News (FoxNews) White House announces it will not comply with 'illegitimate and unconstitutional' impeachment inquiry

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,221
4,452
136
"The process was formally initiated on February 6, 1974, when the House of Representatives passed a resolution, H.Res. 803 "

This is not a Constitutional requirement, and never was. The only reason for the formal vote for Nixon and Clinton was a House rule limiting subpoena power of the committees, but House Republicans changed that rule so that they could investigate Hillary and Obama. There is no reason for Democrats to vote now since the Republicans saw fit to change the rules so they didn't have to last time.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
U.S v Nixon did *not* say that the House was obligated to hold a vote to start a formal impeachment inquiry. And how could it? Such a ruling would be blatantly unconstitutional.

Bottom line:

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

Yes, at this point I think people are being deliberately obtuse because they don't like the answer the Constitution gives them. The House has the sole power of impeachment and how it determines the process for/exercises that power is 100% up to the House. Any attempt by the executive, the courts, or even the Senate to change this violates the Constitution.

This is not complicated, this is simply about respecting what the Constitution says instead of what you wish it said. Someday I hope conservatives start putting the law before their feelings.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I'm happy to wait and see how it plays out. #ZombiePelosi is going to have to hold a floor vote sooner rather than later.

That will be to send a writ of impeachment to the Senate, for sure. Other than that, Dems will proceed however they damned well please, as per the Constitution.

I'm confident McConnell will quash the writ, somehow, but it won't be on the basis of this particular line of bullshit. He won't question Pelosi's power to make the rules in her chamber because it would bring into question his own.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I'm happy to wait and see how it plays out. #ZombiePelosi is going to have to hold a floor vote sooner rather than later.

That will be to send a writ of impeachment to the Senate, for sure. Other than that, Dems will proceed however they damned well please, as per the Constitution.

I'm confident McConnell will quash the writ, somehow, but it won't be on the basis of this particular line of bullshit. He won't question Pelosi's power to make the rules in her chamber because it would bring into question his own.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I'm happy to wait and see how it plays out. #ZombiePelosi is going to have to hold a floor vote sooner rather than later.

I'm sure that the impeachment itself will have that and then Trump is impeached. Mitch of course is likely to outdo Pelosi as evidenced by his behaviors and actions. This you will justify and embrace of course.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,635
3,509
136
This is not a Constitutional requirement, and never was. The only reason for the formal vote for Nixon and Clinton was a House rule limiting subpoena power of the committees, but House Republicans changed that rule so that they could investigate Hillary and Obama. There is no reason for Democrats to vote now since the Republicans saw fit to change the rules so they didn't have to last time.

Lol, yet another Taj self-own.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,221
4,452
136
What part of precedent and Court rulings don't you understand?

Precedent is to hold confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court appointee that the President has nominated. You were not so interested in precedent then, live with the consequences now.
Courts get no say in this. Congress has every right to ignore any court that tries to tell them how to run an impeachment since the Constitution says that ONLY the House can decide what procedures to use.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
This is not a Constitutional requirement, and never was. The only reason for the formal vote for Nixon and Clinton was a House rule limiting subpoena power of the committees, but House Republicans changed that rule so that they could investigate Hillary and Obama. There is no reason for Democrats to vote now since the Republicans saw fit to change the rules so they didn't have to last time.
It's almost like changing the way the game is played to benefit a Republican can sometimes backfire. I can't imagine that'll happen again though.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DarthKyrie

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
That will be to send a writ of impeachment to the Senate, for sure. Other than that, Dems will proceed however they damned well please, as per the Constitution.

I'm confident McConnell will quash the writ, somehow, but it won't be on the basis of this particular line of bullshit. He won't question Pelosi's power to make the rules in her chamber because it would bring into question his own.
McConnell can just say (like he did with Garland) that we should leave it up to the voters to decide so the Senate will just ignore the writ.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
I wonder if the Dems will push for a "return to normal" as part of their narrative. I would think that would serve well for the down-ballot people and then let the nominee push whatever their agenda is independently if it doesn't align.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
I wonder if the Dems will push for a "return to normal" as part of their narrative. I would think that would serve well for the down-ballot people and then let the nominee push whatever their agenda is independently if it doesn't align.
"Normal" was slowly destroying America anyway. That is a big reason contributing to the popularity of Trump and Sanders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
"Normal" was slowly destroying America anyway. That is a big reason contributing to the popularity of Trump and Sanders.
Oh, I agree, but I imagine a LOT of voters who didn't notice or care.

I'm not in favor of it. But based on existing strategies being employed I think it would fit their narrative.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
"Normal" was slowly destroying America anyway. That is a big reason contributing to the popularity of Trump and Sanders.

It's what happens when people vote Republican. We all get screwed. Well, other than the richest among us, the sole beneficiary of their policy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Dec 10, 2005
25,053
8,333
136
Lol. Republicans have the most to lose if an unnecessary vote was held to open an impeachment inquiry. They currently have no idea the number of skeletons that will be falling out of the closet. Have fun defending that "no" vote as the avalanche continues.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Precedent is to hold confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court appointee that the President has nominated. You were not so interested in precedent then, live with the consequences now.
Courts get no say in this. Congress has every right to ignore any court that tries to tell them how to run an impeachment since the Constitution says that ONLY the House can decide what procedures to use.
OH gosh! You mean i'm a partisan poster, as is 100% of all the posters in this forum? Who would have known?
You were all feelings hurt about Merrick Garland and i'm sure you'll be all feelings hurt if Justice Ginsberg passes and President Trump nominates a replacement and the Senate confirms.

It's partisan politics and it's being played right now by the House and Speaker Pelosi.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I wonder if the Dems will push for a "return to normal" as part of their narrative. I would think that would serve well for the down-ballot people and then let the nominee push whatever their agenda is independently if it doesn't align.

I'd put it in terms of sanity, common decency, shared values & honesty.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
The fact they're posting in a politics thread? Do you actually think the people that are posting in here aren't partisan?
I think that some people are, and some aren't. You said 100%, I said that's a bold claim. Are you arguing that in fact, 100% of people who post in this forum are partisan?
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,221
4,452
136
Lol. Republicans have the most to lose if an unnecessary vote was held to open an impeachment inquiry. They currently have no idea the number of skeletons that will be falling out of the closet. Have fun defending that "no" vote as the avalanche continues.

They are hoping for two things out of the vote, the first is to tie it up in deliberation for as long as possible, and there are a number of procedural things they can do to draw it out, the second is to get concessions that allow them to submit subpoenas of their own which they will use in bad faith.
They have basically nothing to lose, since when the vote is finally called for they will just all abstain.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
I think that some people are, and some aren't. You said 100%, I said that's a bold claim. Are you arguing that in fact, 100% of people who post in this forum are partisan?
It's my opinion. Can I prove it? Not without their names and voting records over the last 20 years.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
It's my opinion. Can I prove it? Not without their names and voting records over the last 20 years.
How would their voting records decide anything? Positing in a partisan manner is completely different from how one votes.

Do you really think everyone here is just rah rah for their team? No wonder you're so damn ornery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie