Understand The Danger We Are In

[Thunk]

What, for example, are they reporting happening when it's not happening? The impeachment investigation is happening.

No! It is NOT! THEY ARE LYING TO YOU!

Understand the danger that poses!

 

[Thunk]

If we don't know what's happening--not even a clue, how do you know the media is lying?

Discernment.

The house has to vote to have an impeachment investigation...they have not.

Having that vote would give the house minority (republicans) subpoena power...they don't have it.

 

[OldLady]

What, for example, are they reporting happening when it's not happening? The impeachment investigation is happening.

No! It is NOT! THEY ARE LYING TO YOU!

Understand the danger that poses!

Let's make sure I've got this straight. Are you saying there is no impeachment investigation going on in the House of Representatives right now?
Or are you saying you don't believe the House has a good reason to consider impeachment?

 

[OldLady]

If we don't know what's happening--not even a clue, how do you know the media is lying?

Discernment.

The house has to vote to have an impeachment investigation...they have not.

Having that vote would give the house minority (republicans) subpoena power...they don't have it.

The House's rules do not mandate a vote for lawmakers to conduct an impeachment investigation, but a vote could give Republicans more power in the Democratic-led inquiry.
It would also force lawmakers in both parties to go on the record for or against the inquiry as headlines fly thick and fast about the Ukraine affair.

Trump Challenges House On Impeachment Vote. Pelosi: No Requirement For That

I can see why Trump, a Republican, would want a vote, if it would give the Republicans more power in the process. Seems like kind of a strange rule, actually.

 

[peach174]

Pelosi announced a Formal inquiry of Impeachment.
We are a representative republic where the people are represented in the House and States are Represented by the senate.

To Impeach on an Formal inquiry means to get rid of the people's vote.

It was done under Nixon and Clinton.
Pelosi just announced it without a floor vote.
She is right that it is not in the constitution, but it is in the house rules, she is sidestepping that rule.

 

[peach174]

If we don't know what's happening--not even a clue, how do you know the media is lying?

Discernment.

The house has to vote to have an impeachment investigation...they have not.

Having that vote would give the house minority (republicans) subpoena power...they don't have it.

The House's rules do not mandate a vote for lawmakers to conduct an impeachment investigation, but a vote could give Republicans more power in the Democratic-led inquiry.
It would also force lawmakers in both parties to go on the record for or against the inquiry as headlines fly thick and fast about the Ukraine affair.

Trump Challenges House On Impeachment Vote. Pelosi: No Requirement For That

I can see why Trump, a Republican, would want a vote, if it would give the Republicans more power in the process. Seems like kind of a strange rule, actually.

It's about holding representatives accountable for their actions.
Dems in purple states may not get reelected if they vote against their constituents views.


That's why the rule is there.

 

[OldLady]

Pelosi announced a Formal inquiry of Impeachment.
We are a representative republic where the people are represented in the House and States are Represented by the senate.

To Impeach on an Formal inquiry means to get rid of the people's vote.

It was done under Nixon and Clinton.
Pelosi just announced it without a floor vote.
She is right that it is not in the constitution, but it is in the house rules, she is sidestepping that rule.

The article I read said that it is not mandated in the House rules. I agree she is sidestepping to keep the Republicans' noses out of it. If anyone has that House rule handy relative to opening an impeachment investigation, it would be interesting to see which of our media sources is lying to us.

 

[OldLady]

If we don't know what's happening--not even a clue, how do you know the media is lying?

Discernment.

The house has to vote to have an impeachment investigation...they have not.

Having that vote would give the house minority (republicans) subpoena power...they don't have it.

The House's rules do not mandate a vote for lawmakers to conduct an impeachment investigation, but a vote could give Republicans more power in the Democratic-led inquiry.
It would also force lawmakers in both parties to go on the record for or against the inquiry as headlines fly thick and fast about the Ukraine affair

Trump Challenges House On Impeachment Vote. Pelosi: No Requirement For That

I can see why Trump, a Republican, would want a vote, if it would give the Republicans more power in the process. Seems like kind of a strange rule, actually.

It's about holding representatives accountable for their actions.
Dems in purple states may not get reelected if they vote against their constituents views.


That's why the rule is there.

What I thought was kind of strange is that a formal vote would give the Republicans more say in the proceedings. And that it wasn't a requirement.

 

[peach174]

If we don't know what's happening--not even a clue, how do you know the media is lying?

Discernment.

The house has to vote to have an impeachment investigation...they have not.

Having that vote would give the house minority (republicans) subpoena power...they don't have it.

The House's rules do not mandate a vote for lawmakers to conduct an impeachment investigation, but a vote could give Republicans more power in the Democratic-led inquiry.
It would also force lawmakers in both parties to go on the record for or against the inquiry as headlines fly thick and fast about the Ukraine affair

Trump Challenges House On Impeachment Vote. Pelosi: No Requirement For That

I can see why Trump, a Republican, would want a vote, if it would give the Republicans more power in the process. Seems like kind of a strange rule, actually.

It's about holding representatives accountable for their actions.
Dems in purple states may not get reelected if they vote against their constituents views.


That's why the rule is there.

What I thought was kind of strange is that a formal vote would give the Republicans more say in the proceedings. And that it wasn't a requirement.

Because it forces Dems to represent the people whom they are suppose to do, not loyalty to their party.
It they vote on an formal impeachment they vote against the people who elected them and they could very well lose their re election

 

[Wry Catcher]

We have a "news" media that blatantly lies to us! Not a lie here and there about little things...but on a minute by minute basis about things of global importance!

For example, in the last week the media has been telling us that we are moving very close to the impeachment of the president of the united states. It could happen at any time now.

The truth is we are no closer to impeachment than we were a year ago...2 years ago. There has not even been a vote to formally INVESTIGATE for impeachment, or draw up articles of impeachment...nothing!

This is dangerous folks! This is the stuff of nazi germany!

And this ^^^ is the post of a ditto head. Mega dodos, Thunk.

 

[peach174]

Trump is playing chess while the Dems are playing checkers.

 

[Thunk]

The article I read said that it is not mandated in the House rules.

Mandated???

There's that qualifier again that allows them to lie!

It is a house rule...it is precedent.

Like a child playing "house"...the democrats are playing "impeachment investigation" and the media is telling us it's real.

And as far as "keeping republicans noses out of it"...how would you like to be accused of a crime & not be allowed to speak? Not be allowed to call witnesses? Not be allowed to cross examine your accusers?

Impeachment has rules to prevent fuckery like this from happening! It's just a wee bit more than "keeping their noses out of it"!

 

[Thunk]

Let's make sure I've got this straight. Are you saying there is no impeachment investigation going on in the House of Representatives right now?

I'm saying the democrats are playing "investigation" the same way a child plays "house"...and the media is pretending it is real.

The democrats think they can break our most sacred rules any time it suits them.

Face your accusers and question them? Oh fiddle-dee-dee.

Innocent until PROVEN guilty? Hogwash!

And president Trump just called them out on it...told them until they follow their own rules and vote, they can shove their subpoenas up their bung holes!

 

[Thunk]

A few snips of McCarthys letter to pelosi...

“Unfortunately, you have 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,” McCarthy said in his letter. “In addition, the swiftness and recklessness with which you have proceeded has already resulted in committee chairs attempting to limit minority participation in scheduled interviews, calling into question the integrity of such an inquiry.”

========================================

Citing House Rules X and XI, McCaul said that until Congress members from both parties vote to create a special impeachment task force to carry out proceedings, “Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff lacks the jurisdiction to investigate the Department of State’s conduct of United States foreign policy toward Ukraine. That prerogative belongs to our Members.”

“Official impeachment inquiries are initiated by the adoption of a House resolution empowering or creating a committee or task force to undertake such activities,” McCaul continued. “In both the Nixon and Clinton cases, the Judiciary Committee debated and reported a resolution authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate whether there were sufficient grounds to impeach the President, which was then debated and voted on by the full House of Representatives. There have been no such debates or votes in this Congress.”

McCarthy calls on Pelosi to suspend Trump impeachment inquiry, accuses her of 'recklessness'

Less than 50%

 

[Thunk]

Now, considering the seriousness of impeaching any US president...don't you think McCarthys letter to pelosi should be reported on every MSM news station?

This ain't a slap on the wrist we're talking about here!

Yet, it's almost not reported at all...you have to dig for it.

 

[Thunk]

The media will get locked up when Donald Trump—Andrew Jackson makes his move !!

In all honesty, many news media personalities SHOULD be locked up for criminal conspiracy!

I know they have special protections under the first amendment...but for Gods sake that can't possibly include trying to overthrow the US gov't with their lies!

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The media will get locked up when Donald Trump—Andrew Jackson makes his move !!

In all honesty, many news media personalities SHOULD be locked up for criminal conspiracy!

I know they have special protections under the first amendment...but for Gods sake that can't possibly include trying to overthrow the US gov't with their lies!

Yes that totally destroys the system of justice and creates a flood of major problems that will destroy the nation

 

[S.J.]

Or are you saying you don't believe the House has a good reason to consider impeachment?

It's not the House, it's Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler. Until there's a vote, it's not the House.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

We have a "news" media that blatantly lies to us! Not a lie here and there about little things...but on a minute by minute basis about things of global importance!

For example, in the last week the media has been telling us that we are moving very close to the impeachment of the president of the united states. It could happen at any time now.

The truth is we are no closer to impeachment than we were a year ago...2 years ago. There has not even been a vote to formally INVESTIGATE for impeachment, or draw up articles of impeachment...nothing!

This is dangerous folks! This is the stuff of nazi germany!

Nothing you can do.
The American people are petrified of their government now.
The 2nd Amendment a paper tiger.
And their government is indeed oppressing the people at this point.
We are EXACTLY where the Founding Fathers warned of and worked hard to prevent.

But they misjudged people's ability to quickly forget history. So it's repeating.

This country is in a death spiral. what comes next gets ugly unfortunately.

 

[Thunk]

But they misjudged people's ability to quickly forget history. So it's repeating.

This country is in a death spiral. what comes next gets ugly unfortunately.

I respectfully disagree.

The founding father knew we'd be here eventually & left us the 2nd amendment to take care of the problem.

Yes, it will get ugly beyond imagination...and that's why Americans are so hesitant to employ such drastic measures. But they are pushing us closer and closer to the edge.