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

Be hesitant to rely on a source like thoughtco.com.

The only thing required by the Constitution when it comes to impeachment and the House is that the House vote on Articles of Impeachment. There is nothing in the Constitution which dictates how the House must act before it votes on those Articles. An impeachment inquiry is not a vote on the Articles.

If a House rule existed that demanded a vote on the inquiry or dictated what must happen before the House voted on articles of impeachment, then the House would need to abide by those rules.

None exists.

 

Why not? If the House votes on Articles and Impeachment, approves it by a simple majority, are the Articles invalid because that was the first official vote that the full House made in regards to the Impeachment process?

 

Is it great and unmatched?

 

Yes... that's the impeachment PROCESS... we are in the impeachment INQUIRY phase leading to the impeachment PROCESS phase...

When the INQUIRY is done, the articles of impeachment will be voted on in the House to begin the PROCESS...

Not that confusing... They are on step 1... you are on step 2.. although I believe the House should be on step 2 now as well...

 

And to be clear, there are no constitutional demands that step 1 even take place, let alone that it take place according to certain demands nor that it afford certain rights to the President or the minority party.

If there was a House rule regarding that step, then those rules would need to be followed. There are none and so, Pelosi is free to pursue the impeachment inquiry phase in any manner she deems appropriate.

Must the House Vote to Authorize an Impeachment Inquiry?

 

I think in this context, unmatched and unparallaled are interchangeable

 

That would be a great question for the President to take up to the Courts if that happens, prior to the Senate taking up the case.

With that said, as you and I both now, it's not gonna be asked....the House isn't going to do that. This isn't about impeachment at all....

 

It is, I just wanted to make sure I got trump's quote about himself accurate.

 

Nah...it just exposes the dem/libs as frauds and hypocrites.Follow the correct procedures which were followed hystorically and there will be no issues with cooperation. But it's obvious that dems and their supporters prefer illegal approach to the impeachment.

 

I believe we are on track for a new impeachment decision from the US Supreme Court. Although, they have ruled in the past that impeachment is a political question, so they might just affirm that it is not justiciable.

 

Where did Trump say or imply that he cooperate after an impeachment inquiry vote?

Follow up, when he does double down by refusing to cooperate, will you condemn him?

 

They have also ruled that impeachment requires Due Process...which at this point the House is denying...

 

Hmm...

Interesting.

 

Doubling down on the hoax?

 

I think certain Dems are wanting to go full impeachment, trouble is, they really need evidence first!

 

Hurrying? The democrats wanted to impeach Trump as soon as he beat crooked Hillary nearly three years ago, now they say don't rush us? too funny

Anyway, we know the dems strategy is to just string this out, release cherry picked info and let their media do their thing.

Holding a formal vote on impeachment, conservative legal experts say, would allow Republicans to subpoena documents and witnesses and investigate all the revelations surrounding the whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s interactions with Ukraine, as well the roles of Joe Biden and his son Hunter in Ukrainian corruption allegations.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a..._impeachment_vote_cuts_both_ways__141391.html

btw, has anybody seen Hunter Biden recently? He has been on the Sunday talk shows, right?


Having a vote on an impeachment inquiry resolution would give Republicans an opening to argue they should have subpoena power like in past impeachment proceedings, something that Democrats would almost certainly never allow.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/08/politics/nancy-pelosi-letter-impeachment/index.html


“In the history of our nation, the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the president without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step,” Cipollone wrote in the letter to congressional Democrats.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...y-says-house-should-vote-to-start-impeachment

 

I don’t know what thoughtco is, but the constitution makes no such requirement

 

Sorry for being unclear.

My point is that after the RUSSIA! hoax, the NAZI! hoax, and the Kavanaugh hoax, it's the utmost of absurdities that we all aren't laughing at this latest hoax.

 

Prove it.

 

And they also worried about a political Congress usurping a duly elected President for political reasons.

 

I give you credit for answering the question with a justification for the strategy.

I give you credit for supplying some efforts at elaborating on the strategy. I would note that the reasoning offered by the conservative legal experts is largely based on a political justification, not a legal justification.

There is nothing in the House Rules or the US Constitution that affords the President or the minority party additional rights and privileges after an impeachment inquiry vote takes place. There is a political argument of fairness that conservatives will make (prior impeachments have taken votes on providing some of those rights to minority parties), but there is no legal requirement for such.

 

That the HOUSE decide to impeach not the Speaker not a committee chairman. And the rules of the last two set the precedent that the House as a whole votes to start an impeachment.

 

Once again, putting the word "house" in all caps has zero relevance. And the precedent is not dispositive. House rules change all the time and there are no current House rules which dictate that an impeachment inquiry vote must be made before the Articles of Impeachment are voted upon.

 

It requires due process

 

All the witnesses being subpoenaed should just tell Schiff to piss off and there's just not a dang thing he can do about it.