Graham squirms when confronted with double standard on Subpoenas....

[bodecea]

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Explain how and why you think it changed?

In 2015 the Republican House changed the rules to give various committee chairs the right to subpoena witnesses without a vote to authorize that power. Before you ask, yes the Dems complained like the Trumpubs are now.

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

So various committee already have that power. Why is there a need to vote to get something they already have?

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.
Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist (and became communists). So all they had to do was say no when they were in the minority. They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

Right now Democrats are calling it an impeachment when in fact it is a one-sided search for crimes in a highly partisan inquisition....similar to a Salem Witch Trial

This gained momentum and became a regular thing under Obama's Win at ALL Costs, Elections have Consequences Political Kamikaze Warfare.

You Russian trolls slipped up a little in 2018, Comrade.

 

[The Original Tree]

To give the president an opportunity to defend himself......

You don't like that possibility.

It would make it a fair fight, and you don't want to allow that.

Rump gets his chance when or if it goes to the Senate just like every other President that was ever faced with Impeachment. Are you saying that every other president has one set of laws and Rump has his very own set? Does that mean that you are saying that Rump is above the law? The sooner it goes to the Senate and he gets to defend himself the better off we all are.

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Explain how and why you think it changed?

In 2015 the Republican House changed the rules to give various committee chairs the right to subpoena witnesses without a vote to authorize that power. Before you ask, yes the Dems complained like the Trumpubs are now.

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

So various committee already have that power. Why is there a need to vote to get something they already have?

Actually they don't. Only in matters of Legislative Oversight can they look in to certain issues.

They have ZERO authority in a FAKE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.

 

[WillowTree]

To give the president an opportunity to defend himself......

You don't like that possibility.

It would make it a fair fight, and you don't want to allow that.

Rump gets his chance when or if it goes to the Senate just like every other President that was ever faced with Impeachment. Are you saying that every other president has one set of laws and Rump has his very own set? Does that mean that you are saying that Rump is above the law? The sooner it goes to the Senate and he gets to defend himself the better off we all are.

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

 

[The Original Tree]

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Explain how and why you think it changed?

In 2015 the Republican House changed the rules to give various committee chairs the right to subpoena witnesses without a vote to authorize that power. Before you ask, yes the Dems complained like the Trumpubs are now.

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

So various committee already have that power. Why is there a need to vote to get something they already have?

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.
Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist (and became communists). So all they had to do was say no when they were in the minority. They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

Right now Democrats are calling it an impeachment when in fact it is a one-sided search for crimes in a highly partisan inquisition....similar to a Salem Witch Trial

This gained momentum and became a regular thing under Obama's Win at ALL Costs, Elections have Consequences Political Kamikaze Warfare.

You Russian trolls slipped up a little in 2018, Comrade.

Whatever you say Joseph Goebbels.

 

[The Original Tree]

Rump gets his chance when or if it goes to the Senate just like every other President that was ever faced with Impeachment. Are you saying that every other president has one set of laws and Rump has his very own set? Does that mean that you are saying that Rump is above the law? The sooner it goes to the Senate and he gets to defend himself the better off we all are.

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

Yet no impeachment vote. No Fake Committees with Fake Impeachment Inquiries and Subpoena Cannons. No Secret Accusers with Secret Accusations, Secret Transcripts, Denial of Due Process, and Secret Leaks to a Secretive Biased Media.

 

[airplanemechanic]

How about this-the CONGRESS is acting in an impeachable manner-closed courts and secret witnesses-leaking stories to the media-reading

Isn't that what the House did when it was investigating Obama?

Fuck Stick Homo Pole Gagger married to the first transexual first "Queen" and his Corrupt Administration, never went through anything like this, because like The Mob, they owned the People Investigating them. They had bought Judges and Bought Police so to speak. Then these same Bought Scum Bags launched their COUP, after Obama Bin Sucking Dick left Office, because The Boss' hand Picked DYKE did not get Installed in to the Office of POTUS.

If there was any comparison at all, Obama would have faced a firing squad for Treason.

You know you're lying. It's what you do. During those investigations into Obama, the minority party was not given subpoena power of their own. Many of the depositions were held behind closed doors and facts were selectively leaked from those testimonies.

All the things the Trupublicans are whinning about now.

Obama wasn't IMPEACHED. When the president is IMPEACHED the minority party gets subpoena power.

That and the investigations into Obozo were not "impeachment inquiries" so try to keep comparing apples to ball bearings.

You're flopping like a dying fish.

 

[BlindBoo]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

 

[mudwhistle]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

That is what is called is called a leading question. It also is one with no factual basis.

Democrats were only interested in obstruction, not in finding out the truth or exhonerating the Obama Administration

 

[BlindBoo]

Rump gets his chance when or if it goes to the Senate just like every other President that was ever faced with Impeachment. Are you saying that every other president has one set of laws and Rump has his very own set? Does that mean that you are saying that Rump is above the law? The sooner it goes to the Senate and he gets to defend himself the better off we all are.

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

That's a good question, well I suppose it's a question. The GOP House had and used the subpoena power to investigate what they saw as wrongdoing in the executive branch, without ever having to call a special Impeachment Inquiry.

The obstruction into Congressional oversight began before the DEMS called "Impeachment Inquiry"!

Good catch.

 

[BlindBoo]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

That is what is called is called a leading question. It also is one with no factual basis.

Democrats were only interested in obstruction, not in finding out the truth or exhonerating the Obama Administration

There is no exonerating anyone from a Conspiracy Theory. They morph like a virus.

 

[The Original Tree]

We have had 3.5 Years of Anonymous Faggots with their Anonymous Accusations Published in The Left Tard Trump Hating Media, Double Secret Accusations, and For Schitt Face's Eyes Only Evidence.

Obama never dealt with that. He had an entire Corrupt and Criminal Political Machine Bowing down to him and carrying out The Black Messiah's every wicked wish.

 

[mudwhistle]

In every other impeachment the house voted. Should not Trump receive the same treatment?

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

That's a good question, well I suppose it's a question. The GOP House had and used the subpoena power to investigate what they saw as wrongdoing in the executive branch, without ever having to call a special Impeachment Inquiry.

The obstruction into Congressional oversight began before the DEMS called "Impeachment Inquiry"!

Good catch.

Wait a fucking minute!!!!!

Congress has the Constitutionional right to provide oversight of the Executive Branch. It doesn't have to be an impeachment. Impeachment is supposed to be a last resort to reigning in a official who has demonstrated a disregard for the law.

 

[The Original Tree]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

That is what is called is called a leading question. It also is one with no factual basis.

Democrats were only interested in obstruction, not in finding out the truth or exhonerating the Obama Administration

There is no exonerating anyone from a Conspiracy Theory. They morph like a virus.

So I take it you are All in on Voting for The Orange Menace in 2020.

Finally you have seen The Light!

 

[BlindBoo]

Obama wasn't IMPEACHED.

That's true. Yet they still had the power to subpoena witnesses for oversight of the executive branch.

When the president is IMPEACHED the minority party gets subpoena power.

Show me in the Constitution where that is a required of the House when Impeaching a president.

That and the investigations into Obozo were not "impeachment inquiries"

The current House has the same subpoena power that the previous House had when it was investigating Obama. Why should they give the Trumpublican's subpoena power? There is no constitutional requirement to do so. Just like there was no constitutional requirement for Mitch to hold a single hearing on Obama's SC nominee.

 

[BlindBoo]

In both modern cases the House Committees didn't have standing subpoena power and a vote was required to give any committee, not just an impeachment inquiry, subpoena power. That has since changed.

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

That's a good question, well I suppose it's a question. The GOP House had and used the subpoena power to investigate what they saw as wrongdoing in the executive branch, without ever having to call a special Impeachment Inquiry.

The obstruction into Congressional oversight began before the DEMS called "Impeachment Inquiry"!

Good catch.

Wait a fucking minute!!!!!

Congress has the Constitutionional right to provide oversight of the Executive Branch. It doesn't have to be an impeachment. Impeachment is supposed to be a last resort to reigning in a official who has demonstrated a disregard for the law.

Ignoring duly authorized subpoenas is a disregard for the law. Ordering your appointees to ignore them is callous disregard for the law.

 

[mudwhistle]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

That is what is called is called a leading question. It also is one with no factual basis.

Democrats were only interested in obstruction, not in finding out the truth or exhonerating the Obama Administration

There is no exonerating anyone from a Conspiracy Theory. They morph like a virus.

So that explains Russian Collusion and the Ukrainian whistleblower complaint, but Benghazi and the emails don't fall under that definition.

• Something happened
• Somebody was guilty of a cover-up
• and Democrats refused to allow an investigation in congress
• So currently the DOJ is investigating all of the above as well as the criminal conspiracy to remove the president from office using illegal warrants.

 

[mudwhistle]

Link?
And you won’t mind when a Republican house does this to a DemonRat Prez?

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

They already did it to Obama. Why do you think they changed the rules?

The GOP was impeaching Obama in 2015?
In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

That's a good question, well I suppose it's a question. The GOP House had and used the subpoena power to investigate what they saw as wrongdoing in the executive branch, without ever having to call a special Impeachment Inquiry.

The obstruction into Congressional oversight began before the DEMS called "Impeachment Inquiry"!

Good catch.

Wait a fucking minute!!!!!

Congress has the Constitutionional right to provide oversight of the Executive Branch. It doesn't have to be an impeachment. Impeachment is supposed to be a last resort to reigning in a official who has demonstrated a disregard for the law.

Ignoring duly authorized subpoenas is a disregard for the law. Ordering your appointees to ignore them is callous disregard for the law.

Unfortunately this is an impeachment in name only.
If it was an impeachment BOTH SIDES would have the right to subpoena Witnesses. So Democrats are abusing their positions to investigate alleged criminal behavior without probable-cause purely for political purposes. The entire process is unprecedented and borders on illegal. Trump is not required to cooperate with a lynchmob bent on hanging him regardless of the facts.

 

[The Original Tree]

Obama wasn't IMPEACHED.

That's true. Yet they still had the power to subpoena witnesses for oversight of the executive branch.

When the president is IMPEACHED the minority party gets subpoena power.

Show me in the Constitution where that is a required of the House when Impeaching a president.

That and the investigations into Obozo were not "impeachment inquiries"

The current House has the same subpoena power that the previous House had when it was investigating Obama. Why should they give the Trumpublican's subpoena power? There is no constitutional requirement to do so. Just like there was no constitutional requirement for Mitch to hold a single hearing on Obama's SC nominee.

Wrong.

Their oversight only pertains in matters of Legislative Oversight.

For The Legislative Branch to elevate it's authority to an Investigative Body Investigating The President, they need to vote to grant themselves, in bipartisan fashion, Impeachment Powers. They have no impeachment authority without that vote. That violates The Separation of Powers that the three Co-Equal Branches of Government are run by.

The Fore Fathers built in Accountability.

The Democrats are trying to circumvent that accountability.

So not only are you Cowards, you are Liars too. Your Dear Leader Adam Schiitt and Nazi Pelosi or a testament to your moral and ethical depravity.

 

[BlindBoo]

I think you're confused.
Before.....we had a Congress that was working together and interested in doing the People's work.

True. Before 2009 that is.

"I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes." - Mick Mulvaney

Mulvaney casually confessed last week that nobody cares about the deficit. Mulvaney of course spent the Obama era claiming to care about the deficit a lot — so much, indeed, that he was willing to shut down the government or even default on the national debt in order to reduce it.

Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

Then the Democrats became extremely partisan and obstructionist

"The Republican Party of the last quarter century regularly toggles between methodological extremes. When they gain the presidency, they dismiss congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility alike as totally unnecessary. When they relinquish it, they pursue both to fanatical extremes. Either they are blowing up the deficit and covering up wild crime sprees, or they are demanding senseless austerity and conducting permanent, redundant investigations of phantasmal Fox News–generated nonevents."

They had to change the rules to prevent Democrats from preventing discovery in investigations.

What was the outcome of what the Democrats said were phony investigations based on wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories?

That is what is called is called a leading question. It also is one with no factual basis.

Democrats were only interested in obstruction, not in finding out the truth or exhonerating the Obama Administration

There is no exonerating anyone from a Conspiracy Theory. They morph like a virus.

So that explains Russian Collusion and the Ukrainian whistleblower complaint, but Benghazi and the emails don't fall under that definition.

• Something happened
• Somebody was guilty of a cover-up
• and Democrats refused to allow an investigation in congress
• So currently the DOJ is investigating all of the above as well as the criminal conspiracy to remove the president from office using illegal warrants.

So you think the House committees that investigated Benghazi didn't have subpoena power?

Sucks to be you.

Perhaps you think the endless investigations into Benghazi weren't driven by partisan politics too?

Kevin McCarthy, then in the running for Speaker of the House, said, "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping...."

Of course it shows a pattern of behavior for the Republicans, why else would Trumpybear try to get the Ukraine to Trump up an investigation on Biden. It's worked in the past. Just the appearance is all that mattered.

 

[BlindBoo]

Wrong.

Their oversight only pertains in matters of Legislative Oversight.

So when they investigated the attack in Benghazi, that was just legislative oversight?

For The Legislative Branch to elevate it's authority to an Investigative Body Investigating The President, they need to vote to grant themselves, in bipartisan fashion, Impeachment Powers.

Nope, another swing and a miss, nothing in our Constitution requires any type of special impeachment inquiry at all, much less bipartisan rules for them.