Boring in here tonight!

[Old Man Jingles]

9 things everyone should know about the impeachment process

Or you could simply read the article, it’s just a list of facts about Impeachment.

I don’t generally post BS.

raspberry

Agree with that.

OK ... I read it.
It makes assumptions favorable to DemWits but it is basically describes the process without getting into details.

 

[El Correcto]

OK ... I read it.
It makes assumptions favorable to DemWits but it is basically describes the process without getting into details.

Welcome to vox.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Welcome to vox.

I was already aware of VOX ... freaking liars on most things.
They make all kind of st up even when it's not needed.

 

[BrownArmy]

OK ... I read it.
It makes assumptions favorable to DemWits but it is basically describes the process without getting into details.

Feel free to post a link to an article that makes assumptions favorable to Republicons but that basically describes the Impeachment process.

 

[BrownArmy]

Welcome to vox.

Lulz, I only posted the article because it was the first one I found that agreed with your point that the 'Impeachment Inquiry' was a real stage.

Here's the actual language from the Constitution, Article II, Section 4:

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

(Yup, that's it).

 

[El Correcto]

Lulz, I only posted the article because it was the first one I found that agreed with your point that the 'Impeachment Inquiry' was a real stage.

Here's the actual language from the Constitution, Article II, Section 4:

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

(Yup, that's it).

I skimmed it, they didn’t provide any context to how impeachment inquiries begin and how democrats glossed over the vote that took place in the last two to begin the inquiries. They need to bring up a H.Res clearly stating their intention to start impeachment inquiries, I guess they don’t have to, but that’s how it’s been done in the past. It started as a simple resolution in the house.

 

[BrownArmy]

I skimmed it, they didn’t provide any context to how impeachment inquiries begin and how democrats glossed over the vote that took place in the last two to begin the inquiries. They need to bring up a H.Res clearly stating their intention to start impeachment inquiries, I guess they don’t have to, but that’s how it’s been done in the past. It started as a simple resolution in the house.

I think that’s correct, they need a full vote in the House to start Impeachment before it gets real.

Now it’s only sorta-real.

And after that, they would need to vote on various Articles of Impeachment.

Unless something drastic happens, the Senate isn’t going to vote for Impeachment, soooo I don’t know.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Thank You Lord ... the weekend is here!
No More Boredom!
Ok folks ... let's get down to some major league TROLLING!!!

 

[Old Man Jingles]

OK boys.
Sounds like y'all are in violent agreement!

I think we can all agree that ‘Impeachment Inquiry’ is not real until the House takes an actual vote.

Looks like I was right after all!
No ‘Impeachment Inquiry’ until the House takes an actual vote.

 

[newfie]

Impeachment in the United States - Wikipedia


"When the Supreme Court has considered similar issues, it held that the power to secure "needed information ... has long been treated as an attribute of the power to legislate. ... [The power to investigate is deeply rooted in the nation's history:] It was so regarded in the British Parliament and in the colonial Legislatures before the American Revolution, and a like view has prevailed and been carried into effect in both houses of Congress and in most of the state Legislatures." McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 161 (1927). The Supreme Court also held, "There can be no doubt as to the power of Congress, by itself or through its committees, to investigate matters and conditions relating to contemplated legislation." Quinn v. United States, 349 U.S. 155, 160 (1955).

The Supreme Court has also explained that Congress has not only the power, but the duty, to investigate so it can inform the public of the operations of government:

It is the proper duty of a representative body to look diligently into every affair of government and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the voice, and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. Unless Congress have and use every means of acquainting itself with the acts and the disposition of the administrative agents of the government, the country must be helpless to learn how it is being served; and unless Congress both scrutinize these things and sift them by every form of discussion, the country must remain in embarrassing, crippling ignorance of the very affairs which it is most important that it should understand and direct. The informing function of Congress should be preferred even to its legislative function.[23]"

Why do you fear Congress doing their duty by investigating the Executive branch?
Too much power has been ceded to the Executive branch, not just with Trump but with others as well ( yes Obama too).
Its time as a country to curb some of that power.
Thanks for the excuse Trump

that's good that you're reading and educating yourself in your later years.

now read article 2 section 3 of the constitution and tell me why our president is expected to look the other way when the bidens have a clear display of pay for play.

Then tell me why pelosi wont take a formal vote to start the impeachment process which would give the republicans the right to subpoena witnesses and actually make the entire process fair.

if any of these issues confuse you then keep reading

 

[Old Man Jingles]

that's good that you're reading and educating yourself in your later years.

now read article 2 section 3 of the constitution and tell me why our president is expected to look the other way when the bidens have a clear display of pay for play.

Then tell me why pelosi wont take a formal vote to start the impeachment process which would give the republicans the right to subpoena witnesses and actually make the entire process fair.

if any of these issues confuse you then keep reading

Shhhhiiioooot ... everything confuses him!

 

[newfie]

I don’t think the house has to vote to do it.

It’s just a formal thing, something that has been done in the past. Not an actual law. I think.

its more then a formality . it gives the congress specific powers and the republicans specific powers to call witnesses .

it also forces congress to define exactly what they are investigating. Today you had three different committees try to issue subpoenas. What violations are they specifcially investigating the vote forces the majority power to define their investigation .

this is still a fishing expedition

 

[Old Man Jingles]

its more then a formality . it gives the congress specific powers and the republicans specific powers to call witnesses .

it also forces congress to define exactly what they are investigating. Today you had three different committees try to issue subpoenas. What violations are they specifcially investigating the vote forces the majority power to define their investigation .

this is still a fishing expedition

It's amazing three different committees can trip over each other's short assed peckers or as we call them in the South ... Schiffs!

 

[ajblakejr]

And I logged in because I was bored.

 

[newfie]

It's amazing three different committees can trip over each other's short assed peckers or as we call them in the South ... Schiffs!

I think they can only trip over one pecker the other two committee heads were white and would not reach

 

[newfie]

And I logged in because I was bored.

youza !!

 

[newfie]

And I logged in because I was bored.

how you doing?

 

[ajblakejr]

Bored.

watching tv and confused and bored

However, I just determined that Subaru has the best commercials and I want a golden retriever that can drive.

how are you doing?

 

[Old Man Jingles]

And I logged in because I was bored.

Hi AJ!!!!

 

[ajblakejr]

Hi AJ!!!!

Not high or do you mean hi as in a greeting between two nongender specific humans.

High not legal in Wisconsin and I am subject to Department of Transportation randon testing.

I will just say, “Yo!”