The official Impeachment thread.

Jul 2019
4,989
2,544
Georgia
trump's counsel wrote a letter to Congress, stating why he won't cooperate

I've read to page 3 and it's utter horseshit. They're saying the House is going about it in an unprecedented manner (by not holding a vote to launch inquiry), when their sample size is 3. And they know it's not required by law. It's rather ironic since trump's whole presidency is based on him doing unprecedented things.

I think they'd rather rack up obstruction charges than the truth of what he actually did to be revealed. That speaks volumes.

Link to letter:

 
  • Like
Reactions: leekohler2
Sep 2019
695
194
NYC
trump's counsel wrote a letter to Congress, stating why he won't cooperate

I've read to page 3 and it's utter horseshit. They're saying the House is going about it in an unprecedented manner (by not holding a vote to launch inquiry), when their sample size is 3. And they know it's not required by law. It's rather ironic since trump's whole presidency is based on him doing unprecedented things.

I think they'd rather rack up obstruction charges than the truth of what he actually did to be revealed. That speaks volumes.

Link to letter:



every other impeachment in the history of this country there was a vote for the "inquiry". The reason the democrats do not want the vote is it launches powers to the whole house including the republicans to subpoena witnesses.

The democrats do not want a fair investigation.
 
Jul 2019
4,989
2,544
Georgia
every other impeachment in the history of this country there was a vote for the "inquiry". The reason the democrats do not want the vote is it launches powers to the whole house including the republicans to subpoena witnesses.

The democrats do not want a fair investigation.
you ever find that constitutional mandate that requires House vote to launch formal inquiry?

I've been waiting a while.
 
Sep 2019
695
194
NYC
you ever find that constitutional mandate that requires House vote to launch formal inquiry?

I've been waiting a while.


Right after you show me where I stated one is required.


My point is, is historically there was one, and in this most important thing, why exclude the republicans by going against historical tradition?


Don't you think this just makes the whole thing look ridiculously partisan? Do you think the impeachment will be seen as legitimate if they change rules, hide "accusors" refuse to let the republicans participate, etc?

Or do you think a one party impeachment where they refused the grant trump the right to counsel and a fair defense, exclude democratically elected republicans from participating will look like anything other than a partisan witch hunt?


What happens when the republicans seek revenge on the next dem potus? will you still be cavalier about a house excluding the other party from investigations and participation.
 
Jul 2019
4,989
2,544
Georgia
Right after you show me where I stated one is required.
okay, sure

right, but the vote is required to make the inquiry official. Until then anyone can tell the house to go pound sand.

don’t believe me, see if you can find any official subpeona, that has legal consequences for not showing...
and

Don't you think this just makes the whole thing look ridiculously partisan? Do you think the impeachment will be seen as legitimate if they change rules, hide "accusors" refuse to let the republicans participate, etc?

Or do you think a one party impeachment where they refused the grant trump the right to counsel and a fair defense, exclude democratically elected republicans from participating will look like anything other than a partisan witch hunt?


What happens when the republicans seek revenge on the next dem potus? will you still be cavalier about a house excluding the other party from investigations and participation.
nope.

right now it's an inquiry. also known as an "investigation"

6 committees, all with minority Republican members. even if a vote were held, anyone Republicans wanted to subpoena, it would have to pass majority Dem committees anyway. if articles are drawn, and pass the house, then it goes to the Senate for trial. That's where he will be able to defend himself. Also the Senate is majority Republican, so if the Republicans are still defending him, they will do so there as well.

if someone is being investigated, say by the police (inquiry), they don't get to defend themselves until charges are pressed (articles), and trial occurs.

 
Sep 2019
695
194
NYC
okay, sure



and



nope.

right now it's an inquiry. also known as an "investigation"

6 committees, all with minority Republican members. even if a vote were held, anyone Republicans wanted to subpoena, it would have to pass majority Dem committees anyway. if articles are drawn, and pass the house, then it goes to the Senate for trial. That's where he will be able to defend himself. Also the Senate is majority Republican, so if the Republicans are still defending him, they will do so there as well.

if someone is being investigated, say by the police (inquiry), they don't get to defend themselves until charges are pressed (articles), and trial occurs.




So no proof I claimed it was a constitutional requirement.


Concession accepted.



Your tribe is shooting themselves in the foot, and when an impeached trump wins re-election, remember, it's your fault./
 
Jul 2019
4,989
2,544
Georgia
So no proof I claimed it was a constitutional requirement.


Concession accepted.



Your tribe is shooting themselves in the foot, and when an impeached trump wins re-election, remember, it's your fault./
I take solace in your round-about admission you were wrong about a vote being required. You don't have to outwardly admit it for me to know.

Hopefully you won't be like the other trumpers, and go back to repeating the BS over and over, 10 minutes later, lol