White House says it will refuse to cooperate with impeachment inquiry

Rommey

Rommey

Well-Known Member
Yooper

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
transporter said:
Innocent people are hell bent on clearing their names...guilty people fight the process...the obstruct...they deflect...
Click to expand...
Your subsequent clauses (after the periods) are precisely some of the ways an innocent person will seek to "clear his/her/xer name." Especially when the weight of a system is aligned against that person.

--- End of line (MCP)
 
Burnthings

Burnthings

Active Member
141489
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
GOOD!
Click to expand...
How is that good? Seriously, even if you don’t agree with them the house has constitutional authority for oversight. If you let a president decide when he allows oversight it’s not oversight. As Lindsey Graham said during the Clinton impeachment, doing that allows the president to take the power of impeachment from congress.
 
Yooper

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Midnightrider said:
How is that good? Seriously, even if you don’t agree with them the house has constitutional authority for oversight. If you let a president decide when he allows oversight it’s not oversight. As Lindsey Graham said during the Clinton impeachment, doing that allows the president to take the power of impeachment from congress.
Click to expand...
I don't think we should conflate "oversight" with "impeachment." They are not, in general use, the same thing. If the Dem leadership wants the docs it should follow the procedures to initiate impeachment and not play the pseudo-official game it's been playing.

Here is how the process is supposed to work:
In the House of Representatives
  • The House Judiciary Committee decides whether or not to proceed with impeachment. If they do...
  • The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee will propose a resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to begin a formal inquiry into the issue of impeachment.
  • Based on their inquiry, the Judiciary Committee will send another resolution composed of one or more "Articles of Impeachment" to the full House stating that impeachment is warranted and why or that impeachment is not called for.
  • The Full House (probably operating under special floor rules set by the House Rules Committee) will debate and vote on each Article of Impeachment.
  • Should any one of the Articles of Impeachment be approved by a simple majority vote, the President will be "impeached." However, being impeached is sort of like being indicted for a crime. The president will remain in office pending the outcome of the Senate impeachment trial.
Click to expand...
Is this what's happening (i.e., the first two or three bullets)? I don't think so (but willing to be corrected). Until this does happen the Executive is under no obligation to "help" the Legislative (not sure what the requirements are even then). I guess, of course, the Judiciary Committee could add "did not assist" to the "articles of impeachment" resolution....

Source:
www.thoughtco.com

The Method and History of the US Impeachment Process

Three U.S. presidents have been impeached. What is the impeachment process in US government, and what does it mean to be impeached?
www.thoughtco.com www.thoughtco.com

--- End of line (MCP)
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Yooper said:
I don't think we should conflate "oversight" with "impeachment." They are not, in general use, the same thing. If the Dem leadership wants the docs it should follow the procedures to initiate impeachment and not play the pseudo-official game it's been playing.

Here is how the process is supposed to work:

Is this what's happening (i.e., the first two or three bullets)? I don't think so (but willing to be corrected). Until this does happen the Executive is under no obligation to "help" the Legislative (not sure what the requirements are even then). I guess, of course, the Judiciary Committee could add "did not assist" to the "articles of impeachment" resolution....

Source:
www.thoughtco.com

The Method and History of the US Impeachment Process

Three U.S. presidents have been impeached. What is the impeachment process in US government, and what does it mean to be impeached?
www.thoughtco.com www.thoughtco.com

--- End of line (MCP)
Click to expand...
In other words, if they just follow the process, they can subpoena the documents they want.

I wonder why they won’t just do that
 
Rommey

Rommey

Well-Known Member
This_person said:
In other words, if they just follow the process, they can subpoena the documents they want.

I wonder why they won’t just do that
Click to expand...
As I understand it, if they formally start an inquiry, the minority (Republicans) would then have subpoena power and Trump would be able to present a defense (i.e., depose witnesses under oath).
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
Yooper said:
I don't think we should conflate "oversight" with "impeachment." They are not, in general use, the same thing. If the Dem leadership wants the docs it should follow the procedures to initiate impeachment and not play the pseudo-official game it's been playing.

Here is how the process is supposed to work:

Is this what's happening (i.e., the first two or three bullets)? I don't think so (but willing to be corrected). Until this does happen the Executive is under no obligation to "help" the Legislative (not sure what the requirements are even then). I guess, of course, the Judiciary Committee could add "did not assist" to the "articles of impeachment" resolution....

Source:
www.thoughtco.com

The Method and History of the US Impeachment Process

Three U.S. presidents have been impeached. What is the impeachment process in US government, and what does it mean to be impeached?
www.thoughtco.com www.thoughtco.com

--- End of line (MCP)
Click to expand...
Thats one description of the process. But as I understand it the actual written rules are ambiguous to nonexistent, I am open to being corrected as well. In either case, the house has authority over both oversight and impeachment. They can subpoena in either role and refusing to respond to those subpoenas is obstruction of congress.
Rommey said:
As I understand it, if they formally start an inquiry, the minority (Republicans) would then have subpoena power and Trump would be able to present a defense (i.e., depose witnesses under oath).
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that the last Republican congress changed the rules to force minority party requests for subpoenas to be approved by the majority of the committee. So they might not have any additional power at all.
 
Rommey

Rommey

Well-Known Member
Midnightrider said:
Except for the fact that the last Republican congress changed the rules to force minority party requests for subpoenas to be approved by the majority of the committee. So they might not have any additional power at all.
Click to expand...
I don't see anyone reporting that fact. I would assume some news organization would be putting that tidbit out there in all the coverage on the impeachment issue out there. Also, the leading Republicans are out there saying they would have subpoena power. So I'm not sure where you got your info...maybe you should inform them of their rules to stop them from spreading misinformation...
 
littlelady

littlelady

God bless the USA
Rommey said:
I don't see anyone reporting that fact. I would assume some news organization would be putting that tidbit out there in all the coverage on the impeachment issue out there. Also, the leading Republicans are out there saying they would have subpoena power. So I'm not sure where you got your info...maybe you should inform them of their rules to stop them from spreading misinformation...
Click to expand...

:yay: Happy Birthday!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top