Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: House to vote on resolution laying out next steps in impeachment inquiry

  1. #1

    House to vote on resolution laying out next steps in impeachment inquiry

    House to vote on resolution laying out next steps in impeachment inquiry

    This comes as pressure grows on Democrats to conduct the inquiry with a more open process, including holding public hearings with key witnesses in the Ukraine case.

    Oct. 28, 2019, 4:21 PM EDT/Updated Oct. 28, 2019, 4:58 PM EDT

    By Alex Moe and Rebecca Shabad

    WASHINGTON — The House is expected to vote Thursday on a Democratic resolution that will lay out the next steps in the impeachment inquiry, according to a senior congressional source.

    The language of the resolution has not been released, but it is expected to detail procedures going forward in the investigation, not formalize it.

    “This resolution establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the American people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the Judiciary Committee as it considers potential articles of impeachment, and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a letter to her caucus Monday.

    “We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives.”

    The move comes as pressure grows on Democrats to make the inquiry more open, including holding public hearings with key witnesses in the Ukraine case. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., has said that Democrats eventually plan to question witnesses in public sessions.

    Republicans have been calling on House Democrats to hold a floor vote to formalize the impeachment inquiry so that Republicans can be given subpoena power, but Pelosi has decided against such a vote. Trump administration officials also have called for such a House vote authorizing the inquiry, because they have said the current investigation is invalid and have refused to cooperate.

    “We won’t be able to comment fully until we see the actual text, but Speaker Pelosi is finally admitting what the rest of America already knew — that Democrats were conducting an unauthorized impeachment proceeding, refusing to give the President due process, and their secret, shady, closed door depositions are completely and irreversibly illegitimate,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

    GOP lawmakers have also complained about the process being conducted behind closed doors, but Democrats argue there is precedent stemming from the Nixon and Clinton impeachment proceedings for holding the initial investigation behind closed doors.

    House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., tweeted Monday that his caucus would not "legitimize the Schiff/Pelosi sham impeachment."

    Pelosi said in her letter Monday that Democrats "will bring a resolution to the Floor that affirms the ongoing, existing investigation that is currently being conducted by our committees as part of this impeachment inquiry, including all requests for documents, subpoenas for records and testimony, and any other investigative steps previously taken or to be taken as part of this investigation.”

    The House Rules Committee on Monday announced that its members will meet Wednesday afternoon, in advance of the Thursday vote, to consider the resolution. A description of the proposal on the committee's website said the measure would direct "certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America.”

    So far, nine witnesses have provided more than 70 hours of closed-door testimony, according to a tally by NBC News.

    The Democrats' move comes after former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman refused to appear for a scheduled deposition Monday morning before the three House congressional committees leading the impeachment inquiry.

    The White House had been trying to block his appearance, and Kupperman, who worked under former national security adviser John Bolton, filed a lawsuit Friday asking a federal judge to rule on whether he must testify under a congressional subpoena.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...quiry-n1073006

  2. #2
    It'll be interesting to see if all the repugs in the house will back Trump here.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    It'll be interesting to see if all the repugs in the house will back Trump here.

    They will

  4. #4
    Why don't the Dem's get a candidate and a platform to defeat Trump ? Why do they waste their time on this BS ? If they're so righteous then take it to the people and vote. Or are we going to have to listen t this and the Rusiagate nothing burger for another 4 years ?

  5. #5
    I found Dershowitz' commentary on this impeachment inquiry enlightening. He said that there are political sins, crimes and high crimes. Asking the Ukrainian President for a political favor amounts to nothing more than a political sin. A sin in which voters can deal with Trump next year.

    Encouraging the people who didn't vote for Trump that impeachment is a viable and acceptable route is a very big political sin by the House Dems. A political sin with long-lasting ramifications for future relations between the President and the House as well as the political parties.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    28,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Sleazy View Post
    Why don't the Dem's get a candidate and a platform to defeat Trump ? Why do they waste their time on this BS ? If they're so righteous then take it to the people and vote. Or are we going to have to listen t this and the Rusiagate nothing burger for another 4 years ?
    If somebody has done something wrong, then they need to be held accountable. It is a tenet of our western justice system.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp View Post
    I found Dershowitz' commentary on this impeachment inquiry enlightening. He said that there are political sins, crimes and high crimes. Asking the Ukrainian President for a political favor amounts to nothing more than a political sin. A sin in which voters can deal with Trump next year.

    Encouraging the people who didn't vote for Trump that impeachment is a viable and acceptable route is a very big political sin by the House Dems. A political sin with long-lasting ramifications for future relations between the President and the House as well as the political parties.
    Dershowitz is an apartheid supporter and admitted to receiving massages at Epstein's mansion.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp View Post
    I found Dershowitz' commentary on this impeachment inquiry enlightening. He said that there are political sins, crimes and high crimes. Asking the Ukrainian President for a political favor amounts to nothing more than a political sin. A sin in which voters can deal with Trump next year.

    Encouraging the people who didn't vote for Trump that impeachment is a viable and acceptable route is a very big political sin by the House Dems. A political sin with long-lasting ramifications for future relations between the President and the House as well as the political parties.
    What a load of shit.

    What Dershoshitz fails to mention is that that little bitty political sin of just meekly asking for a wee bit of a personal fav is that Trump's quid, asking for Zelensky to fabricate dirt on Trump's main political rival for the 2020 election, was tied to Trump's quo, of releasing the unlawfully withheld Congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine which is facing an existential threat to it's existence from Trump's favorite ally, Putin's Russia.

    You really should stop the bullshit as I know you much smarter than that.

    Encouraging people that engaging in such an abuse of power, the corruption of the office of the POTUS and now the ongoing obstruction of the Constitutionally recognized Congressional powers of oversight and impeachment is now the new normal will only damage democracy for decades to come.

    This is the new normal that you support.
    I'm a bitter house**** baby....so why don't you **** me.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Anbarandy View Post
    What Dershoshitz fails to mention is that that little bitty political sin of just meekly asking for a wee bit of a personal fav is that Trump's quid, asking for Zelensky to fabricate dirt on Trump's main political rival for the 2020 election, was tied to Trump's quo, of releasing the unlawfully withheld Congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine which is facing an existential threat to it's existence from Trump's favorite ally, Putin's Russia.
    The House Dems will get there chance to make their case without all the silly rhetoric we hear now. Or at least they should have to make their public case. They might just hold a vote based on the current theatrics.

    Fabricate dirt? Okay, I'd like to see them prove that.
    Delaying military aid? Evidence that the weaponry was held up for a long time until dirt was provided. That'd be nice to see. Should be straightforward if true.
    Quid pro quo? Do we only have the hearsay of disenchanted, biased govt. employees against the word of other govt. employees. We do have the tape. Yeah, the tape. The tape is inconclusive on the matter of quid pro quo.

    From what I understand, the Trump Administration reversed Obama policy and started giving the Ukrainians more potent weapons to defend themselves. You're kind of doing what I see routinely on these political forums. Using only convenient history or just ignoring history completely to make a political point.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlemagne View Post
    Dershowitz is an apartheid supporter and admitted to receiving massages at Epstein's mansion.
    And he is a brilliant constitutional law scholar.

    You can conflate apartheid with Israel's Palestinian policies, but that's just a rhetorical device to dismiss Israel's policies without fair and sensible discussion. With your logic, any political figure or commentator who supports Israel should have their views dismissed out of hand.

  11. #11
    ...but, but, but, last week the vote was not needed nor required- all the "experts" said. I'm really confused, now. ROFLMAO!!!!
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp View Post
    And he is a brilliant constitutional law scholar.

    You can conflate apartheid with Israel's Palestinian policies, but that's just a rhetorical device to dismiss Israel's policies without fair and sensible discussion. With your logic, any political figure or commentator who supports Israel should have their views dismissed out of hand.
    And your statement is nothing but nonsensical right-wing rhetoric. Nothing factual at all.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp View Post
    The House Dems will get there chance to make their case without all the silly rhetoric we hear now. Or at least they should have to make their public case. They might just hold a vote based on the current theatrics.

    Fabricate dirt? Okay, I'd like to see them prove that.
    Delaying military aid? Evidence that the weaponry was held up for a long time until dirt was provided. That'd be nice to see. Should be straightforward if true.
    Quid pro quo? Do we only have the hearsay of disenchanted, biased govt. employees against the word of other govt. employees. We do have the tape. Yeah, the tape. The tape is inconclusive on the matter of quid pro quo.

    From what I understand, the Trump Administration reversed Obama policy and started giving the Ukrainians more potent weapons to defend themselves. You're kind of doing what I see routinely on these political forums. Using only convenient history or just ignoring history completely to make a political point.
    The only "silly rhetoric" we have seen thus far is the Trump and His Republican Theater of the Absurd:

    1) Attacking the Whistle Blower's credibility only to find out that the Whistler Blower's complaint has been verified by multiple witnesses and evidence. Now they are trying to unmask him/her which is contrary to the Whistle Blower Statute.

    2) Attacking every witness as a deep state, unpatriotic, never-Trumper loser only to find out that each witness who gave testimony and evidence that has not been favorable to Trump has proven to be credible and compelling.

    3) Attacking the process thus far, which is both constitutional and in accordance with a standard investigatory inquiry phase, instead of the evidence only provides ammunition that they have no credible defence for Trump's actions. And now with a full house vote Thursday to transfer the inquiry to the Judiciary Committee as 'open inquiry' with equal Rep. and Dem. representation, rules and regulations as the Republicans have been screeching about and the WH lawyers calling for, there is no reason now for the WH NOT to come clean and provide witnesses and documents that they have unconstitutionally withheld this far.

    My God, what a great opportunity for the Reps and the WH to provide evidence exonerating Trump. I'm sure they have a bunch of documents and witnesses that they would love to present to the American people detailing Trump's innocence in this matter. Trump should call on Rudy Guiliani and his 4 Russian/Ukrainian plumbers, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Mick Mulvaney, Gordon Sondland again, Rick Perry, NSC lawyer Eisenberg and all the others who can prove with testimony and documents Trump's 'perfect phone call' and 'perfect blackmail plan'.

    4) The Repugnanticans lines of defence have been breached. The Whitstle Blower, the witnesses and their evidence have been credible thus proving their attacks to be nothing but a sham. The process argument is revealed to be nothing but a theatrical dry ice cloud of bullshit.

    5) Hearsay, second hand, third hand hearsay. Well we now have our first "on the call" witness who has provided 1st hand evidence of the 'perfect' phone call and guess what? It was anything but perfect. So imperfect that it prompted him to twice alert his superiors to the "quid pro quo" going on.

    6) The bipartisan Congressionally approved military aid was held up by Trump from July, I believe maybe predating July, to Sept 11. There were many inquiries made by Congress as to what the fuck was going on. Trump only released the funding after he received a phone call from Republican Ron Johnson to "give em the fuckin aid" and when he was informed about the Whistle Blower complaint before it became public.

    The Republicans during this impeachment process have engaged in behavior equivalent to a fuckin Clown Show and you can expect more of the same behavior and worse as the inevitable march to impeaching this disgrace of President gets hotter.

    I could go on and on, but I am sure you are not too deluded to continue to drink the kool-aid you are being fed, but then again, maybe you are too far gone.
    I'm a bitter house**** baby....so why don't you **** me.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    28,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Anbarandy View Post

    I could go on and on, but I am sure you are not too deluded to continue to drink the kool-aid you are being fed, but then again, maybe you are too far gone.
    trump devotee syndrome (TDS) is usually terminal (to one's ability to recognize reality).

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    ...but, but, but, last week the vote was not needed nor required- all the "experts" said. I'm really confused, now. ROFLMAO!!!!
    See, Pelosi puts out a vote to please Trump and you get all upset.
    Of course you're confused, without being able to complain about process you'll have to address the actual complaints.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •