Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 4 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
Why won't Pelosi open an inquiry?
2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:03PM #31
Max
Posts: 2,973

Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:07PM #32
NW
Posts: 1,183

Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.




LOL.  You really don't prove you're right by just saying you're right and I'm wrong.  Fortunately, the actual law in both of our arguments is on my side.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:13PM #33
Max
Posts: 2,973

Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:07PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.




LOL.  You really don't prove you're right by just saying you're right and I'm wrong.  Fortunately, the actual law in both of our arguments is on my side.




They are on your side only in your dreams. As said before, the law isn't silent about an impeachment inquiry. As it stands now Pelosi can legally start an impeachment inquiry without a vote.


And Law Enforcement with a search warrant isn't going to wait outside until the occupant of the house that's going to be searched calls their lawyer.


But thanks for the laughs.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:21PM #34
NW
Posts: 1,183

Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:13PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:07PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.




LOL.  You really don't prove you're right by just saying you're right and I'm wrong.  Fortunately, the actual law in both of our arguments is on my side.




They are on your side only in your dreams. As said before, the law isn't silent about an impeachment inquiry. As it stands now Pelosi can legally start an impeachment inquiry without a vote.


And Law Enforcement with a search warrant isn't going to wait outside until the occupant of the house that's going to be searched calls their lawyer.


But thanks for the laughs.




Please, for the love of God, quote me the place in The Constitution or House Rules that says Pelosi can start an inquiry without a vote.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:24PM #35
felipe27point5
Posts: 2,645

Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:21PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:13PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:07PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.




LOL.  You really don't prove you're right by just saying you're right and I'm wrong.  Fortunately, the actual law in both of our arguments is on my side.




They are on your side only in your dreams. As said before, the law isn't silent about an impeachment inquiry. As it stands now Pelosi can legally start an impeachment inquiry without a vote.


And Law Enforcement with a search warrant isn't going to wait outside until the occupant of the house that's going to be searched calls their lawyer.


But thanks for the laughs.




Please, for the love of God, quote me the place in The Constitution or House Rules that says Pelosi can start an inquiry without a vote.




Please for the love of god quote me the place in the constitution where it says Pelosi needs a vote to start an inquiry

You are welcome to recall my posts when it becomes that i'm proven wrong as long as we judge it on the merits of what we knew to be true at the time it was posted.
2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:29PM #36
Max
Posts: 2,973

Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:24PM, felipe27point5 wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:21PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:13PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:07PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 1:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:55PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:51PM, Max wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:49PM, NW wrote:


Oct 15, 2019 -- 12:03PM, Max wrote:


Oct 14, 2019 -- 8:08PM, Judge wrote:


Oct 12, 2019 -- 1:27PM, NW wrote:

Because opening an official inquiry with a vote gives Republicans subpoena authority. Right now, the Democrats are performing their investigation behind closed doors and the Republicans can do nothing but watch. Do you think there's skeletons in hiding?



Well it also gives the Dems the power of subpoena.   Right now all they can do is send letters asking for information, but they have no real power behind them.   It seems like a stunt/smear so far.


Plus we have a treaty to share information with the Ukraine in matters of government corruption, so clearly he has the authority to ask the kinds of quations that he did from the transcript of the call.   The Ukranian President has said multiple times now that there was no pressure in any way for such info put on him by Trump.   And the Ukraine had re-opened the Hunter Biden investigation already, before the call






The Dems already have subpoena power.




Well, that power is in question right now.  The Administration's claim is that they don't have the power for an investigation that isn't opened.




Well, the US Constitution and House Rules say the Administration's claim is false.




There is no mention of it in The Constitution.  You should probably know the document before you reference it.  The Constitution is silent on the issue.


The House Rules are also silent on the issue.  They don't say what Pelosi is doing is wrong; they also don't say it's wrong.  You can argue that no stance is permissive.  The Administration does not.  The courts will decide.




Sorry, we had this discussion already and in spite of the first discussion it seems that you haven't learned anything new about the topic. So take your own advice in your second sentence. You know as much about the Constitution and House Rules as you do about search warrants.




LOL.  You really don't prove you're right by just saying you're right and I'm wrong.  Fortunately, the actual law in both of our arguments is on my side.




They are on your side only in your dreams. As said before, the law isn't silent about an impeachment inquiry. As it stands now Pelosi can legally start an impeachment inquiry without a vote.


And Law Enforcement with a search warrant isn't going to wait outside until the occupant of the house that's going to be searched calls their lawyer.


But thanks for the laughs.




Please, for the love of God, quote me the place in The Constitution or House Rules that says Pelosi can start an inquiry without a vote.




Please for the love of god quote me the place in the constitution where it says Pelosi needs a vote to start an inquiry




Exactly!  The Constitution says the House "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." Pelosi controls the House and is under no legal obligation to hold an impeachment inquiry vote. Funny how some want to focus on that and not Trump's corruption.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 15, 2019 - 1:29PM #37
Max
Posts: 2,973

For those who don't want to continue to swim in the pool of ignorance, have a good read.............


Fact-Checking 5 Claims About the Impeachment Inquiry


nyti.ms/2IM60JQ

2 months ago  ::  Oct 16, 2019 - 10:30AM #38
prof. quiz
Posts: 7,765

Pelosi is keeping her cards close to her chest. Even if she put this up to a vote Trumpet and his minions still would not cooperate. This way they have more time to keep digging up evidence and not allowing the chosen one to discredit what he can't see with his relentless goofy tweets meant to take our eyes off the ball.


The corruption and dark money fueling the traitors admin will soon be exposed for all to see in its naked glory. The doctored tax returns that limit his property values for tax purposes while inflating their values for the bankers is in black and white for all of us to see now. No wonder he fought so hard not to show them.


As a side note, I read an old piece stating that it turns out that Trumpet is really the biggest loser. His tax returns from '85-'94 showed he lost more money than any other American.


When they have their ducks lined up they will vote. Then Moscow Mitch will run interfenence in the Senate and finally the double-digit IQ fraud will get voted out in 2020 because enough people have tired of his relentless ****.


The end.

2 months ago  ::  Oct 16, 2019 - 10:44AM #39
SSBob643
Posts: 1,537

Oct 16, 2019 -- 10:30AM, prof. quiz wrote:


The corruption and dark money fueling the traitors admin will soon be exposed for all to see in its naked glory. The doctored tax returns that limit his property values for tax purposes while inflating their values for the bankers is in black and white for all of us to see now. No wonder he fought so hard not to show them.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


And it won't move the needle one mm with the trumpies...


2 months ago  ::  Oct 16, 2019 - 10:48AM #40
bertram
Posts: 10,163

Oct 16, 2019 -- 10:30AM, prof. quiz wrote:


Pelosi is keeping her cards close to her chest. Even if she put this up to a vote Trumpet and his minions still would not cooperate. This way they have more time to keep digging up evidence and not allowing the chosen one to discredit what he can't see with his relentless goofy tweets meant to take our eyes off the ball.


The corruption and dark money fueling the traitors admin will soon be exposed for all to see in its naked glory. The doctored tax returns that limit his property values for tax purposes while inflating their values for the bankers is in black and white for all of us to see now. No wonder he fought so hard not to show them.


As a side note, I read an old piece stating that it turns out that Trumpet is really the biggest loser. His tax returns from '85-'94 showed he lost more money than any other American.


When they have their ducks lined up they will vote. Then Moscow Mitch will run interfenence in the Senate and finally the double-digit IQ fraud will get voted out in 2020 because enough people have tired of his relentless ****.


The end.




Trying to get the Trumpophiles to face the truth is like trying to force like poles of a magnet together.  The resistance is strong.

Page 4 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing

Yankees Forum