Democrats keep changing the rules to get Trump

Tucker had a real whistleblower named John Kiriakou on last night. Eric Holder had him charged with 5 felonies and he served 23 months in prison. The media, to the extent they noticed him at all, called him a leaker.

(Not sure I spelled his last name correctly.)

The significant and essentially only changes made by Nancy Pelousy to the House procedure for Impeachment, trying to make a false equivalence between general subpoena powers of committees and the specified powers granted in the past by a full house impeachment resolution reserved to the House Judiciary Committee. I did a search for “intelligence” and found only one incidental mention of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. . . and it was not authorized to do anything to do any investigations of impeachments. Additions underlined in bold, deletions in red strike through:

In the three previous instances of judicial impeachments, however, the House did not approve a resolution explicitly authorizing an impeachment inquiry. The Rules of the House since 1975 have granted committees the power to subpoena witnesses and materials, administer oaths, and meet at any time within the United States—powers that were previously granted through resolutions providing blanket investigatory authorities that were agreed to at the start of a Congress or through authorizing resolutions for each impeachment investigation. In two of the three recent cases, the House agreed to separate resolutions to allow committee counsel to take affidavits and depositions. If the House does approve an authorizing resolution, then in addition to the Rules Committee, the Judiciary Committee can report an original resolution authorizing an impeachment investigation if impeachment resolutions have been referred to the committee. In the
~~In the~~ case of the most recent authorization of a presidential impeachment inquiry, the ~~full House did debate the resolution~~ Judiciary Committee reported such a resolution, and the full House debated it. As mentioned above, pursuant to a resolution agreed to by the House, the Judiciary Committee reviewed material submitted by an independent counsel appointed to investigate President Bill Clinton. The Judiciary Committee then reported a resolution (H.Res. 581, 105th Congress) authorizing an investigation into whether sufficient grounds existed for the impeachment of the President.

The intent is to make it seem that the investigation was done BEFORE the House as a whole authorized the Judiciary Committee to investigate Bill Clinton’s impeachable actions and report back. However, that is not the case. The House voted to authorize the Judiciary Committee to investigate and THEN report its findings to the House with a recommendation. It was not what Nancy is trying to obfuscate with these self-serving edits. . . Which were dated, wait for it. . . August 12, 2019!, the same day as the so called whistleblower turned in his complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General!

Do you believe in coincidences? I certainly do not.

Has anyone else noticed the similarities in the mouths of Democrats?

I have come to the conclusion that it’s the result from spewing so much Draino(™) . . . No one can do that for an entire career and not have it effect their mouths.

Has anyone else noticed the similarities in the mouths of Democrats?

I have come to the conclusion that it’s the result from spewing so much Draino(™) . . . No one can do that for an entire career and not have it effect their mouths.