Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What are the rules re: impeachment?He doesn't insist he's above the law. He insists that the House follows the rules re: impeachment.
What are the rules re: impeachment?
All I could find was:
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
I agree these rules should be followed.
Good question.Where are the rules about subpoena authority?
OP, please point out where the lie is. I want YOU to point it out. Don't just link some article that doesn't really say anything, ya weak-a$$ bytch.
He doesn't insist he's above the law. He insists that the House follows the rules re: impeachment.
So you clearly don’t understand how a grand jury works, which is the closest comparison to what the houses political impeachment procedure is.What you're seeing here is star chamber, kangaroo "justice," courtesy of the swamp. The lawyers on this board (and even those who claim to be lawyers) should be familiar with "substantive due process" aka "fundamental fairness," and this ain't it. Seriously? Anonymous accusers and witnesses? Give me a f***in' break.
Not a grand jury proceeding, dumbfvck. This is a legislative "proceeding." (using that term generously)So you clearly don’t understand how a grand jury works.
El lol. I had to edit my original post for clarity because I knew you wouldn’t understand the comparison without it plainly written out. And voila!Not a grand jury proceeding, dumbfvck. This is a legislative proceeding.
Actually that's a false comparison, but go with it if it makes you feel smarter.El lol. I had to edit my original post for clarity because I knew you wouldn’t understand the comparison without it plainly written out. And viola!
It’s an apt, not false comparison.Actually that's a false comparison, but go with it if it makes you feel smarter.
Nope. If this were a House impeachment proceeding, there would be votes taking place by the House. The actions of the majority party DO NOT constitute the actions of the house, absent any votes. This can best be called a democrat impeachment "thing."It’s an apt, not false comparison.
They vote at the end dummyNope. If this were a House impeachment proceeding, there would be votes taking place by the House. The actions of the majority party DO NOT constitute the actions of the house, absent any votes. This can best be called a democrat impeachment "thing."
Nope. Not how it works. Dumbfvck.They vote at the end dummy
You are having trouble distinguishing between the actions of the majority party, and the actions of the House of Representatives.
That's one dumb attorneyThis is funny; they still haven't figured out that you are an attorney SiL that is their better
No I'm notYou are having trouble distinguishing between the actions of the majority party, and the actions of the House of Representatives.
One doesn't have to be a lawyer to be their better. All one has to do is work at a job that involves something more complicated than making lattes.This is funny; they still haven't figured out that you are an attorney SiL that is their better
(Oooops)
You are. You're just not smart enough to realize it. Just like you're not smart enough to realize that your leftist teachers/professors lied to you.No I'm not
Ah damn they lied to me about committees and subcommittees. I'll never forgive them for that.You are. You're just not smart enough to realize it. Just like you're not smart enough to realize that your leftist teachers/professors lied to you.
They sure as hell didn't tell you how those committees are supposed to function. Probably not a lie, just incompetence.Ah damn they lied to me about committees and subcommittees. I'll never forgive them for that.
Let me guess they need a vote of the whole house to do investigation?They sure as hell didn't tell you how those committees are supposed to function. Probably not a lie, just incompetence.
That would definitely be the transparent thing to do. Basically what we have here is non-impeachment. They really don't want impeachment, they just want their leftist idiot (pardon the redundancy) base to believe impeachment is happening, all the while engaging in strategic leaks for the purpose of affecting the election. This is why the comparison to grand jury proceedings (as argued by the other dumba$$) fails. Additionally, grand juries don't hear testimony from anonymous witnesses.Let me guess they need a vote of the whole house to do investigation?
Yeah like I said they vote at the end dummyThat would definitely be the transparent thing to do. Basically what we have here is non-impeachment. They really don't want impeachment, they just want their leftist idiot (pardon the redundancy) base to believe impeachment is happening, all the while engaging in strategic leaks for the purpose of affecting the election. This is why the comparison to grand jury proceedings (as argued by the other dumba$$) fails. Additionally, grand juries don't hear testimony from anonymous witnesses.
Didn't even read my post. Buh-bye, dumbfvck.Yeah like I said they vote at the end dummy
The one about your opinion on Democrat strategy and with no content on house rules or the legislative process?Didn't even read my post. Buh-bye, dumbfvck.
This.At the end of the day, Nancy simply doesn't want real impeachment proceedings. Not only would it be politically damaging, but then the republicans would get to dig up all kinds of democrook skeletons.
OP, please point out where the lie is. I want YOU to point it out. Don't just link some article that doesn't really say anything, ya weak-a$$ bytch.