Here's a House Member who gets it.

[iguanaman]

Schiff's already tainted the whole investigation...this is a nothing burger

when IG report drops on Friday the narrative should change from defense to offense....lets see what those deep staters have been up too.

Always taking the hail mary pass I see. Putting your money on looney conspiracy theories is a terrible bet though.

 

[iguanaman]

Why do you hate arsonists trying to burn Country & Constitution to the ground?

LOL Projection is the word of the day.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Re: Here's a House Member who gets is.

Any minute now!!!!!!!!

Mueller, er, that is, Schiff, will lower the axe upon the Orange Hitler's Head!!!!!!!!

:donkeyfla

I suspect it will be at least another month. Not that I am basing it on anything, its just what my gut tells me. Even then it will go a lot faster than previous impeachment proceedings. :shrug:

 

[trixare4kids]

Always taking the hail mary pass I see. Putting your money on looney conspiracy theories is a terrible bet though.

This is mighty rich.

Putin, Putin, Putin

 

[iguanaman]

This is mighty rich.

Putin, Putin, Putin

Speak of the devil.....
Putin is on a victory lap of the Middle East - CNN

Tired of Putin winning yet?

 

[Parrish]

This is not oversight.
Oversight is showing transparency, and accountability to the American people, one day, one testimony at a time.
They, WE deserve more than reading leaks and Democratic cherry picks from the media. One day in the future, Adam Schiff will be shown to be on the wrong side of history.

If you truly mean what you say that Oversight is transparency then full disclosure, handing over documents, no executive privilege, complying with subpoenas and then public testimony is something we both can agree with.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

If you have the evidence you would go to the House to get an Inquiry vote. This would present the evidence of all criminal activities to all members of the house to get support from Republicans as well as voters. Not using the power of the house under these circumstances would either make you an idiot or show you actually don't have the evidence you claim you do. Kind of like what Schiff did when he claimed to have the evidence that would convict Trump of being a planted Russian agent and we all saw how that turned out.

Claiming Pelosi can do what she wants to do just makes matters worse because that isn't the point. Voters know better and hiding testimony and refusing to provide such UNCLASSIFIED testimony transcript to the public is for one reason only. Democrats couldn't wait to release the Mueller report but are refusing to release the witness transcripts? You will NEVER explain that away to voters.

Now coming off the most embarrassing 2 year Mueller investigation you want to have closed door sessions, kicking out Republican members, using anonymous witnesses, and we are all expected to just trust them to provide us with what they claim? Stop dreaming

For those who can''t see the obvious they are either mentally deficient or just hate Trump more than they care about the constitution which is usually the case. You would have to be an idiot to believe voters are going to fall for this but Democrats really don't care about the continuing failures of the last 2 years. They know they can't beat Trump in an election and they know they can't get an Impeachment vote so this is all they have left.

Holding secret hearings and using anonymous witnesses will never get an Impeachment. They know this but when you have run out of options, desperation is all you have.

First off, this is like the police walking into a home and finding someone dead. The police want to know more. They know they have a dead person, but that is all.

The democrats have a summary of a phone call that suggests someone is fiddling with our foreign allies, for what, is not precisely clear.

Now the WH is saying to the police "No, you don't get search the rest of the house for evidence. Now take your dead body and get out of here. If you can't prove how this guy died, that's your problem. We're not going to help you solve your stupid little mystery."

So, one by one, the House committees are questioning people who should know. If they get to the point, with or without the cooperation of the administration, that they are confident the president committed a crime or knowingly abused his authority, or tried to cover up evidence of any of this, they will present their case and the supporting evidence to the full House and a vote to impeach (or not) will take place.

At that point it will all be out in the open, all the relevant facts will be known. And Congress, both Houses, will get to decide what to do about it.

Sure, the president may not be guilty of anything, but his behavior suggests otherwise. I say let it play out.

 

[Parrish]

If nothing is amiss the WH and POTUS have nothing to worry about or hide. If I was falsely accused of a crime I'd have no problem allowing my friends or associates testifying in my defense. POTUS seems to be reacting like a guilty party.

 

[veritas1]

or you could put on the line about who will hold the House.

Republican retirements will make it difficult but Trump will have enormous coattails. Dems have no clue about what's coming in the presidential race.

 

[veritas1]

Trump supporters are already galvanized by ignorance and bigotry, they don't need facts. Besides, any fair minded independents have already seen enough to know that Trump is a criminal moron and the GOP are defending him.

Trump is ruling from a bubble of GOP shamelessness. There, he is insulated from the normal consequences of treason. I agree, though, that Trump will probably win in 2020. It's more of a testament to the truth being easily corrupted by the right, though, rather than a failure of the left to present it.

You don't know what treason is. Yes, Trump will roll in 2020. People have eyes and ears and they like peace and prosperity. Free stuff for illegal aliens, taking away their insurance and gun grabbing, not so much.

 

[rocket88]

You don't know what treason is. Yes, Trump will roll in 2020. People have eyes and ears and they like peace and prosperity. Free stuff for illegal aliens, taking away their insurance and gun grabbing, not so much.

Trump has done more for gun grabbing than Obama did. He banned the bumpstocks. When Obama even thought about something like that, you all lost your minds.

People have eyes and ears and i think they might want an adult as President. Not someone who has a temper tantrum when he doesn't get his way.

 

[veritas1]

It's political railroading to talk to his people in his administration? Such absurdity. :doh

When there is no evidence of impeachable offenses, yes. Trump has no obligation to help the Dems try to manufacture a crime.

 

[veritas1]

You seem to be prejudging the outcome of the investigation and the trial. Are you implying the GOP senate will never convict the president? No matter what evidence is presented? That says a lot more about the GOP then the DNC.

There is no compelling evidence of any impeachable offense. That phone call with Zelensky certainly isn't it. No, the Senate will never remove the POTUS on this flimsy political charge.

 

[akyron]

No democrat not on the committee tried to enter the meeting. They did not feel the need to play the victim.

Actually, Last time they were invited along with the President's lawyers in the interest of fairness, precedent, and institutional tradition. See...Men live and die. (people). It is the institutions that outlive people and enable the country to survive in a repeatable fair tradition. Best practices at its best.

"It is the intention of the Committee that its investigation
will be conducted in all respects on a fair, impartial and
bipartisan or nonpartisan basis. In this spirit, the power to
authorize subpoenas and other compulsory process is committed
by this resolution in the first instance to the Chairman and
the Ranking Minority Member acting jointly. If either declines
to act, the other may act alone, subject to the right of either
to refer the question to the Committee for decision prior to
issuance, and a meeting of the Committee will be convened
promptly to consider the question."

Both parties have equal subpoena power.

"On October 5, 1998, the Committee met in open session and
ordered reported the resolution printed herein by a vote of 21
to 16, a quorum being present.
Need for the Resolution
Because the issue of impeachment is of such overwhelming
importance, the Committee decided that it must receive
authorization from the full House before proceeding on any
further course of action. Because impeachment is delegated
solely to the House of Representatives by the Constitution, the
full House of Representatives should be involved in critical
decision making regarding various stages of impeachment. With
the passage of H. Res. 525, the full House has already directed
the release of the Referral from the Independent Counsel, set
the parameters for public release of other related materials,
and directed the Committee to review the Referral and
accompanying materials in order to make a recommendation to the
House.
Also, a resolution authorizing an impeachment inquiry into
the conduct of a president is consistent with past practice.
According to Hind's Precedents, the ``impeachment of President
Johnson was set in motion by a resolution authorizing a general
investigation as to the execution of the laws.'' When the first
attempt to impeach President Johnson failed, the House
``referred to the Committee on Reconstruction the evidence
taken by the Judiciary Committee in the first attempt to
impeach President Johnson.'' 3 Hind's Precedents, Sec. 2408.
The impeachment investigation of President Nixon was
explicitly authorized by the full House. During debate of H.
Res. 803 in 1974, Congressman Rodino, then chairman of the
Committee on the Judiciary, stated:

We have reached the point when it is important that
the House explicitly confirm our responsibility under
the Constitution.
We are asking the House * * * to authorize and direct
the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate the
conduct of the President of the United States * * *.

* * * * * * *

Such a resolution has always been passed by the
House. The Committee has voted unanimously to recommend
that the House of Representatives adopt this
resolution. It is a necessary step if we are to meet
our obligations * * *."

"the Committee adopted, by voice vote, a number of protections
for the President. The President and his counsel shall be
invited to attend all executive session and open committee
hearings. The President's counsel may cross examine witnesses.
The President's counsel may make objections regarding the
pertinency of evidence. The President's counsel shall be
invited to suggest that the Committee receive additional
evidence. Lastly, the President or the President's counsel
shall be invited to respond to the evidence adduced by the
Committee at an appropriate time. The provisions will ensure
that the impeachment inquiry is fair to the President."

INVESTIGATORY POWERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY WITH RESPECT TO ITS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY October 7, 1998

We have seen the desire to avoid legislative approval before. This may be why Nancy will not hold a vote legitimizing a literal "act of congress".

