WATCH LIVE: House Judiciary Committee Debates Articles of Impeachment

Which, of course, the court would settle but the dem clown show is in a hurry.

 

That's a stupid comment. The popular vote margin comes from the collective popular votes for Clinton versus the collective popular votes for Trump and the other candidates on the ballots in all 50 States. The unexpected victories for Trump, which carried his electoral college victory, were Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. He won those states by popular majorities, which collectively amounted to less than 100K votes. Democrats could just as easily claim that were it not for those three states, Clinton would have easily won both the popular vote and the electoral college.

 

In the last admin, Holder was cited for contempt of Congress and the admin refused to turn over stuff in the Fast and Furious deal. No impeachment. Hell nothing even happened to Eric “I’m Obama’s Wingman” Holder. Washington ignored subpoenas. Hell Andrew Jackson ignored a SCOTUS ruling(which is worse, and others have as well) and did his thing anyways, no impeachment.

Basically, as someone who still isn’t voting for Trump, all I see is “because Trump” and any twisting and excuse to get out of others doing the same thing(yes same dang thing) is just partisanship. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Glass houses. There are many more....

Still voting for Ann Richards. The DNC disgusts me and I’m not fond of the GOP. It would have disgusted her too.

 

Congress isn't an investigative body, they have zero enforcement powers, so contempt of Congress is neither a crime, nor impeachable offense. Read the Constitution, there's this separation of powers thing that says the House doesn't control the Executive, and the Executive doesn't have to bow to the House over frivolous whims...

 

BUZZZ... not the way it works...

If they choose to pursue the Mueller OOJ in 2020, after the SCOTUS says McGahn has to testify (or pass entirely), new Articles of impeachment can be brought on those topics...

Also (as a bonus), when Trump is out in 2021, those OOJ's are also statutory crimes on the books...

SNIP
Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.
ENDSNIP

In fact, because it's NOT double jeopardy, he could be possibly be impeached on something now and ALSO convicted of it later... Sweet!

 

I fully understand the court can (and will) decide as well, but that doesn't take the power away from Congress to punish it while they are deciding...

 

“Separation of powers” is not high crimes or misdemeanors.

 

Thanks for proving you don't know anything about the separation of powers.

 

Every poll that showed Clinton winning the White House was 100% wrong. No margin of error there, that was reality, where all the manufactured +/- in the world doesn't help. I'm happy liberals are still silly enough to believe in the same process, it just ensures the same results. Thanks liberals, your blind trust in manufactured polls is going to give Republicans the House...

 

The court will not decide here since the dem clown show is in such a hurry they shelved their subpoenas.

 

Eric Holder showed up and testified and the administration had turned over 7000 pages of documents on Fast & Furious by the time that Eric Holder testified for the 7th time. That is a significant difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#Investigations_and_fallout

There is always going to be a push and give regarding the Congress and the Executive. But Trump brought the lack of cooperation to a whole new level by declaring the impeachment inquiry as wholly invalid and declaring all current and former employees/documents absolutely immune.

 

Still not impeachable. That is something the court decides but the dem clown show is in such a hurry they will not pursue it.

 

Zero polls showed that Clinton would win the White House. Almost every poll showed, correctly, that Clinton would earn the most votes.

 

Wait about 10 days.

 

The impeachment clause gives Congress the right to impeach the President and, if convicted by a Senate trial, remove him from office. It also gives Congress the "power of the purse," and the "advise and consent" power over major Presidential appointments, as well as the numerous powers in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution. The President possesses none of those powers unless they are allocated to him wholly or in part by Congress itself.
I'd say that's a lot of control over the President. And, yes, if the votes are sufficient (in the House a simple majority for impeachment, two-thirds majority to overcome a Presidential veto), the President does have to "bow to the House over frivolous whims" and anything else the House decides.

 

And Hamilton warned about just this scenario, a partisan impeachment.

 

If you honestly believe that is what they were polling for, you don't understand a thing. Its a convenient excuse after the fact, but those polls were conducted to see who would win the White House, not who would win irrelevant 'popular' votes that determine nothing. Personally I'm tired of that sorry excuse, but looks like you folks want to keep it around so you can use it again when you lose in 2020...

 

The Constitution does not make Congress an investigative authority, in any situation. That was one of the first major blunders here, this was amateur hour from the get go. If this was to be taken seriously Democrats would have requested an independent investigator. Oh wait they did that once, and Trump was exonerated, so instead they used this sham process to 'impeach' without a single criminal act. I'm not sure what's more pathetic, the House for doing it, or the progs that support it...

 

If it's violated, it most certainly is. The Constitution was written in an era wherein "sovereignty" was transferred from the monarch to the people. The people are represented by the legislature, elected by the people. The "people" do NOT elect the President. The President is elected through the Electoral College, which according to a recent Court ruling may OR MAY NOT reflect the popular vote within a specific state.
Ergo...sovereignty rests with Congress, via its election by "the people," NOT with the Presidency, who only represents the collective states according to the powers of Congress.
The theory of a "Unitary Presidency" is BS corporatism, being used to justify minority rule.

 

Find me a single poll that attempted to predict the outcome of the electoral college and I will show you a MODEL, which is not the same as a POLL.

 

You obviously don't understand polling sufficiently to comprehend my explanation. I can recommend a few good books for you, which you may want to read before trying to discuss the subject.

 

Explain to me what you think all that polling was for? You think it was to collect useless data? You folks play a silly game by trying to deny the truth of it, but really,explain it so everyone can understand what the polls are really for and why campaigns spend lots of money to learn nothing that could help them win. Go on...

 

No thanks, I don't need your liberal claptrap fake methodology junk cluttering up my shelves. What do you need instructions on? You are clearly confused, if you think the manufactured nonsense you are citing is somehow legitimate...

 

Polls are snapshots which attempts closely estimate the current opinion of a given population regarding a specific situation or a specific outcome. Political campaigns rely on that information to help guide their decisions moving forward.

There are ZERO polls which attempt to predict the outcome of an electoral college. The closest any election poll will come is to predict the outcome of the popular vote.

 

The Gaetz amendment is to REPLACE mentioning Joe Biden in Article 1?

That's ****ing silly... Trump mentioned both Joe (Biden) and Hunter (Biden's son) in the phone call... I'd have no problem with ADDING some of what Gaetz wants here, but you cannot remove the mention of Joe Biden...

Hard to follow the specifics on TV...