President Trump to Pelosi – White House Will Not Cooperate Until House Holds Vote on Impeachment

[Frannie]

Snort some Fentanyl...………………..

True Obama was the best President for transvestites like his husband mike.

Man, you sure have a thing for trannies. You see trannies where there are no trannies. Must be related to mikey.

So did Joan Rivers


Play on little tiddles

She's a comedian. Perhaps you should be posting in the Humor or Satire section instead of Politics. Just sayin'...

She was also dead 1 week after saying that

Keep farting

So what, proves nothing. But you are quite the USMB Jackass, I'll give you that. Keep trolling.[/QUOTE]
You stay in denial because Barak is a homo, even farrakhan says so

 

[Frannie]

The House is not required to vote on anything to do with impeachment until it is presented with Articles of Impeachment, which logically have to be drafted after an investigation into what to include in them. There is no requirement that the House vote to set "parameters" on the impeachment inquiry itself. The linked article from Gateway Pundit complains that it is "[e]ven worse, House Democrats haven’t even named a specific crime committed by President Trump," ignoring the fact that this sort of information cannot be known until after an investigation is completed.

McCarthy complained that Pelosi has "given no clear indication as to how your impeachment inquiry will proceed — including whether key historical precedents or basic standards of due process will be observed," but she doesn't have to. I don't know what he means by "key historical precedents," but due process applies only to formal proceedings, not to investigations.

The trump administration has itself become known for its failure to observe "key historical precedents," (and laws) like obeying subpoenas and producing tax returns, for instance. There was a "historical precedent" of having White House press briefings, but that went out the window, too. And I seem to recall that the various executive-branch departments have not been following the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), passed in 1946, which governs the way in which federal agencies may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions:

Political lawsuits bring the Administrative Procedure Act to the forefront

Too much suspicion has been raised involving too many people, too many situations, and involving other countries to limit the scope of the inquiry before it can even get started, given that these suspicious matters involve the fundamental institutions of our country and it is imperative that the American People know the truth.

3 years and no Democrat has the balls to vote

Fart on

It's not a case of "not having the balls to vote." The House doesn't have to vote until the Articles of Impeachment have been introduced. You can't just go making stuff up.

Actually they vote to authorize an official investigation

Please pay attention

 

[Papageorgio]

Absolutely the right thing to do!!!!







BOOM!... President Trump to Pelosi - White House Will Not Cooperate Until House Holds Vote on Impeachment --- VIDEO

So you can add "obstruction of Congress" to the charges.

Obstruct Congress on what?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Pelosi doesn't want to hold a vote because she doesn't want GOP congressmen to subpoena anyone.

 

[Frannie]

Absolutely the right thing to do!!!!







BOOM!... President Trump to Pelosi - White House Will Not Cooperate Until House Holds Vote on Impeachment --- VIDEO

So you can add "obstruction of Congress" to the charges.

Obstruct Congress on what?

Lol by releasing the transcript of the call perhaps

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you can add "obstruction of Congress" to the charges.

You must be ignorant of the fact the executive branch need not cooperate with Congress on ANYTHING, absent a subpoena or other legal compulsion.
Absent an OFFICIAL impeachment inquiry - one voted on and passed by members of the house - Pelosi, et al, cannot issue those subpoenas.

 

[Diver Diva]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

 

[Frannie]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

Strange as it may seem this entire episode may have been set up by Trumps people

 

[Diver Diva]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

Strange as it may seem this entire episode may have been set up by Trumps people

You mean the "whistleblower" is actually working for Trump? That thought did cross my mind.

 

[Frannie]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

Strange as it may seem this entire episode may have been set up by Trumps people

You mean the "whistleblower" is actually working for Trump? That thought did cross my mind.

It's far fetched as we assume that all the CIA is retarded like brennan however that is clearly not the case. If true the dems just imploded

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The House is not required to vote on anything to do with impeachment until it is presented with Articles of Impeachment, which logically have to be drafted after an investigation into what to include in them. There is no requirement that the House vote to set "parameters" on the impeachment inquiry itself. The linked article from Gateway Pundit complains that it is "[e]ven worse, House Democrats haven’t even named a specific crime committed by President Trump," ignoring the fact that this sort of information cannot be known until after an investigation is completed.

McCarthy complained that Pelosi has "given no clear indication as to how your impeachment inquiry will proceed — including whether key historical precedents or basic standards of due process will be observed," but she doesn't have to. I don't know what he means by "key historical precedents," but due process applies only to formal proceedings, not to investigations.

The trump administration has itself become known for its failure to observe "key historical precedents," (and laws) like obeying subpoenas and producing tax returns, for instance. There was a "historical precedent" of having White House press briefings, but that went out the window, too. And I seem to recall that the various executive-branch departments have not been following the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), passed in 1946, which governs the way in which federal agencies may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions:

Political lawsuits bring the Administrative Procedure Act to the forefront

Too much suspicion has been raised involving too many people, too many situations, and involving other countries to limit the scope of the inquiry before it can even get started, given that these suspicious matters involve the fundamental institutions of our country and it is imperative that the American People know the truth.

3 years and no Democrat has the balls to vote

Fart on

It's not a case of "not having the balls to vote." The House doesn't have to vote until the Articles of Impeachment have been introduced. You can't just go making stuff up.

And yet neither Nixon or Clinton were investigated WITHOUT a vote.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's not a case of "not having the balls to vote." The House doesn't have to vote until the Articles of Impeachment have been introduced. You can't just go making stuff up.

And yet, there was such a vote with regard to Nixon and Clinton.
Perhaps people back then were more worried about procedure and legitimacy than Pelosi, et al.

 

[Lysistrata]

So you can add "obstruction of Congress" to the charges.

You must be ignorant of the fact the executive branch need not cooperate with Congress on ANYTHING, absent a subpoena or other legal compulsion.
Absent an OFFICIAL impeachment inquiry - one voted on and passed by members of the house - Pelosi, et al, cannot issue those subpoenas.

All standing committees in the House have subpoena power. No House vote is required to begin an impeachment inquiry.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you can add "obstruction of Congress" to the charges.

You must be ignorant of the fact the executive branch need not cooperate with Congress on ANYTHING, absent a subpoena or other legal compulsion.
Absent an OFFICIAL impeachment inquiry - one voted on and passed by members of the house - Pelosi, et al, cannot issue those subpoenas.

All standing committees in the House have subpoena power. No House vote is required to begin an impeachment inquiry.

And yet, there was such a vote with regard to Nixon and Clinton - and one for Trump, that failed earlier this year.
Perhaps people back then were more worried about procedure and legitimacy than Pelosi, et al.

 

[IM2]

If Trump tells you guys to do a swan dive off the top of the tallest building in your city and you will float, don't believe that one.

 

[Dick Foster]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

They did that over three years ago. And Trump has been has been putting a single handed ass whoppin on them ever since, all while saving the economy and the country.

 

[IM2]

Nancy and the Dems have bitten off more than they can chew.

They did that over three years ago. And Trump has been has been putting a single handed ass whoppin on them ever since, all while saving the economy and the country.

Trump has not saved anything and he's taking the ass whipping. Mueller could not indict as a matter of policy. So he left that job to congress. And that is what's going on now.

 

[IM2]

I don't see a person breaking the law as someone giving somebody as ass whipping. I see a scared man obstructing justice hoping to run out the clock.

 

[Preacher]

Am I the ONLY person who doesn't give a shit what happens? I don't like the demoncraps I don't like Trump so I am sitting here eating popcorn enjoying the shit show.

 

[jc456]

Absolutely the right thing to do!!!!







BOOM!... President Trump to Pelosi - White House Will Not Cooperate Until House Holds Vote on Impeachment --- VIDEO

Well. I guess this is a situation of "s**t or get off the pot". Trump probably figures, even if it goes through the House, it will only ensure he raises $100M+ in a short period of time.

He's probably dumb enough to think that.

it's called calling a bluff.