Jump to content

Examining the House Impeachment Inquiry Resolution


Geee

Recommended Posts

house-impeachment-inquiry-resolution-observations

Some observations

On Tuesday, House Democrats published the resolution that, once passed, will approve and govern the impeachment inquiry on the question whether President Trump should be impeached. The vote is likely to take place on Thursday.

Some observations about the eight-page resolution.

1) The resolution is flawed, for reasons we’ll get to (the flaws could be major or minor, depending on how the resolution is implemented). By any measure, though, it is a significant improvement over the status quo ante. Once it’s passed, the House as an institution will have endorsed the impeachment inquiry. As we have pointed out, the Constitution commits the impeachment power to the House, not to the Speaker or the majority party in the House. The House acts as institution only by voting. It will finally have done so once this resolution is approved. The president and Republicans will no longer have a valid argument that the inquiry is constitutionally infirm. That has been the White House’s main justification for refusing to cooperate. (This refusal is overstated since a number of executive officials have submitted to closed-door interviews and otherwise participated. This has largely been done, though, despite the discouragement of the White House, which has otherwise declined to cDivided House passes Dem-backed guidelines for Trump impeachment as GOP reps fume on floorooperate.):snip:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Geee

 

Question: Will the Democrats be looking into the Seven Billion Dollars we gave to Ukraine that are....missing? When something like that happens I get a WTF moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Valin said:

@Geee

 

Question: Will the Democrats be looking into the Seven Billion Dollars we gave to Ukraine that are....missing? When something like that happens I get a WTF moment.

I don't know if you read the article I posted a while back about ALL the people who used these funds for their personal piggy bank. I suspect this is a frequent occurrence for many of our so-called aid programs - that how these jerks get so rich on OUR money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Geee said:

I don't know if you read the article I posted a while back about ALL the people who used these funds for their personal piggy bank. I suspect this is a frequent occurrence for many of our so-called aid programs - that how these jerks get so rich on OUR money.

Long Versions

Cliffnotes of Glenn's investigation

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Impeachment Vote Will Cost These Dems Their Seats

They ran as moderates in swing districts yet voted like radicals. 

During the 2018 midterms, dozens of “moderate” Democrats won House seats in swing districts by forswearing partisan feuds in order to concentrate on the needs of their constituents. They pledged to focus less on conflict than on finding common ground with their Republican colleagues. They also modulated their comments concerning President Trump and, when the subject of impeachment arose, insisted that it would be a divisive and unproductive exercise. Thursday, however, all but two voted in favor of a hyper-partisan impeachment resolution, exposing their campaign promises as cynical lies and ensuring that the Democrats will lose their House majority in 2020.

The Democrats, their bluster about the 2018 “blue wave” notwithstanding, have a particularly tenuous grasp on the House majority. The GOP needs to flip only 19 seats in 2020 to regain control — and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has already identified more than twice that number of vulnerable Democrats in districts won by Trump in 2016. Thursday’s vote has imperiled those weak Democrats even further by graphically illustrating that there really is no such thing as a “moderate Democrat.” Below is a list of Democrats who promised their constituents they would rise above the corrupting influence of the Washington establishment and are now likely to lose their House seats.

Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.): In 2018, Cunningham beat a weak opponent by fewer than 4,000 votes in South Carolina’s 1st District. During his campaign, and until just recently, he spoke of impeachment in the following terms: “I’ve warned members of my own party that a partisan rush to impeach the president would be bad for the country.” Last Tuesday, however, he announced that he would vote for the resolution. Like most of these faux moderates, he will tell his constituents that Thursday’s vote merely affirmed an ongoing investigation. This will not mollify the voters to whom he so brazenly lied. In a district that the president won by 13 points in 2016, Congressman Cunningham is a dead Democrat walking.:snip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-statement-on-house-resolution-vote/

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the House impeachment resolution vote:

Today’s vote endorses an abusive process that rolls over the rights of President Trump and undermines the rule of law. This was no impeachment resolution – it was a coup resolution. This coup attack was corruptly formed and corruptly pursued. The U.S. Senate should rule out a trial on any so-called impeachment arising from the Pelosi-Schiff abuse of the U.S. Constitution.

In the meantime, Judicial Watch will continue its dozens of FOIA lawsuits that have already uncovered so much about the related abuse of President Trump – Spygate, which is the worst public corruption scandal in American history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1711705519
×
×
  • Create New...