[link] House Democrats on Thursday passed a resolution outlining the next phase of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. The 232-196 vote passed nearly along party lines, with no... Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Quests. | Journs. | Gen. | News | Quiz | Links | TV | Music | Movies | Games | Sports | Sug. | Lit. | Jokes | Artcls. | Newb | O.S.
House approves rules for Trump impeachment probe to proceed

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next (showing 1-25 of 118)

Back to Thread List
Bottom Last Post

1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 11:47:08 AM EST (GMT-5)
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/31/hou...

House Democrats on Thursday passed a resolution outlining the next phase of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.

The 232-196 vote passed nearly along party lines, with no Republicans voting for the resolution. Two Democrats joined Republicans in voting against it. The lone Independent congressman, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, voted for the impeachment inquiry resolution.

The measure, which sketches out guidelines for public hearings in the inquiry and the president’s participation in the process, marks the first time lawmakers’ votes will be counted on matters related to the Trump impeachment process.

Trump blasted the impeachment inquiry just after the vote passed: “The Greatest Witch Hunt In American History!”

1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 11:55:21 AM EST (GMT-5)

1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 11:59:08 AM EST (GMT-5)
Not really a witch hunt. More like a lynch mob. Oops, can’t use the word lynch anymore. More like a “let’s get em” mob.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:00:21 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 11:59:08 AM Noldor wrote:
Not really a witch hunt. More like a lynch mob. Oops, can’t use the word lynch anymore. More like a “let’s get em” mob.


Exercising powers that are specifically enumerated in the Constitution is not "lynching." It's also not a witch hunt. It's literally how the checks and balances in our system are designed to function.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:03:10 PM EST (GMT-5)
So Democrats have not been wanting to impeach Trump since he took office? Ok yeah sure.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:07:05 PM EST (GMT-5)
When someone has been breaking the law ever since they were elected, it's appropriate to want to impeach them.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:12:10 PM EST (GMT-5)
Also, this is the resolution to approve rules for the public portion of the impeachment **inquiry**. By arguing against this, you're basically saying there shouldn't even be an investigation.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:16:13 PM EST (GMT-5)
I don’t mind the investigation. I do mind congressmen and congresswomen calling for impeachment before any investigation has even begun. And I’m sure those same people would for for impeachment regardless of whatever the investigation may or may not turn up.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:18:12 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:16:13 PM Noldor wrote:
I don’t mind the investigation. I do mind congressmen and congresswomen calling for impeachment before any investigation has even begun.


When you're literally witnessing the crimes and abuses of power being committed in real time, it's not that big a leap to make a call for impeachment before there's a formal investigation. Surely you must understand this; it's common sen...oh. Never mind.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:19:30 PM EST (GMT-5)
How about if he lied about receiving a blowjob....while under oath

ERMAHGERD! PERJURY! WE GOT HIM NOW!!!!11
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:22:41 PM EST (GMT-5)
I would’ve been surprised if he had not lied about that.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:31:48 PM EST (GMT-5)
Noldor certainly can’t effectively defend trump’s actions so he, like republican lawmakers, will whine about it being a mob.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:48:00 PM EST (GMT-5)
Considering his lawyer was sentenced to three years and he's an unindicted coconspirator, an investigation seems pretty logical even before the "perfect" phone call.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:50:18 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:16:13 PM Noldor wrote:
I don’t mind the investigation. I do mind congressmen and congresswomen calling for impeachment before any investigation has even begun.
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:18:12 PM birdsong4j wrote:
When you're literally witnessing the crimes and abuses of power being committed in real time, it's not that big a leap to make a call for impeachment before there's a formal investigation. Surely you must understand this; it's common sen...oh. Never mind.

What’s the point of having an investigation then? Just bypass the investigation and the vote and declare impeachment.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:51:09 PM EST (GMT-5)
Because there's lots of sht we don't know about?
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 12:57:47 PM EST (GMT-5)
Because republicans would whine about that too? And then you’d argue the lack of investigation invalidates the impeachment vote? Under what circumstances would you accept an impeachment vote noldor? You’re not arguing in good faith. You’d complain no matter what they do.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 1:17:02 PM EST (GMT-5)
Investigation is the opportunity to present evidence and question witnesses (for both sides). It's sort of the equivalent of a regular citizen receiving a trial with a jury of one's peers.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 1:24:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 1:17:02 PM postallbear wrote:
Investigation is the opportunity to present evidence and question witnesses (for both sides). It's sort of the equivalent of a regular citizen receiving a trial with a jury of one's peers.

No, what you’re describing is a trial. The idea that trump is owed AT ALL a part in an investigation is as stupid as arguing that a murder suspect should be able to help guide the murder investigation. But here we are and republicans have been crying about some sense of fairness that they know isnt the standard and they’d never offer up to democrats.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 2:06:53 PM EST (GMT-5)
If there exists evidence that he's not guilty, that should also be considered, no?
Not saying that trump should be allowed to cowdung the proceedings.
1 month ago - Thursday 10/31/19 - 2:48:56 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 2:06:53 PM postallbear wrote:
If there exists evidence that he's not guilty, that should also be considered, no? Not saying that trump should be allowed to cowdung the proceedings.

Yes the evidence of innocence should come forward. But what is more likely to happen now is that republicans are going to bring forward witnesses that have nothing to do with the inquiry, those witnesses will be declined, and then republicans will continue to whine about the process. It’s already been reported that Nunes wasted time questioning witnesses about Steele dossier conspiracy theories in the closed sessions. It’s likely they’ll continue the same shenanigans.
1 month ago - Friday 11/1/19 - 1:29:21 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Thursday 10/31/19 - 2:06:53 PM postallbear wrote:
If there exists evidence that he's not guilty, that should also be considered, no? Not saying that trump should be allowed to cowdung the proceedings.

Yes, in the trial phase. Which happens in the senate. The house phase (aka impeachment) is roughly equivalent to a grand jury proceeding, if we're making a criminal court analogy (which is both instructive and imperfect in ways).
26 days ago - Wednesday 11/13/19 - 11:00:32 AM EST (GMT-5)
The first public hearings have started.

The opening statement by the first witness (a career diplomat at the State Dept.) has done several things:

1. established that a president (or any other public official) asking a foreign government to investigate a political rival is improper
2. Made clear that we have plenty of mechanisms to investigate crimes or corruption that do NOT involve asking foreign governments to do it.
3. Categorically denied the Trump team's conspiracy about Joe Biden somehow bribing or demanding that Burisma not be investigated.

Republicans have tried to paint these two witnesses as Democrat plants who "passed the audition" in the closed-door hearings, and they've both pushed back on that idea in just their opening statements.
26 days ago - Wednesday 11/13/19 - 11:14:22 AM EST (GMT-5)
New info from Amb. Taylor in his opening statement. This is bad.


26 days ago - Wednesday 11/13/19 - 11:43:09 AM EST (GMT-5)
wItCh HuNt!!!1
26 days ago - Wednesday 11/13/19 - 12:45:00 PM EST (GMT-5)
Which hunt?

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next (showing 1-25 of 118)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Back to Thread List
Top

 
Edit