Posted on 10/29/2019 4:24:27 AM PDT by EyesOfTX
If the Democrats didn’t have scams, they’d have nothing at all. – Lindsey Graham actually did something productive last week, and it deserves mentioning here. Despite the fact that there is literally zero chance that the resolution he introduced last Thursday condemning the sham fake impeachment process being run in the House right now could ever obtain the 60 votes needed for cloture, Graham’s ability to convince 50 of the 53 Senate Republicans to sign onto the resolution as sponsors demonstrated the resolve of the Senate majority to oppose any product from the current House process.
This effort by Graham produced two excellent results. First, it outed three GOP RINOs as being so disloyal that they can’t even vote to condemn the obviously anti-American, Soviet-style process being run in the basement of the Capitol building by Schiff and his gang of thugs. Those three senators are Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and of course, Mitt Romney, the Murderers Row of Senate RINOs. It would be sad if it weren’t so tiresome and predictable. Alaska, Maine and Utah voters: What in the hell are you thinking?
The second excellent result produced by Graham’s resolution is that it put pressure on Pelosi to do something to anoint her sham process with some imprimatur of legitimacy. The obvious way to do that would be to hold a vote of the full House on a resolution to authorize a formal impeachment inquiry, a step that has been taken in every previous impeachment process in American history. Initial reports from our fake news media Monday morning indicated Pelosi would be doing exactly that. Silly us for believing anything our fake news media says anymore.
Those reports were, of course, completely false. Pelosi can’t hold a vote to authorize a formal impeachment inquiry for the simple fact that she still does not have enough members of her pathetic caucus willing to support such a resolution. She still has 35-40 Democrats who were elected in GOP-majority districts in 2018, and all of them know they will be signing their re-election chances away if they vote to authorize a formal, actual impeachment inquiry.
But that’s not the only problem Pelosi and Schiff have here. They also know that a vote to begin a real, formal impeachment inquiry would result in GOP house members on the relevant committees having the same powers to subpoena and question witnesses that the Democrats have under the current Soviet inquisition. Even worse, the Trump Administration would also then have similar rights and powers.
In other words, a formal impeachment inquiry would function in the way the American system of justice is supposed to function under our Constitutional Republican form of government, and we all know the Democrats can’t have that.
Thus, Pelosi, faced with the procedural roadblock set up by Graham’s resolution, decided she had to do what she and her fellow Democrats always do when one of their scams fails: Create another scam. So, she huddled up with her buddies over at Lawfare, who really run the House of Representatives these days, and came up with – you got it – another scam.
This scam will involve a vote – ostensibly of the “full House” – on a resolution “Directing certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes.”
In other words, it is simply a vote to authorize the continuation of the current Soviet-style inquisition. Pelosi believes that, with the always-willing help of the army of Democrat toadies in the fake news media, she will be able to convince the nation that this vote, since it involves all members of the House, somehow legitimizes her illegitimate process.
Doing it this way will also allow her 40 or so reluctant members to claim to voters next year that, hey, they didn’t vote for “impeachment,” they just voted to continue an inquiry into whether an impeachment was justified. See the difference? Yeah, neither will most of their voters.
But here’s the catch that she and Schiff are counting on: If even one Republican member of the House votes “yes” when her resolution comes to a vote on Thursday – and a handful have already indicated they support the current process – then they and their media toady army will be able to claim that this vote was “bipartisan.”
Pelosi and her Lawfare lieutenants are also hoping that this vote, if “bipartisan,” will be able to convey the judicial enforcement authority that their sham process currently lacks. This lack of authority is why the “subpoenas” that have been sent to the executive branch by Schiff thus far are nothing more than toothless letters with no enforcement authority.
This is San Fran Nan’s philosophy of governance: When nothing you do is legitimate, you do everything you can to legitimize the illegitimate. In this latest scam, she’s counting on that one Republican vote, and you can be sure that there is a Mitt Romney clone in the GOP caucus just salivating over the chance to give it to her.
That is all.
It is not necessary for the full House to vote to authorize referral of a Member’s Bill or resolution to a committee.
Pelosi is playing games with dynamite. Not a real good idea.
I hope no one minds, but I took the article from Conservative Treehouse concerning this and boiled it down to its most essential components:
On Thursday, Pelosi is bringing to the floor a resolution that is not an “impeachment resolution” but a resolution to support the already existing”impeachment inquiry.”
Pelosi is very purposefully and carefully telling reporters this is not a “House Resolution on Impeachment” vote because if she held a vote on an impeachment resolution the minority and Executive branch would gain rights therein.
The Lawfare advisory and rules committee is handling the construct of the “Official House Inquiry” on impeachment. Pelosi is holding a vote, a resolution, to affirm her previous declaration of a House “inquiry.”
This is a House vote to show support for Pelosi’s previous unilateral decree. Right now the rules committee is adding language to the resolution that will provide additional one-sided support for a completely partisan process.
The Speaker is allowed to make unilateral decrees.
Why not? Pelosi has the green light to continue this coup from the do-nothing GOP Senate. where are the hearings Graham promised?
We can always count on you here on threads dealing with impeachment to say stuff like this.
But once again you re wrong.
Look at the Constitution. Nowhere does it say the Speaker possesses this power. The power is reserved to the House, and she is not the House.
This morning it seemed that even the usually astute Maria Bartiromo has confused this ... impeachment PROCEDURES resolution ... with an actual impeachment resolution. Of course, confusing and misleading the public is one of the aims of the Dems.
Trump has paid a heavy price for what Paul Ryan did in the House to try to lose it. What an evil man. He should go down in history as Paul Ryan, Protector of the Swamp.
Re what you wrote about Sundance and his CTH articles—amen!!!
<><> On Thursday, Pelosi is bringing to the floor a resolution that is most assuredly "not an impeachment resolution,”
<><> Pelosi's resolution cannily supports her already articulated existing ”impeachment inquiry.”
<><> Pelosi very purposefully and carefully is telling reporters this is not a “House Resolution on Impeachment” vote.
<><> If she held a vote on an impeachment resolution the minority and Executive branch would gain rights therein. This she wants to avoid like the plague.
<><> The Lawfare advisory and rules committee is handling the construct of the “Official House Inquiry” on impeachment.
<><> Pelosi is holding a vote, a resolution, to affirm her previous declaration of a House “inquiry.”
<><> This is a House vote to show support for Pelosi’s previous unilateral decree.
<><> The House rules committee is adding language to her resolution to provide additional one-sided support for a completely partisan process.
Good synopsis but the only issue is that there is no impeachment inquiry since the House has not voted to hold one. The Democrats are running an inquiry on whether there should be an inquiry.
>
Why not? Pelosi has the green light to continue this coup from the do-nothing GOP Senate. where are the hearings Graham promised?
>
SSssshhhh! We got an election coming up & we don’t need any one reminding others why “any (R) vote is better than a (D)\lesser of 2 evils\just a FEW more ‘conservatives’” doesn’t hold much, if any, water.
Currently the Legislative Branch is expressing their “impeachment authority” as part of the Legislative Branch purpose.
So that raises the issue of an entirely different type of subpoena:
A demand from congress that penetrates the constitutional separation of powers and
further penetrates the legal authority of Executive Branch executive privilege.
======================================
POINTS TO PONDER
It was separately established by SCOTUS during the Nixon impeachment investigation that
*IF* the full House votes to have the Judiciary Committee commence an impeachment investigation,
then the Judiciary Committee has subpoena power that can overcome executive privilege claims.
<><> There has been NO VOTE to create that level of subpoena power.
<><> ergo, the House has not created a process to penetrate the constitutionally inherent separation of powers,
<><> nor the legally recognized firewall known as ‘executive privilege’.
<><> a House vote authorizes the committee impeachment investigation,
<><> only then does the committee gains judicial enforcement authority.
<><> thus creating the penalty for non-compliance with an impeachment subpoena.
======================================
A demand letter only becomes a “subpoena” (technically ‘a request for the production of documents with a penalty for non-compliance’) when the committee has judicial enforcement authority.
Only then does that process establish an enforcement penalty.
The current demand letters cannot carry a penalty because the demands do not contain judicial enforcement authority....simply because the impeachment investigation was not authorized by the chamber.
The reason judicial enforcement authority is constitutionally required is because creating Judicial enforcement authority, creating the penalty for non-compliance, gives the Executive Branch a process to appeal any legislative demand via the Judicial Branch (federal courts).
Absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch has no process to engage an appellate review by federal courts.
This, then, is the purposeful trick within the Pelosi/Lawfare road-map.
Pelosi Impeachment SYNONYMS:
o WE MEAN IT THIS TIME impeachment inquiry
o WE ARE NOT JOKING impeachment inquiry
o AFFIRM impeachment inquiry
o Impeachment PROBE
o FOR THE TENTH TIME impeachment inquiry
o IN OTHER WORDS impeachment inquiry
... and on and on
In the Democrats rancid world, they keep saying “words”, that they hope will wound a president they despise.
The Dems will savagely strip innocent patriots of their rights in order to feel the thrill of controlling people.
For the Dem left, a little crotch action will always supersede the Constitution.
Patriots know these sub-human morons will stoop to any lengths and will regurgitate the most preposterous lies to advance their pathetic political ambitions.
The left fights hard for “rights” not even mentioned in the Constitution – abortion, health care, a “free” college education – than those intrinsic rights specifically singled out for protection from government infringement in the Bill of Rights.
Lefties are desperate for power. Desperate Democrats badly crave power AND control, and they’re willing to do anything to get it.
OK suppose I am elected to the House and I introduce a Bill to give every person in the US five pints of ice cream a month, and it is referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, which then holds hearings.
Do you believe the whole House has to authorize the Committee on Ways and Means to hold hearings on my Free Ice Cream Act of 2021?
+100
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.