The act would legally endow Hitler with the power to create laws that did not require legislative approval

 

[veritas1]

Trump has done more for gun grabbing than Obama did. He banned the bumpstocks. When Obama even thought about something like that, you all lost your minds.

People have eyes and ears and i think they might want an adult as President. Not someone who has a temper tantrum when he doesn't get his way.

Bumpstocks? Really? How many people do you think own bumpstocks? .005% of gun owners? What we want are adults in Congress who actually govern rather than spend 100% of their time whining about the POTUS and trying to figure out how to overturn the last election.

 

[Mach]

Bumpstocks? Really? How many people do you think own bumpstocks? .005% of gun owners? What we want are adults in Congress who actually govern rather than spend 100% of their time whining about the POTUS and trying to figure out how to overturn the last election.

Democrats have a metric-ton of legislation in the Senate's queue including an anti-corruption bill, and Trump's desire...universal background checks that ideally effect 100% of gun purchases.

Mitch doesn't even bring such things to a vote. did you mean you wanted Mitch to vote and work through them, negotiate, etc? Or to stop government, as you claim to oppose above?

Democrats in Congress are passing lots of bills. Republicans are ignoring them. - Vox

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Yawn.

Under wepubwicans, the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which interviewed 103 witnesses, had 102 d closed doors.

The chair of that committee, Trey Gowdy, says public hearings are "utterly useless." Oh, and that 103rd interview?

What are you whining about again?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Bumpstocks? Really? How many people do you think own bumpstocks? .005% of gun owners? What we want are adults in Congress who actually govern rather than spend 100% of their time whining about the POTUS and trying to figure out how to overturn the last election.

Your lord and god, twump, also wants to confiscate guns and only THEN have due process.

And yet you still supplicate and genuflect worshipfully at his feet.

Fun!

 

[veritas1]

Democrats have a metric-ton of legislation in the Senate's queue including an antic-corruption bill, and Trump's desire...universal background checks that ideally effect 100% of gun purchases.

Mitch doesn't even bring such things to a vote. did you mean you wanted Mitch to vote and work through them, negotiate, etc? Or to stop government, as you claim to oppose above?

Democrats in Congress are passing lots of bills. Republicans are ignoring them. - Vox

I'm fine with bringing stuff to a vote. However, I don't recall Democrats complaining about Harry Reid and the failure to pass a budget for 3 years while the government ran on CR's so Obama could keep his pet projects funded.

 

[Marine Electric]

He gets nothing, he's crying like an ignorant fool, hoping other ignorant fools will buy into his crying.
This is all you have to defend Trump and Rudy's corruption? Crying about non-issues? Doesn't that shame you a bit Trix?

The investigation is ongoing. When the evidence is collected, it will be presented to the members so they can determine how they will vote.

Once it passes the House, it will go to the Senate, where Trump and his corrupt cronies can mount a defense, that will be mostly attacking everyone and everything else, other than refuting the facts.
The impeachment articles will in contrast, be about facts and testimony, will be corroborated, and damning.

To make matters worse, once Trump immediately attacked the whistle-blower, the people who confided in the whistle-blower, etc., with threats of being treated like spies, making remarks about the death penalty, they are now taking more precautions in keeping them out of the public spotlight. Trump has threatened witnesses, and they are being protected from you and the president for as long as they can. They won't even call the whistle-blower directly now...since they are not needed, and because of Trump threatening citizens who are doing good for the nation under law.

^^This^^^:thumbs:

This thread is yet another example of the dumb and gullible among us, who don't understand how the most basic processes work, being tricked by the radical right-wing media and instinctively jumping on board The Stupid Train to defend a common criminal/idiot.

You.can't.make.this.****.up.


:doh

 

[veritas1]

Your lord and god, twump, also wants to confiscate guns and only THEN have due process.

And yet you still supplicate and genuflect worshipfully at his feet.

Fun!

The only people who have enacted such a thing are the fools running the PRCA.

 

[What if...?]

Why does a House representative need to be on a "proper committee" to see the transcripts?
Why all the secrecy? Why are we only getting what the Democrats want us to see?

Security clearances?

That would be my guess.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

The only people who have enacted such a thing are the fools running the PRCA.

Lulz at you pathologically denying the reality of what your god actually said.

 

[veritas1]

Lulz at you pathologically denying the reality of what your god actually said.

Said? People can say anything. Let me know when he signs a law allowing for guns to be confiscated from law abiding owners on flimsy pretexts.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Said? People can say anything. Let me know when he signs a law allowing for guns to be confiscated from law abiding owners on flimsy pretexts.

Whew! It's good to see you recognizing the reality that Obama confiscated all of our guns and that's why we're all posting from UN/FEMA concentration camps.