- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pentagon says unable to share documents with House impeachment request
Posted on 10/16/19 at 10:30 pm to bmy
Posted on 10/16/19 at 10:30 pm to bmy
Well, frickit. Let's just take a look at what the CURRENT U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES has to say about the impeachment process ON ITS OWN WEBSITE:
"The House's Role
The House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. Individual Members of the House can introduce impeachment resolutions like ordinary bills, or the House could initiate proceedings by passing a resolution authorizing an inquiry. The Committee on the Judiciary ordinarily has jurisdiction over impeachments, but special committees investigated charges before the Judiciary Committee was created in 1813. The committee then chooses whether to pursue articles of impeachment against the accused official and report them to the full House. If the articles are adopted (by simple majority vote), the House appoints Members by resolution to manage the ensuing Senate trial on its behalf. These managers act as prosecutors in the Senate and are usually members of the Judiciary Committee. The number of managers has varied across impeachment trials but has traditionally been an odd number. The partisan composition of managers has also varied depending on the nature of the impeachment, but the managers, by definition, always support the House’s impeachment action."
Any of that sounds like it's happened to you?
LINK
"The House's Role
The House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. Individual Members of the House can introduce impeachment resolutions like ordinary bills, or the House could initiate proceedings by passing a resolution authorizing an inquiry. The Committee on the Judiciary ordinarily has jurisdiction over impeachments, but special committees investigated charges before the Judiciary Committee was created in 1813. The committee then chooses whether to pursue articles of impeachment against the accused official and report them to the full House. If the articles are adopted (by simple majority vote), the House appoints Members by resolution to manage the ensuing Senate trial on its behalf. These managers act as prosecutors in the Senate and are usually members of the Judiciary Committee. The number of managers has varied across impeachment trials but has traditionally been an odd number. The partisan composition of managers has also varied depending on the nature of the impeachment, but the managers, by definition, always support the House’s impeachment action."
Any of that sounds like it's happened to you?
LINK
Posted on 10/16/19 at 10:53 pm to bmy
quote:
The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to the chair of the committee under such rules and under such limitations as the committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed by the chair of the committee or by a member designated by the committee. (ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on Ethics, a subpoena may be authorized and issued only by an affirmative vote of a majority of its members. (B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return other than at a meeting or hearing of the committee or subcommittee authorizing the subpoena. (C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as authorized or directed by the House.
you missed a critical part of your own quote that destroys whatever point you thought you made.
subpoenas from comittees/subcomittees only enforceable if authorized or directed by the HOUSE so for the 79835th time this most of this board has repeatedly corrected you, the house has not authorized nor directed formal impeachment proceedings.
sorry your side's hyper partisan secret investigation subpoenas from (sub)committees are UNENFORCEABLE without being legitimized by the house.
Posted on 10/16/19 at 10:57 pm to AMS
Remember when AOC thought she could just waltz in and start issuing subpoenas?
Yeah, good times...
Yeah, good times...
Posted on 10/17/19 at 5:41 am to bmy
quote:So, theoretically any President could just be under a constant House Impeachment probe? That doesn't seem like the standard that needs to be set.
She simply isn't required to do so by the constitution/rule/law and not doing voting on it has the added benefit of pushing Trump into appearing obstructive.
"The power of the Congress to conduct investigations is . . . broad. It encom-passes inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes. It includes surveys of defects in our social, economic or political system . . . . It comprehends probes .. .of the Federal Government to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste."107 (Watkins)
Posted on 10/17/19 at 7:17 am to bmy
quote:
bmy
Let me write it out for you in crayon:
Nancy Pelosi is not the House.
Adam Schiff is not the House.
The Democratic Party is not the House.
The House has yet to do anything. Guess what it takes for the House to do something?
And until the House does this thing, the Executive branch can tell Pelosi and crew to go frick themselves, and are legally entitled to do so.
This post was edited on 10/17/19 at 7:19 am
Posted on 10/17/19 at 7:21 am to Jbird
I’m sure if the Pentagon could, they would tell Congress to choke on a dick. This whole thing is a fricking shite show.
Popular
Back to top


0






