[Pearls Before Swine]

The phrase “... in response to the complaint...” is particularly damning. Especially so, as conservatives suspected this was the case, but it had to be extracted under careful questioning.

Set up.

[cgbg]

Rules and laws are for deplorables.

They don’t apply to Democratic Royalty.

[Seruzawa]

Hello? Barr? Where are you, Barr? Here boy! You got work to do.

[pepsi_junkie]

This is the sort of thing that led to the fall of the Roman republic and the transition to a Roman Empire with essentially a king. The Senate was f-ing around with the laws so they could persecute political opponents. They tried playing that game with Julius Caesar and he said “hmmm, I have an army and they demand I return to Rome without it so I can be tried in a kangaroo court over lies? I think I’ll just bring my army with me.” And the Republic was no more.

[bk1000]

They don’t seem to realize what will happen if they remove Trump illegitimately.

[RayChuang88]

Are you sure the Democrats aren't taking their cues from the Stalin "show trials" of the 1930's just before the Yehzovchina Great Purge?

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Of course they are. That's #2 in the Rules for Liberals Handbook;

1. It's always someone else's fault.
2. If you have lost or it looks like you might lose, change the rules and try again.

[Harpotoo]

And atkinson still has a Job!?!?! Hey I want a Fed job for life too:-)

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

(from the article):"Prior to the so-called “whistle blower” (WB) coming forward,
the language in the complaint form did indicate that the information had to be first hand.
IC IG Michael Atkinson changed the form specifically for this WB."

Well, we have found classic partisan politics in the intelligence community,Investigator General.
According to the article, IC IG Michael Atkinson is self-identified.
Is there any question why the Intelligence Community can't be trusted (?) and is part of the "Deep State" swamp ?

[PGalt]

When it comes to ‘rats, collectivists, socialists, totalitarians, CRIMINALS, SCUMBAGS...”no controlling legal authority”. Witness history. Witness current events.

[timestax]

[Swordmaker]

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.