Pelosi holds vote Thursday

[Shad]

And they are accurate.

Except for the fact that the House impeaches not the majority.

That's called "being the majority".

Impeachment is done by the House not the majority

As it was under the Republicans during the Clinton impeachment.

Nope. Both side had the same access and rights

 

[Jose Fly]

Dems were in control before the vote and after the vote.

Yeah....that's called "being the majority". You might as well be griping that Mitch McConnell is "in control" of the Senate.

Impeachment is done by the House not the majority.

No duh. But the majority sets the rules and controls the process, as it has been in every other impeachment in US history.

I mean, what exactly were you expecting? House Republicans to be given control?

 

[Jose Fly]

Except for the fact that the House impeaches not the majority.

Impeachment is done by the House not the majority

And where did anyone say otherwise?

Nope. Both side had the same access and rights

Show where during the Clinton and Nixon impeachment the minority party could issue subpoenas without approval from the committee chair.

 

[fantome profane]

Except for the fact that the House impeaches not the majority.

The House impeaches by a simple majority vote.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Uh yeah, that's the same one I just linked.
Read the disclaimer that I posted. Notice how it is written at the very beginning of the document! Did you not see it??


Nonsense. They were allowed to ask questions, and did ask questions.

also in the "I would like to ask you a favor" part there are a couple of ellipses, places where the call was not transcripted. Earlier this week there was testimony that filled in those parts. Now that this is going to be an open process that will be brought to light. Thank you Republicans.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ergo people are just repeating what the media tells them without thought. Read the Resolution. Dems still have control thus is a farce

You need more than that. In fact since the Republicans have been obstructing the whole process bring them in threatens to change it into a farce.

 

[Shad]

And where did anyone say otherwise?

The Constitution. Have you read it?

Show where during the Clinton and Nixon impeachment the minority party could issue subpoenas without approval from the committee chair.

Text - H.Res.581 - 105th Congress (1997-1998): Authorizing and directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether sufficient grounds exist for the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States.
Summary of H.Res. 803 (93rd): Resolution providing appropriate power to the Committee on the Judiciary to conduct an ... - GovTrack.us
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc819397/m2/1/high_res_d/98-763_1998Sep16.pdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/hres803.htm

 

[Shad]

The House impeaches by a simple majority vote.

That wasn't my point. My point was about the rules in the resolution.

 

[fantome profane]

That wasn't my point. My point was about the rules in the resolution.

And if you could change them,what changes would you make?

Would you give the Republicans unfettered subpoena power?

 

[Jose Fly]

The Constitution. Have you read it?

Where did anyone say that the majority party impeaches, as you claimed?

Text - H.Res.581 - 105th Congress (1997-1998): Authorizing and directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether sufficient grounds exist for the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States.
Summary of H.Res. 803 (93rd): Resolution providing appropriate power to the Committee on the Judiciary to conduct an ... - GovTrack.us
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc819397/m2/1/high_res_d/98-763_1998Sep16.pdf

Umm.....it says subpoenas must be signed off by the chairman, just as with today's.

 

[Shad]

And if you could change them,what changes would you make?

The minority leader does not have to get Schiff to sign off. Schiff has an open bias as well.

Would you give the Republicans unfettered subpoena power?

The same power Schiff has. Schiff does not need anyone to sign-off so he has unfettered subpoena power. Amusing how you either overlook or didn't know that

 

[Shad]

Where did anyone say that the majority party impeaches, as you claimed?

You

"That's called "being the majority"."

Umm.....it says subpoenas must be signed off by the chairman, just as with today's.

Nope.

"Provides that such authority may be exercised by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly or by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee."

"For the purpose of making such investigation, the committee is
authorized to require--
(1) by subpoena or otherwise--

(b) Such authority of the committee may be exercised--
(1) by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly,
or, if either declines to act, by the other acting alone, except that in
the event either so declines, either shall have the right to refer to
the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be
so exercised and the committee shall be convened promptly to render that
decision; or
(2) by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee.
Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be issued over the signature of
the chairman, or ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of
them, and may be served by any person designated by the chairman, or ranking
minority member, or any member designated by either of them. The chairman, or
ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of them (or, with
respect to any deposition, answer to interrogatory, or affidavit, any person
authorized by law to administer oaths) may administer oaths to any witness. For
the purposes of this section, ``things'' includes, without limitation, books,
records, correspondence, logs, journals, memorandums, papers, documents,
writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, reproductions, recordings,
tapes, transcripts, printouts, data compilations from which information can be
obtained (translated if necessary, through detection devices into reasonably
usable form), tangible objects, and other things of any kind."

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Constitution. Have you read it?




Text - H.Res.581 - 105th Congress (1997-1998): Authorizing and directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether sufficient grounds exist for the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States.
Summary of H.Res. 803 (93rd): Resolution providing appropriate power to the Committee on the Judiciary to conduct an ... - GovTrack.us
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc819397/m2/1/high_res_d/98-763_1998Sep16.pdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/hres803.htm

That appears to support @Jose Fly 's claim. Please quote the relevant passage that says anyone in Congress can issue a subpoena.

 

[fantome profane]

The minority leader does not have to get Schiff to sign off. Schiff has an open bias as well.



The same power Schiff has. Schiff does not need anyone to sign-off so he has unfettered subpoena power. Amusing how you either overlook or didn't know that

Of course Schiff has unfettered subpoena power. He is in charge. Amusing how you either overlook that or didn’t know that.

So let me ask you this. In your suggested version of the rules could the Republicans go to maga rally and hand out a few hundred subpoenas, bus then all up to Washington and have them testify for hours about how much they love the dear leader?

Or would there be some mechanism to ensure their subpoena were valid and relevant?

 

[Shad]

Of course Schiff has unfettered subpoena power. He is in charge. Amusing how you either overlook that or didn’t know that.

Except I pointed out he is in charge already a few posts ago. Try again.

So Schiff having unfettered access; good. Gop minority leader having the same; bad. Hilarious.

So let me ask you this. In your suggested version of the rules could the Republicans go to maga rally and hand out a few hundred subpoenas, bus then all up to Washington and have them testify for hours about how much they love the dear leader?

This is an absurd point and dismissed as such.

Or would there be some mechanism to ensure their subpoena were valid and relevant?

Schiff is under no such mechanism yet you want the GOP to be. Hilarious. Authoritarian hack

 

[Jose Fly]

You

"That's called "being the majority"."

That was in reference to running the process and chairing the committees.

Nope.

"Provides that such authority may be exercised by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly or by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee."

"For the purpose of making such investigation, the committee is
authorized to require--
(1) by subpoena or otherwise--

(b) Such authority of the committee may be exercised--
(1) by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly,
or, if either declines to act, by the other acting alone, except that in
the event either so declines, either shall have the right to refer to
the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be
so exercised and the committee shall be convened promptly to render that
decision; or
(2) by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee.
Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be issued over the signature of
the chairman, or ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of
them, and may be served by any person designated by the chairman, or ranking
minority member, or any member designated by either of them. The chairman, or
ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of them (or, with
respect to any deposition, answer to interrogatory, or affidavit, any person
authorized by law to administer oaths) may administer oaths to any witness. For
the purposes of this section, ``things'' includes, without limitation, books,
records, correspondence, logs, journals, memorandums, papers, documents,
writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, reproductions, recordings,
tapes, transcripts, printouts, data compilations from which information can be
obtained (translated if necessary, through detection devices into reasonably
usable form), tangible objects, and other things of any kind."

And from the rules of this impeachment...

(4)(A) The ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee is authorized, with the concurrence of the chair, to require, as deemed necessary to the investigation—
(i) by subpoena or otherwise—
(I) the attendance and testimony of any person (including at a taking of a deposition); and
(II) the production of books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents; and
(ii) by interrogatory, the furnishing of information.

