request is denied. Now can we get back to the real world please?
    Click to expand...

    “You don’t know how real life works.... Can we get back to the real world.”

    In between these two statements is entirely hypothetical.

    Like I said above, lack of consistency within your own posts doesn’t help your credibility.
     
    yuyi64 said:
    You obviously don't understand how things work in real life or are being intentionally deceptive. All your flowery prose and theory is nice but a chair like Schiff would never allow a ranking member to issue a subpoena that would not serve his political objective. He would simply tell the ranking member the reason is not valid and thus the request is denied. Now can we get back to the real world please?
    Click to expand...
    That was not the issue, you said

    Because making a formal charge of impeachment and bringing debate to the House floor would give both sides of the aisle subpoena powers
    Click to expand...

    I was just pointing out that you are wrong. Then I tried to explain how it is supposed to work according to their Article 1 responsibilities. I cannot pretend to know how Schifff would respond to a subpoena request from Nunes because Nunes has shown himself to be less than honest about his own actions. I would like to believe that if Nunes has shown that subject of his subpoena request is pertinent and within the scope of their investigation, that Schiff would submit the subpoena.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    I would like to believe that if Nunes has shown that subject of his subpoena request is pertinent and within the scope of their investigation, that Schiff would submit the subpoena.
    Click to expand...
    Now you're back to la la land. You know that will never happen, you simply refuse to publicly admit it.
     
    You’re just assuming things now. In an impeachment inquiry does the subpoena power shift to the minority party or not? You said it does, like you know. So is that right?
     
    MT15 said:
    You’re just assuming things now. In an impeachment inquiry does the subpoena power shift to the minority party or not? You said it does, like you know. So is that right?
    Click to expand...
    An impeachment inquiry is what we supposedly are doing currently and the subpoena power is the hands of the chair of the committee investigating, in this case Adam Schiff.
     
    yuyi64 said:
    What's not adding up is that if the Democrats believe all of this is true then go ahead and impeach. They need to stop dancing around the issue of what is impeachable and bring the charge to the floor of the House for a vote. Lets get all this grandstanding over with and put your vote where your mouth is.
    Click to expand...
    They need to gather all the proper evidence. it's very similar to court. You can't move to trial, before the evidence is even collected. If they think they have a case, then want to make sure they have all the connecting pieces to eliminate the defenses already being waged via the media / bully pulpit.
     
    wardorican said:
    They need to gather all the proper evidence. it's very similar to court. You can't move to trial, before the evidence is even collected. If they think they have a case, then want to make sure they have all the connecting pieces to eliminate the defenses already being waged via the media / bully pulpit.
    Click to expand...

    if we're going to talk suppositions and assumptions and hypotheticals, we might as well consider which among these is more probable when it comes to ideas around timing and perceived delaying - and this one is certainly more plausible than anything else offered

    plus, as information continues to leak out, it makes the case stronger. I still don't understand this manufactured insistence and necessity to move ahead with a vote right now.
     
    yuyi64 said:
    An impeachment inquiry is what we supposedly are doing currently and the subpoena power is the hands of the chair of the committee investigating, in this case Adam Schiff.
    Click to expand...

    Yes. You made a statement along the lines of they need to have a vote, so that minority members will also get subpoena power. What I asked you is twofold. Is that even true that minority members would be able to issue their own subpoenas? And what or who would they subpoena for this case?
     
    yuyi64 said:
    An impeachment inquiry is what we supposedly are doing currently and the subpoena power is the hands of the chair of the committee investigating, in this case Adam Schiff.
    Click to expand...

    Partially true. Schiff can issue a subpoena by himself, so long as he tells the Ranking Minority member. But that's not the only way.

    www.lawfareblog.com

    Congressional Subpoena Power and Executive Privilege: The Coming Showdown Between the Branches

    With the new Democratic majority in the House of Representatives sporting an aggressive oversight agenda on national security and foreign policy issues, it’s only a matter of time before a raft of congressional subpoenas are fired off from Capitol Hill. Also only a matter of time is resistance...
    www.lawfareblog.com www.lawfareblog.com

    The power of Congress to investigate and obtain information is very broad. While there is no express provision in the Constitution that addresses the investigative power, the Supreme Court has firmly established that such power is essential to the legislative function as to be implied from the general vesting of legislative powers in Congress.

    How a particular committee decides to issue a subpoena is specific to each committee. Most committees of the House and Senate have included in their rules one or more provisions on committees’ and subcommittees’ power to authorize subpoenas by majority vote. Most House committee rules delegate to the committee chair the power to authorize subpoenas, and many of these rules require the chair to consult or notify the committee’s ranking minority member. Once authorized, a subpoena must be signed and delivered to the person named in it. Delivery of the subpoena to the person named in it means the person has been officially “served.”
    Click to expand...


    1570314088452.png


    Now, I'm not sure how often minority members have been denied. I was trying to find some information on that, so.. we will have to wait and see.
     
    MT15 said:
    Yes. You made a statement along the lines of they need to have a vote, so that minority members will also get subpoena power. What I asked you is twofold. Is that even true that minority members would be able to issue their own subpoenas? And what or who would they subpoena for this case?
    Click to expand...
    Using the Nixon and Clinton impeachments as historical precedents, the impeachment resolutions brought to the floor of the House for a vote granted both the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary committee the ability to issue subpoenas in order to have a fair and bipartisan impeachment inquiry. That's not happening in the current pseudo-impeachment process going on right now, and frankly I'm skeptical that in this hyper-partisan climate the Democrats would follow historical precedent and give the ranking member subpoena powers. As to what witnesses would be subpoenaed by the the ranking member, that would depend on what the formal impeachment charge is that's voted on by the full House and what witnesses he determines would best refute the charge.
     
    So it sounds like they need to actually formulate the impeachment resolutions before what you are suggesting would take place, am I reading that right? It seems we’re not to that point yet.
     
    wardorican said:
    Partially true. Schiff can issue a subpoena by himself, so long as he tells the Ranking Minority member. But that's not the only way.

    www.lawfareblog.com

    Congressional Subpoena Power and Executive Privilege: The Coming Showdown Between the Branches

    With the new Democratic majority in the House of Representatives sporting an aggressive oversight agenda on national security and foreign policy issues, it’s only a matter of time before a raft of congressional subpoenas are fired off from Capitol Hill. Also only a matter of time is resistance...
    www.lawfareblog.com www.lawfareblog.com




    1570314088452.png


    Now, I'm not sure how often minority members have been denied. I was trying to find some information on that, so.. we will have to wait and see.
    Click to expand...
    Everything you cited just confirms what I've been saying. At the moment with no formal impeachment resolution having been voted on by the full House, only the chair or majority committee vote can issue a subpoena. The ranking member only has to be notified, and we know that since the committee is controlled by the majority party they're going to vote down any subpoena requests from the ranking member since it wouldn't support the outcome they're trying to achieve.
     
    realization i had listening to a podcast about the Johnson impeachment
    Trump won't be impeached Rs won't allow that
    once the tipping is reached, they will pull out the big guns and put all the pressure on him - 'you can go quietly or you can go to jail'

    and i assume they would signal to him through Fox, like if Fox & Friends starts off one day with 'troubling details about Trumps business dealings have come to light...' trump will know he's on the clock
     
    yuyi64 said:
    Everything you cited just confirms what I've been saying. At the moment with no formal impeachment resolution having been voted on by the full House, only the chair or majority committee vote can issue a subpoena. The ranking member only has to be notified, and we know that since the committee is controlled by the majority party they're going to vote down any subpoena requests from the ranking member since it wouldn't support the outcome they're trying to achieve.
    Click to expand...

    I think if nothing else the Democrats are just going to think back to Merrick Garland and say "why play the game the way it's supposed to be played?"
     
    yuyi64 said:
    Everything you cited just confirms what I've been saying. At the moment with no formal impeachment resolution having been voted on by the full House, only the chair or majority committee vote can issue a subpoena. The ranking member only has to be notified, and we know that since the committee is controlled by the majority party they're going to vote down any subpoena requests from the ranking member since it wouldn't support the outcome they're trying to achieve.
    Click to expand...
    I may have missed it, but I didn't recall you saying the committee as a whole (by majority vote) could issue a subpoena. Just that the chair could. So, I was adding that part.

    Now, the rest is your opinion on what the democrats in the majority would do. They might. Or they might allow the republicans to call others. I don't think they'd allow a lot of road blocks, but anyone who would actually flesh out the investigation, would hopefully be welcome. So, we don't know they'd block anything, you assume they will. That's fair enough, but it may not be accurate and it isn't inevitable.

    I think, deep down, most of those politicians want the truth and want any impeachment case against Trump to be iron clad. I don't think too many republicans are going to keep playing defensive when this all comes out. Rubio can't do much other than say "let's wait for all of the evidence". he's just buying time.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom