It’s not correct there were no rules when the Democrats began this caricature of an impeachment inquiry began. The previous 2 impeachment inquiries used virtually identical rules validated by a House floor vote. The existence of appropriate rules is a fact
But you simply refuse to discuss why the Democrats discarded the tried and true rules in favor of the Schiff show chaos. Democrats became so alarmed at the reaction to the secret subterranean inquisition they cobbled together a corrupt set of rules for the inquiry going forward.
This one sided exercise in rule making was approved solely by Democrat votes.
Despite all this repeated explanation in my comments you persist with the claim that I don’t understand.
No I don’t refuse to discuss this. I’ve discussed it with you endlessly. No matter how many times you insist, this house is not bound to former house rules, nor will subsequent houses that may find themselves in impeachment proceedings be bound to this house’s rules. That’s a fact.
No, you wrote there were no rules, no reference to “Constitutional rules”
"There are no rules, it’s for the house to decide. And should there ever be an impeachment process again down the road someday, that house will not be bound to this houses rules. "
The issue is why did House Democrats discard the rules used in previous impeachment inquiries. You are arguing against a straw man with claims I want you to discuss why the House is not bound by previous rules. Show some honesty for a change by explaining why the Democrats insist on creating their own grossly unfair set of rules.
DUDE
That’s the damn point I’ve been making since jump street. The constitution HAS NO RULES!!!
It’s for the house to decide. Now STOP bitching about it.
There you go, the full embrace of the ends justify the means authoritarianism. Anything goes because Orange man bad.
No, it is not a new House. It’s a new low as Democrats abandon any pretext of fairness or due process in their obsessive hatred for President Trump. In our history we have seen white hot political differences but Resistance Democrats have made perverting the Constitution, F*** the rules, and a mockery of the rule of law not just acceptable but required to show fealty to the cause. The mass tantrum over losing the 2016 election might be tolerated for a short while in the school playground but Resistance Democrats have embraced mob rule
Yesterday brought news of the DCCC focus group testing charges to impeach Trump. Bribery was found to be the most impactful so like clockwork Democrats repeated the party line that Trump was guilty of bribery. It doesn’t matter that the evidence doesn’t support a charge of bribery, F*(% the rules, it’s all about stirring up the mob. Get a rope, find a tree, it’s a political Oxbow incident on a national scale.
In other words, the standards/precedent set in previous impeachment inquiries are fine to be discarded as long as Trump is taken down.
Were this Obama, the dems would be screaming from the rooftops if the inquiry were conducted in this manner by the republicans.
What people like Montey don’t get is American people want fairness and the highest standards of ethics. If something comes out in a fair and just process then the information is trustworthy.
With this circus, it is easy to see it is simply a political hatchet job and an attempt to overthrow the voices of American people.
IMO, these Dems are throwing away any credibility they may have had and are sinking the party.
Maybe something positive will happen to the party if better people are elected due to the disgust with the current party. I won’t hold my breath through.
The first general school of thought is that the standard enunciated by the Constitution is subject entirely to whatever interpretation Congress collectively wishes to make:
“What, then, is an impeachable offense? The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history; conviction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to require removal of the accused from office…” Congressman Gerald Ford, 116 Cong. Rec. H.3113-3114 (April 15, 1970).
Withholding American tax payers aid money appropriated by Congress as well as denying access to the president for the favor of investigating the democratic front runner challenging his seat is a bribery and an absolute abuse of office/power. It really doesn’t matter that you don’t think so.
And while we’re at it, let’s add another article of impeachment, witness intimidation…
And you won’t even attempt to explain why the Democrats discarded rules of impeachment treating all parties equitably for the Schiff show where Commissar Schiff gavels Republicans into silence and the President has no representation. No need for rules, the motto of authoritarians everywhere.
Sure I have, Ive pointed out repeatedly that the house sets the rules. I can see that’s got you twisted into a knot. Go ahead, quote the constitution to defend your position…
Here you go: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”[1]
Btw, impeachment is a political process and isn’t governed by regular jurisprudence. As Lindsey Graham pointed out when the shoe was on the other foot, the president doesn’t have to commit a crime.
On January 16, 1999, a Southern politician with a mop of faintly graying hair stood on the floor of the United States Senate and made a striking proclamation about what it meant to impeach a president.
“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role,” the politician said. “Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
F*$* not just the rules but language as well. Bribery is the act of offering or receiving a bribe. There is zero evidence of Trump offering a bribe to the Ukrainians with the caveat that we limit ourselves to rational discussion instead of the bizzaro world of Resistance Democrat marketing terminology.
Resistance Democrats are conducting the so-called impeachment inquiry strait out of “Alice in Wonderland” . Schiff runs the hearings with the imperious disregard for fairness of the Red Queen. Democrats latest attempt to define Trump’s impeachable offense echos Humpty Dumpty.
" When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
Democrats make the rules as they wish and define words as they please. Welcome to wonderland.
Again you are limited to declaring facts as my opinion then spouting inane Democrat talking points. That’s transparently partisan, party over country
