Witness in Trump-Ukraine Matter Ordered Not to Speak in Impeachment Inquiry

By voting on articles of impeachment. How they get to the articles of impeachment is completely up to the House.

 

Executive privilege, and it's only the President vis-a-vis the Congress, if it is a person within his staff with whom he consults and seeks advice and Congress is not the legal system it is the legislative body.

 

Yes, they have a Constitutional right to. The question is does Trump have a Constitutional right to use the Office of the President to investigate his political adversaries. This has yet to be adjudicated. The left predictably will say no and Trump supporters predictably will say yes, and I say I do not know.

 

Does Trump have great and unparalleled wisdom?

 

Yes political adversaries in the House or at least trying to when it is none of their business. We have several investigations going and it is the role and the duty of the President to seek the cooperation of the governments of countries which may be involved either through their own government or private citizens in that country especially when like with Ukraine we have a firm treaty in place just for that.

 

They’re not acting yet they’re investigating. When they act, and have articles, they’ll vote.

 

They democrats control the house lol they don’t need a single republican vote to impeach him.

 

I found a source to explain why the House does not need to vote on an impeachment inquiry. I'll link it for you, but consider this simple question.

If the House sends the Senate an Articles of Impeachment, does the Article become invalid because the House did not first vote on an Inquiry?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/must-house-vote-authorize-impeachment-inquiry

 

That does not make any logically sense nor does it answerthe question for why taunting and demanding a vote on the inquiry is a good strategy.

 

It is not his doing that Biden is a democrat or running for office. And running for office inoculates him from investigation no more than it did Trump when he was running for office. The evidence has been brought out that most likely points to corrupt behavior involve Biden and his son, more came out today it's not $50K a month the Ukraine oligarchs were paying him but $160K. For a position for which he was totally unqualified. And then the China billion and half. And then the picture of Biden playing golf with one of the oligrachs while claim that just never ever ever discusses his son's business with him.

We need a Special Counsel to begin an investigation an as Trump properly noted it will require the cooperation of the Ukraine government and it's leader.

 

Yet they will need several to convict him. Hell could freeze over, but I doubt it.

 

The Constitution says the HOUSE shall have the sole power to impeach that means the HOUSE starts an impeachment proceeding. It does not say the Speaker of the House has the sole power or a committee chairman has the sole power to impeach. And then the precedent is the HOUSE votes to start any impeachment proceedings. Then there is the due process the Democrats are trying to deny the President. The hamstringing the minority by not allowing them to subpoena witnesses. By not allowing the President to question witnesses or even face the witness. And then they are holding their hearings BEHIND CLOSED DOORS not allowing the PEOPLE to monitor and make their own judgements on the witness and evidence.

 

I have no problem with the Biden’s being investigated, just not by the White House.

 

Why is it you believe in our government one person can set an impeachment of a duly elected President in process? Where does the Constitution grant that power to just one person?

 

I have no problem with Barr and his DOJ doing it even rolling it into Durham's investigation but believe to avoid any question about the legitimacy a Special Counsel should be appointed.

 

The house has only to vote on articles of impeachment. How they get to vote on articles of impeachment is entirely dependent upon the House rules. And the House rules, as of today, do not demand that the House first vote on an inquiry before voting on the Articles of Impeachment.

Putting the word "house" in all caps does not mean anything.

 

LOL. Trump's political adversaries have a Constitutional right to investigate him, but he, as our chief law enforcement official might not be allowed to investigate anyone construed to be his political adversary.

Too funny!

 

The Constitution demands that president be impeached by the House first voting on Articles of Impeachment and then the Senate holding a trial to determine whether those articles warrant removal.

The Constitution does not demand or describe how the House must act before it votes on the Articles of Impeachment. That gets determined by House Rules.

 

Is it funny or is it a vestige from our Founding Fathers who were worried about a Tyrant King using his power and authority to control everyone else while holding himself above the law?

 

If it is allowed I have no problem with that. But in these hyper partisan times I doubt it will help as there is no avoiding bias on either side. The Republicans and Democrats are both rotten to the core with bias.

 

Good to see that you have a sense of humor about the theater of the absurd we are witnessing in DC.

 

Why was Trump being investigated during the Obama administration?

As an avowed political adversary, he was immune.

 

It's ridiculous.

 

Strategy for what?

 

Bwahahahaha! Comedy gold right there. Evidently you are not up on the latest current events.