Rudy Stands His Ground Says Eff You to Democrats

[jc456]

U.S. Congress List of Commitees - GovTrack.us

Judiciary
The Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction over matters relating to the administration of justice in federal courts, administrative bodies, and law enforcement agencies. Its role in impeachment ..

The House Rules are what govern the actions of the House, not GovTrack.us Is there anything in the Constitution requiring a Formal Impeachment Inquiry or defining how that inquiry is to be set up before the Committees subpoenas are considered legal under the Trumpian doctrine of obstruction at all cost?

nope, but we base our policy and rules based on precedence. you should read up.

The precedent is that the House sets it's operating rules by majority vote at the beginning of the session.

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

 

[BlindBoo]

Holder did, didn't hear you complain.

He lost in court and had to comply with the subpoenas and turn over the requested document. I don't think he ever refused to testify however.

did you look it up?

No. I remember him testifying to Congress a lot and I don't remember him refusing to go before Congress. He might have, but certainly there was no blanket immunity claim ever made by the Obama White House.

I posted it.

Facts, schmacts, eh, they don’t care.

Fact is Holder had to turn over the documents he was held in Contempt of Congress for.

 

[jc456]

He lost in court and had to comply with the subpoenas and turn over the requested document. I don't think he ever refused to testify however.

did you look it up?

No. I remember him testifying to Congress a lot and I don't remember him refusing to go before Congress. He might have, but certainly there was no blanket immunity claim ever made by the Obama White House.

I posted it.

Facts, schmacts, eh, they don’t care.

Fact is Holder had to turn over the documents he was held in Contempt of Congress for.

no he didn't. you can post that link then. I posted the judge said he didn't.

 

[kyzr]

We believe that as per the past two precedents, that it takes a full House vote to launch a proper impeachment inquiry.

Those were not rule setting precedents. Under the House rules at the time they had to vote to give any committee subpoena power.

Well there is a serious disagreement on what it takes to launch a legal impeachment inquiry.
The Republicans say nothing happens w/o a full House vote.
The Democrats say the current impeachment inquiry is legal. Who is right?
Let the courts decide, or have Nancy do a full House vote to launch the impeachment inquiry, WTF is the problem?
Currently the House and Senate are in total disagreement, so the voters will decide in 2020.

The Trump herd is tossing out delaying tactics which have no merit. As soon as one is batted down, they will toss out six more.

All Nancy has to do to prove the GOP wrong is call a full House vote. WTF is the problem? Call the GOP's "bluff".
If the GOP finds new issues then I'd say you are correct.
But if the House vote triggers a legal impeachment inquiry the current fight is over.

Pelosi does not have to the GOP's tune. They don't get to call the plays. She's making them eat a big bowl of karma.

Agreed that Nancy calls the tune in the House, but by the same token, Mitch calls the tune in the Senate, and if the GOP Senate says that Nancy's understanding of what starts a legal impeachment inquiry, is incorrect as per leader McCarthy's letter, that's karma too.
McCarthy asks Pelosi to suspend impeachment inquiry until she defines procedures

If/when the articles are sent over they could be dismissed by a simple majority in the Senate, i.e. no show trial.
GOP Senators’ Concerns Muddy Path to Dismiss Possible Impeachment Charges

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I just love it when power-hungry authoritarians have said authority challenged. You KNOW it makes them blood-spitting mad.

Somebody needs to do the same to the GOP asswipes. Challenge their authority and make them throw a tantrum.


.

 

[BlindBoo]

The House Rules are what govern the actions of the House, not GovTrack.us Is there anything in the Constitution requiring a Formal Impeachment Inquiry or defining how that inquiry is to be set up before the Committees subpoenas are considered legal under the Trumpian doctrine of obstruction at all cost?

nope, but we base our policy and rules based on precedence. you should read up.

The precedent is that the House sets it's operating rules by majority vote at the beginning of the session.

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

Already answered. There is no current rule requiring either a majority vote or that it originate in the Judiciary committee.

 

[lennypartiv]

Crazy Eyes Rudy has his hands full these days. Two of his crooked cronies are in jail, and he's under investigation for not registering as a foreign lobbyist. He's under investigation by the very prosecutor's office he used to lead! He is under subpoena by Congress for his Ukraine hoaxes. And even his wife is sick of him and is divorcing him. In addition to the rest of his estate, she's going after a half million dollars of dirty money from the Ukraine he has been hiding.

Rudy knows what he is doing. He won't even be indicted, and through all the chaos he'll be able to assist William Barr in the investigations of McCabe, Mueller, Comey, and Biden.

 

[Andylusion]

Rudy is right about Pelosi. Our American government has gotten much worse, McCarthyism has returned.

Giuliani Suggests Pelosi Is 'Worse Than Joe McCarthy'

The irony is, McCarthy wasn't all that bad honestly, and the reality is, McCarthy was right. There were spies in the state department.

The Democrats on the other hand... nothing. They got nothing.

 

[lennypartiv]

Actually, Rudy may be standing his ground on Riker's Island.

Not gonna happen, and even if it did he would get a pardon immediately.

 

[lennypartiv]

The House Rules are what govern the actions of the House, not GovTrack.us Is there anything in the Constitution requiring a Formal Impeachment Inquiry or defining how that inquiry is to be set up before the Committees subpoenas are considered legal under the Trumpian doctrine of obstruction at all cost?

What's he supposed to do while your Dem leaders attempt this coup?

 

[g5000]

The House Rules are what govern the actions of the House, not GovTrack.us Is there anything in the Constitution requiring a Formal Impeachment Inquiry or defining how that inquiry is to be set up before the Committees subpoenas are considered legal under the Trumpian doctrine of obstruction at all cost?

What's he supposed to do while your Dem leaders attempt this coup?

Well, he isn't supposed to free ISIS!

 

[BlindBoo]

The House Rules are what govern the actions of the House, not GovTrack.us Is there anything in the Constitution requiring a Formal Impeachment Inquiry or defining how that inquiry is to be set up before the Committees subpoenas are considered legal under the Trumpian doctrine of obstruction at all cost?

What's he supposed to do while your Dem leaders attempt this coup?

Coup? The only coup we have here is "Putins Poop Coup" with the Dirty Don playing the lead role flinging his poo all around and making us stink.

 

[kyzr]

nope, but we base our policy and rules based on precedence. you should read up.

The precedent is that the House sets it's operating rules by majority vote at the beginning of the session.

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

Already answered. There is no current rule requiring either a majority vote or that it originate in the Judiciary committee.

You keep saying that without any proof. How about at least one credible source that backs up that statement? The GOP says that you are wrong, and Nancy isn't taking it to court to settle the issue. So its just another example of dysfunctional government, they can't even agree on what the Constitution says. I used to think that gridlock is a good thing, maybe it is?

 

[jc456]

nope, but we base our policy and rules based on precedence. you should read up.

The precedent is that the House sets it's operating rules by majority vote at the beginning of the session.

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

Already answered. There is no current rule requiring either a majority vote or that it originate in the Judiciary committee.

it's why they use precedence. all the time.

 

[g5000]

The precedent is that the House sets it's operating rules by majority vote at the beginning of the session.

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

Already answered. There is no current rule requiring either a majority vote or that it originate in the Judiciary committee.

You keep saying that without any proof. How about at least one credible source that backs up that statement? The GOP says that you are wrong, and Nancy isn't taking it to court to settle the issue. So its just another example of dysfunctional government, they can't even agree on what the Constitution says. I used to think that gridlock is a good thing, maybe it is?

The burden of proof is on the claimant. The GOP is passing around a hoax that an impeachment inquiry requires a full House vote. They have provided ZERO evidence for that hoax.

It is a bogus delaying tactic, and Pelosi isn't dancing to their tune.

 

[Dragonlady]

it's truly sad how fking stupid all you leftist in here are. pffftt.

When the only response you have to facts, is to call leftists "stupid", it shows you have nothing.

All of you Russian assholes have held the high ground since Trump was elected in large part because Trump held the House and the Senate, and both Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and their Committee Heads all bent over for the Trump Administration, and counted on the sane people in the Administration to run interference with Trump's worst inclinations.

Now that Trump has hollowed out the State Department, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and the top ranks of the military, and installed what he had hoped with be "loyal" Administrators in the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA, all of the sane rational people have been fired or driven out of the White House, and Trump and his staff have been winnowed down to the most corrupt and unhinged conspiracy theorists and criminals ever seen in American government.

The people coming forward as whistle blowers and those who are willing to tell Trump to go **** himself on his stonewalling attempts, are those who are watching Trump and his cronies subvert foreign policy to manufacture dirt on Trump's policial enemies at home, and trying to extort those who are wanting "favours", like trade deals and defense weapons, and bend them to his will.

Unfortunately for Trump, people like Volker and Sonderland actually have a conscience, and career diplomats, like Hill and Yovanovich, who actually was working against corruption in the Ukraine, and was pushed out for refusing to go along with Trump's conspiracy theories and lies.

While railing against the appointment of Hunter Biden to the board of Burisma, Rudy Guliani was pushing both for Yovanovich's ouster and the appointment of his Russian clients to the board of the federally owned gas company. Much of the "evidence" against Yovanovich was cleared falsified, including the "do not prosecute list". Names were misspelled, and the positions held by those on the list was misstated. The Ambassador, known for her thoroughness and precision, would never has issued such an error filled document as official communications from government of the United States of America.

State Dept official details White House meeting, reassigning of Ukraine portfolio

It will please me no end when Pompeo, Guliani, Barr, and Mnuchin are all lead off to jail.

 

[BlindBoo]

How about at least one credible source that backs up that statement?

How about you point out the rule that requires a majority House Vote to start an impeachment inquiry or a rule that requires it start it one certain committee. I'll even give you the rules.

https://naturalresources.house.gov/imo/media/doc/116-House-Rules-Clerk.pdf

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Fascism always begins as a majority placing people in power they did not fully understand.
And that is EXACTLY what Democrats are doing with allowing leftist to take over the party.

The Nazi's never won much more than 30% of the German vote. Hitler was appointed Chancellor.

Uh... the Nazi Party was a lot more than just Hitler. It was the largest political party by 1932 and had over 100 seats in Parliament by then.
Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg due to the same kind of thing that is happening to Trump now. Backroom deals, power grabs and Parliamentary laws passed lead to Hindenburg basically losing all of his power.
Sound familiar?

 

[depotoo]

He lost in court and had to comply with the subpoenas and turn over the requested document. I don't think he ever refused to testify however.

did you look it up?

No. I remember him testifying to Congress a lot and I don't remember him refusing to go before Congress. He might have, but certainly there was no blanket immunity claim ever made by the Obama White House.

I posted it.

Facts, schmacts, eh, they don’t care.

Fact is Holder had to turn over the documents he was held in Contempt of Congress for.

“However, in a ruling Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson also denied Holder's request for an indefinite stay of her prior order that the attorney general must turn over any "non-privileged" documents the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee subpoenaed as part of an investigation into the botched gunrunning investigation.”
.....
he was ordered to turn over non-privileged documents only. non-privileged-
Non-privileged documents are documents that are releasable to someone other than the parties who have the privilege. In other words, some documents are privileged under the law, like attorney-client privilege documents, proprietary information, attorney working papers, etc..

 

[kyzr]

post that.

Post what? The current House Rules have already been posted.

no dumb ass, the link that says a majority vote sets precedent.

Already answered. There is no current rule requiring either a majority vote or that it originate in the Judiciary committee.

You keep saying that without any proof. How about at least one credible source that backs up that statement? The GOP says that you are wrong, and Nancy isn't taking it to court to settle the issue. So its just another example of dysfunctional government, they can't even agree on what the Constitution says. I used to think that gridlock is a good thing, maybe it is?

The burden of proof is on the claimant. The GOP is passing around a hoax that an impeachment inquiry requires a full House vote. They have provided ZERO evidence for that hoax.

It is a bogus delaying tactic, and Pelosi isn't dancing to their tune.

This isn't Judge Judy's court. The Republicans are not "claimants". Have it your way and see what happens. Nothing will happen when the Republicans call the democrat's work product illegal, because the impeachment inquiry was started illegally. It will be DOA in the Senate. More wasted time by the democrats. You still haven't posted any links proving your assertion. You probably can't.

Here try reading this by Alan Dershowitz, it proves I'm right and you are wrong.
Opinion | Hamilton Wouldn’t Impeach Trump