(B) In the case that the chair declines to concur in a proposed action of the ranking minority member pursuant to subparagraph (A), the ranking minority member shall have the right to refer to the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be so exercised and the chair shall convene the committee promptly to render that decision, subject to the notice procedures for a comittee meeting under clause 2(g)(3)(A) and (B) of 23 rule XI.

(C) Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be signed by the ranking minority member, and may be served by any person designated by the ranking minority member.

Same thing.

 

[Shad]

That was in reference to running the process and chairing the committees.


And from the rules of this impeachment...

(4)(A) The ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee is authorized, with the concurrence of the chair, to require, as deemed necessary to the investigation—
(i) by subpoena or otherwise—
(I) the attendance and testimony of any person (including at a taking of a deposition); and
(II) the production of books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents; and
(ii) by interrogatory, the furnishing of information.

(B) In the case that the chair declines to concur in a proposed action of the ranking minority member pursuant to subparagraph (A), the ranking minority member shall have the right to refer to the committee for decision the question whether such authority shall be so exercised and the chair shall convene the committee promptly to render that decision, subject to the notice procedures for a comittee meeting under clause 2(g)(3)(A) and (B) of 23 rule XI.

(C) Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be signed by the ranking minority member, and may be served by any person designated by the ranking minority member.

Same thing.

No it is not the same as I per my quotes. Try again. Do not the "or"

" or
(2) by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee.
Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be issued over the signature of
the chairman, or ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of
them, and may be served by any person designated by the chairman, or ranking
minority member, or any member designated by either of them. The chairman, or
ranking minority member, or any member designated by either of them (or, with
respect to any deposition, answer to interrogatory, or affidavit, any person
authorized by law to administer oaths) may administer oaths to any witness. For
the purposes of this section, ``things'' includes, without limitation, books,
records, correspondence, logs, journals, memorandums, papers, documents,
writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, reproductions, recordings,
tapes, transcripts, printouts, data compilations from which information can be
obtained (translated if necessary, through detection devices into reasonably
usable form), tangible objects, and other things of any kind.""

"Subpoenas and interrogatories so authorized may be issued over the signature of
the chairman, or ranking minority member, "

BILLS-116-HRes660.pdf

(4)(A) The ranking minority member of the
2 Permanent Select Committee is authorized, with the

3 concurrence of the chair, to require, as deemed nec-
4 essary to the investigation—"

 

[Jose Fly]

No it is not the same as I per my quotes. Try again.

Okay, I'm not doing this again with you. First it was your argument that there's no link at all between "We're ready to buy javelins" and "I need a favor though"; then it was you challenging me show evidence that J. Biden was acting with the support of the EU, IMF, and congressmen from both parties, and when I did that you waved it away as me "throwing links" at you; and now it's over the fact that with both impeachments, the minority party could issue subpoenas and if there's disagreement on that it will go to full committee vote, and you just saying "Nuh uh".

So thanks for your time.

 

[Shad]

Okay, I'm not doing this again with you. First it was your argument that there's no link at all between "We're ready to buy javelins" and "I need a favor though"; then it was you challenging me show evidence that J. Biden was acting with the support of the EU, IMF, and congressmen from both parties, and when I did that you waved it away as me "throwing links" at you; and now it's over the fact that with both impeachments, the minority party could issue subpoenas and if there's disagreement on that it will go to full committee vote, and you just saying "Nuh uh".

So thanks for your time.

You are not reading what I post. The points I quoted included an "or" while your quotes did not. You didn't read closely which is not my problem. That "or" makes a huge difference in power to subpoena. Section 2 include an "or" as per section 1 which your section B includes no such wording. Try again

 

[fantome profane]

Except I pointed out he is in charge already a few posts ago. Try again.

So Schiff having unfettered access; good. Gop minority leader having the same; bad. Hilarious.



This is an absurd point and dismissed as such.



Schiff is under no such mechanism yet you want the GOP to be. Hilarious. Authoritarian hack

Listen, the Democrats are in charge of the House. You don’t like that, I understand. Trump is President, I don’t like that. But we both have to accept reality whether we like it or not.