Did the House of Representatives fail to do their duty?

[Supposn]

Did the House of Representatives fail to do their duty?

If the U.S. House of Representative’s committee believed that any witness’s testimony or affidavit would help to better determine the truth, don’t they have a duty to seek it?

If the White House refuses to cooperate, shouldn’t the House try to legally compel their cooperation?

If the House issues a legal summons that’s not complied with, shouldn’t the House petition the court to compel compliance?

If the U.S. House failed to do their duty, and the U.S. Senate chooses not to call witnesses, why should they believe that they can compel the Senate to call witnesses that the House failed to call? Can the House compel the Senate to do their duty?

Did the House fail to do its duty? Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Penelope]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

 

[there4eyeM]

The entire Congress has faithfully done its 'duty' to its real constituents, unfortunately for the people of our nation. We do have a representative government, and it is clear whom it represents.

 

[MAGAman]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Damn that Constitution.

If only Democrat Speakers were dictators....

It's not supposed to be easy to undo an election.... It's supposed to be hard.

If the Democrats had any evidence, or at least one 1st hand witness, it wouldn't be nearly this difficult.

 

[Penelope]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Damn that Constitution.

If only Democrat Speakers were dictators....

It's not supposed to be easy to undo an election.... It's supposed to be hard.

If the Democrats had any evidence, or at least one 1st hand witness, it wouldn't be nearly this difficult.

Yes it is, esp when one cheats in an election twice. They have plenty of evidence.

 

[MAGAman]

Yes it is, esp when one cheats in an election twice. They have plenty of evidence.

There's a reason you can't link us to that evidence.

It doesn't exist.

You can't prove me wrong by linking to evidence, so the smart and honest thing to do is admit it.

 

[Auld Phart]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Soon impeachment will become null and void,

The democrat have already made it 'null and void'.

You can thank Nadler and Schiff for that.

 

[Penelope]

Yes it is, esp when one cheats in an election twice. They have plenty of evidence.

There's a reason you can't link us to that evidence.

It doesn't exist.

You can't prove me wrong by linking to evidence, so the smart and honest thing to do is admit it.

I don't want to waste my time.

 

[Penelope]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Soon impeachment will become null and void,

The democrat have already made it 'null and void'.

You can thank Nadler and Schiff for that.

No, the republicans made it null and void, meet the King, King Tramp.

If they do not vote to remove the Potus, then we do not have separation of powers, and the congress can just go home.

 

[Norman]

Did the House of Representatives fail to do their duty?

If the U.S. House of Representative’s committee believed that any witness’s testimony or affidavit would help to better determine the truth, don’t they have a duty to seek it?

If the White House refuses to cooperate, shouldn’t the House try to legally compel their cooperation?

If the House issues a legal summons that’s not complied with, shouldn’t the House petition the court to compel compliance?

If the U.S. House failed to do their duty, and the U.S. Senate chooses not to call witnesses, why should they believe that they can compel the Senate to call witnesses that the House failed to call? Can the House compel the Senate to do their duty?

Did the House fail to do its duty? Respectfully, Supposn

They have failed for three years straight, including the republican house. How is it that the budget is trillions and trillions and yet we can't have few billions to fix the border?

No more never Trumpers...

 

[Auld Phart]

 

[Supposn]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Penelope, the legal principles of the McGhan case are of greater significance than that of President Donald Trump's Senate trail.

The U.S. House of Representatives has and should have diligently applied their legal resources to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. The fact that McGhans testimony since that case, is now linked to the impeachment of the U.S. President. It’s now further imperative that judge’s Ketanji Brown Jackson’ decision within which she wrote, "Presidents are not kings", be upheld against the White House’s overruled claims of immunity.

Failure to take all legal steps compelling reluctant witnesses to testify before the House’s committee, has undermined the case for impeachment. Had the House been earnest, the impeachment would have been delivered to the Senate prior to the 2020 elections. Republicans would be otherwise more uncomfortable if they couldn’t resolve the president’s trail before that day.

Respectfully, Supposn

Refer to:
House Democrats say Trump's impeachment defense undercut DOJ's case against McGahn subpoena
… The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. … The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. …

 

[Cellblock2429]

Did the House of Representatives fail to do their duty?

If the U.S. House of Representative’s committee believed that any witness’s testimony or affidavit would help to better determine the truth, don’t they have a duty to seek it?

If the White House refuses to cooperate, shouldn’t the House try to legally compel their cooperation?

If the House issues a legal summons that’s not complied with, shouldn’t the House petition the court to compel compliance?

If the U.S. House failed to do their duty, and the U.S. Senate chooses not to call witnesses, why should they believe that they can compel the Senate to call witnesses that the House failed to call? Can the House compel the Senate to do their duty?

Did the House fail to do its duty? Respectfully, Supposn

/—-/ Not if their duty was to act like sore loser assclowns, waste time, and taxpayers’ money on a kangaroo court. Job well done for them

 

[wamose]

If Democrats keep the majority, the House will always fail in their duty. That's because they will continue to try to transform our government into their own socialist utopia. They'll never learn that socialism isn't compatible with freedom and the American dream.

 

[Penelope]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Penelope, the legal principles of the McGhan case are of greater significance than that of President Donald Trump's Senate trail.

The U.S. House of Representatives has and should have diligently applied their legal resources to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. The fact that McGhans testimony since that case, is now linked to the impeachment of the U.S. President. It’s now further imperative that judge’s Ketanji Brown Jackson’ decision within which she wrote, "Presidents are not kings", be upheld against the White House’s overruled claims of immunity.

Failure to take all legal steps compelling reluctant witnesses to testify before the House’s committee, has undermined the case for impeachment. Had the House been earnest, the impeachment would have been delivered to the Senate prior to the 2020 elections. Republicans would be otherwise more uncomfortable if they couldn’t resolve the president’s trail before that day.

Respectfully, Supposn

Refer to:
House Democrats say Trump's impeachment defense undercut DOJ's case against McGahn subpoena
… The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. … The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. …

Should of fought harder, never mind that the DOJ is under tramp's control.

The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas

So tramp can't be investigated, he is above the law as far as Republican's go. What they are doing to the USA is damning it.

 

[Penelope]

If Democrats keep the majority, the House will always fail in their duty. That's because they will continue to try to transform our government into their own socialist utopia. They'll never learn that socialism isn't compatible with freedom and the American dream.

So you prefer a King and congress to go home. I already know what you think. Also you might be the first one on the welfare lines, but no welfare will be had, you can rot in the street as far as tramp is concerned. You do not have enough money.

 

[22lcidw]

If Democrats keep the majority, the House will always fail in their duty. That's because they will continue to try to transform our government into their own socialist utopia. They'll never learn that socialism isn't compatible with freedom and the American dream.

So you prefer a King and congress to go home. I already know what you think. Also you might be the first one on the welfare lines, but no welfare will be had, you can rot in the street as far as tramp is concerned. You do not have enough money.

Administer those programs at all levels in an even manner. And then also ask...how much is enough? How much can one person pay for another? If one person takes care of himself and another does not, is the person that does not owed anything? Is this the part where the derogatory What Would Jesus Do Alinsky agenda starts in a retort? The King part was the last President. Behind the scenes there was damage done.

 

[dspahn]

Did the House of Representatives fail to do their duty? Yes but it started months ago.

If the U.S. House of Representative’s committee believed that any witness’s testimony or affidavit would help to better determine the truth, don’t they have a duty to seek it?
If their duty is to find the truth, they failed by seeking a political agenda. Regardless of what you believe about Trump and his culpability, or his level of corruption or anything’s else, it was clear what happened was a quest for impeachment. The Democrats hurt their case badly by pursuing non-criminal charges in a process that was so overtly partisan that it was toxic to go along with it- which is why the vote was along party lines. But even the process itself was so blatantly partisan that it precluded Representatives’ ability to support it. There was clearly a lack of due process and there were so many conflicts of interest in so many ways and places. Then they claimed a compressed timeline to justify depriving the President of his right to defend himself. They blew a gaping hole in this justification by withholding the articles and attempting to violate the separation of powers by trying to control the process in the Senate. I am biased here but I am pretty sure that each statement I have made here is fact coming from the perspective of a good interpretation of the constitution and the overall environment.

If the White House refuses to cooperate, shouldn’t the House try to legally compel their cooperation? yes they should. But that’s not what is happening here. As a matter of fact, this process, applied to the President’s counterpoint is what they are labeling “obstruction [of congress] in this case. That is one of the problems with their charge.

If the House issues a legal summons that’s not complied with, shouldn’t the House petition the court to compel compliance? this seems to echo the above question. Same principle.

If the U.S. House failed to do their duty, and the U.S. Senate chooses not to call witnesses, why should they believe that they can compel the Senate to call witnesses that the House failed to call? Can the House compel the Senate to do their duty? the house cannot compel the senate to do anything. Only the constitution can compel the senate- this is what is meant by the separation of powers. One body cannot change or control another- separation of powers prevents this. They can however balance each other by changing the outcome of case-specific processes.

Did the House fail to do its duty? Respectfully, Supposn

I think it is fair to say the House did indeed fail America. They produced a case to deprive a man of due process that was so flimsy that it took a party line vote to pass- in other words, they couldn’t convince the opposition that they had enough solid proof to complete the impeachment and supplanted justice with political capital. I think this is a very balanced way to look at this, though I’ll acknowledge that my personal bias does clearly shine through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Obiwan]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Damn that Constitution.

If only Democrat Speakers were dictators....

It's not supposed to be easy to undo an election.... It's supposed to be hard.

If the Democrats had any evidence, or at least one 1st hand witness, it wouldn't be nearly this difficult.

Yes it is, esp when one cheats in an election twice. They have plenty of evidence.

They've "got the goods" on Hillary???

 

[Maxdeath]

Ask McGahn, court subpoenas can be held up for years.

And no the Democratic House did not fail, but the republicans failed, first in the house and now in the Senate.

Soon impeachment will become null and void, and the GOP has only itself to blame.

They wanted a dictator and king, no need for congress anymore.

Penelope, the legal principles of the McGhan case are of greater significance than that of President Donald Trump's Senate trail.

The U.S. House of Representatives has and should have diligently applied their legal resources to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. The fact that McGhans testimony since that case, is now linked to the impeachment of the U.S. President. It’s now further imperative that judge’s Ketanji Brown Jackson’ decision within which she wrote, "Presidents are not kings", be upheld against the White House’s overruled claims of immunity.

Failure to take all legal steps compelling reluctant witnesses to testify before the House’s committee, has undermined the case for impeachment. Had the House been earnest, the impeachment would have been delivered to the Senate prior to the 2020 elections. Republicans would be otherwise more uncomfortable if they couldn’t resolve the president’s trail before that day.

Respectfully, Supposn

Refer to:
House Democrats say Trump's impeachment defense undercut DOJ's case against McGahn subpoena
… The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. … The Justice Department has previously argued in court that the House doesn't have any legal grounds to bring lawsuits to enforce subpoenas. But Trump's lawyers argued this week in the impeachment trial that the House should have fought harder in the courts to enforce their subpoenas and the Senate shouldn't condone their negligence by bringing in new witnesses. …

You are correct except for one thing. The whole idea was to stop him from being reelected. The democrats told us that. It would have taken too long to do a proper job by going through the courts and it might have meant witnesses that did not fit with the narrative they were attempting to craft.