About time as Pelosi will hold a vote this week on impeachment

originally posted by: 727Sky
Evidently Pelosi thinks she has the votes or both her and Adam are getting so much blow back that it is time to hold a vote for the impeachment of POTUS. Maybe after all their closed door witness testimony they realize they have a nothing burger like all the other accusations they have made ?

Either way it is my understanding even if the Democrat's vote for impeachment the senate will block the resolution. So once again all this is much to do about nothing other than another fake smear campaign.
youtu.be...

Nah... not a vote on "impeachment", it's another layer of theatrics. They are trying to cement another layer onto the narrative, that will include exposing the public to a more visible dialog. They need to sway more of the public towards wanting impeachment.

They are terrified of the interest in the SpyGate probe, and want to suck some of that air out of the room.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So just to get my facts straight here..

So hunter Biden getting a job, in an industry in which he has no experience, making millions a year, whiles his father is veep, there's nothing off about that?

I believe they are saying that his father used the power of his office to get hunter said job. And convinced the Obama administration to withhold aid until the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired. All of that would fall under abuse of power, yes?

Now trump asks another world leader about the investigation into what went down, a country in which we have a treaty mind you. So I ask you, where's the crime? If this had been any other person this all would be a non issue, and being as there is not democratic nomination yet, and things don't even look that well for Biden, so what standard would make someone a political opponent?

Like I said, just trying to get my head straight here, not claiming to be an expert on this.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

i dont think they (the house /senate) can be impeached its called censure and expulsion

Here is the list of people who have been impeached so far by Congress...

List of Individuals Impeached by the House of Representatives

You will notice that the first person impeached by the US House was a Senator.

The Constitution gives the House of Representatives “the sole Power of Impeachment” (Article I, Section 2) of federal officers and gives the Senate “the sole Power to try all Impeachments” (Article I, Section 3). In the constitutional procedure of impeachment and removal, the House serves in the role of a grand jury bringing charges against an officer suspected of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Article II, Section 4).

Federal Impeachment proceedings are for any Federal Officer.

Which is why you will also notice on that list a Secretary of War and quite a few Judges.

I had just wondered how much the poster knew about the actual Impeachment process.

a reply to: Oppositeoftruth

I'm wondering why Biden's son worked for a fossil fuel company when climate change is such an "existential threat" to mankind.

Charges dismissed for want of jurisdiction; Blount had been expelled from the U.S. Senate before his trial.

Luminari's link above.

Which raises the question, can U.S. senators and representatives be impeached? Generally speaking, no. The Senate Historical Office says the legality is "ambiguous," and in practice, it doesn’t happen. The one and only time the Senate had the chance to affirm that a member of Congress can be impeached, it took a pass.

Source

originally posted by: Oppositeoftruth
a reply to: Gryphon66

So just to get my facts straight here..

So hunter Biden getting a job, in an industry in which he has no experience, making millions a year, whiles his father is veep, there's nothing off about that?

I believe they are saying that his father used the power of his office to get hunter said job. And convinced the Obama administration to withhold aid until the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired. All of that would fall under abuse of power, yes?

Now trump asks another world leader about the investigation into what went down, a country in which we have a treaty mind you. So I ask you, where's the crime? If this had been any other person this all would be a non issue, and being as there is not democratic nomination yet, and things don't even look that well for Biden, so what standard would make someone a political opponent?

Like I said, just trying to get my head straight here, not claiming to be an expert on this.

Biden is the tip or the ice berg. Again I post the link. 7 billion or so missing USA tax dollars. Where's the crime. Where's the intelligence is what I'm asking for. www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Gryphon66

Republicans attempted a partisan impeachment inquiry behind closed doors, relying on cherry picked leaks to move the public opinion needle in hopes of getting enough votes for an actual inquiry, much less a vote on articles?

I guess I missed that.

I wish I had been paying attention to your posts during the RUSSIA! "investigation". No doubt some comedy gold in there.

originally posted by: elDooberino
a reply to: Gryphon66

Republicans attempted a partisan impeachment inquiry behind closed doors, relying on cherry picked leaks to move the public opinion needle in hopes of getting enough votes for an actual inquiry, much less a vote on articles?

I guess I missed that.

I wish I had been paying attention to your posts during the RUSSIA! "investigation". No doubt some comedy gold in there.

All my posts are still here; knock yourself out.

Funny thing about impeachment ... it's the sole power of the House. That means when the Rules of the House are followed, and the matter at hand is legitimate business of the House, then after 2015 when the Republicans changed the Rules of the House to empower Committee Chairs to issue subpoenas on their own, and hold "secret" meetings ... yes, the current circumstances that so many are wailing and gnashing teeth over are the DIRECT RESULT of Republican partisan nonsense.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: xuenchen
Wild unFounded rumors swirling around that Pelosi will be announcing a "suspension" of proceedings for an indefinite amount of time until further notice !! 😧

Where are those rumors swirling Xuenchen?

Can you direct us to those?

Hahahaha
Looks like pelosi needs a vote
Ahahahaha

Pathetic

a reply to: DBCowboy

Very pertinent, and I'm genuinely shocked that the very far left cabal, the aocs and Omar's haven't called him out on it. I mean you heard aoc, we have very limited time before we all die, how in good conscience can she defend such a family?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Another good question.. But rest assured, where ever it is, the Obama administration made sure it was for the best, for us of course. They know what we need..
just move along..

This is what we were told the dems didnt have to do..........
Ahahahaha
Nancy says they do

Ahahahahahaha

a reply to: Gryphon66

Talk about not holding water.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

I haven't finished that whole video yet, but if the first twenty minutes is true, that's a lot of skeletons in the dnc closet. I feel like taking a vote, if it gets confirmed, is suicide for them, if that closet door is opened, there's no closing it again. But I'd really love to see those skeletons. I'd love for someone to explain to me how Pelosi, making 250k a year is a multi millionaire.

originally posted by: darkbake
Actually, the plan the whole time has been to do closed-door depositions first, and then, after gathering preliminary information, hold the impeachment vote and do public proceedings. Nothing changed because of Republican pressure. Things are going exactly as planned. Yes, she has the votes, I've already researched that. So...

I think you are right!

It went as planned with the collusion and obstruction. Did they vote on that one yet?

a reply to: Gryphon66

A committee chair can issue a subpoena but does that subpoena trump executive privilege without the weight of a committee or entire house vote behind it?

Kupperman was about to find out. Did Nancy prefer to avoid the embarrassment of a judge possibly ruling in the executive branch's favor?
Maybe, after a week or so of cherry picked leaks, she was finally able to move the needle just enough to talk her vulnerable members into voting in favor of an official inquiry? The same vote she claims she doesn't need, mind you. Why put those members on record before voting on articles if she doesn't need to?
It's possible internal numbers are showing her that attempting to throw a president out of office with zero transparency in the process (regardless of who changed the committee rules) isn't quite as popular among normal folks (right AND left) as it is among their media propaganda agents and partisan fan boys.

And no, this wasn't the plan. They were going to continue with the sham process and then put articles up for a vote.

Something changed her calculus and I highly doubt it's because she just wants to be fair.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you serious Obama and the hot mic is only one example . The former administrations have always asked other governments for help .

a reply to: Gryphon66

Maybe there are other things that require their attention

a reply to: ABNARTY

Amen to that

She just wants to get this over and done with because it's hurting the party. The only reason they went down this road was to appease the rabid base. She knows this is pointless. She's trying to straddle a line between making the extremists happy and not alienating moderates and Independents. I think she miscalculated.