White House says it will refuse to cooperate with impeachment inquiry

[riclag]

57 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Actually this is the first time we've had a President so corrupt as to let this happen.  Do you want this to be normal?  Rich people to run for President, keep their finances secret, keep their business interests in the family, and use the office to drum up business--that's ok with you?  If so, you are permanently banned from any "drain the swamp" references.

 

The law is clear.  The fact that it is being litigated means nothing, that is just a stalling tactic.

He refuses to coop with the dems because they have been hell bent on impeaching him even before he was POTUS. IMOP The dems  would see America suffer just to  get him out of office! Corruption is a conspiracy theory perpetrated by his opposition . He has met his financial Presidential requirements.

 

Finally ,Its nonsense to think that you must be a politician to be able to sit in the WH.

Edited October 14, 2019 by riclag

[Chomper Higgot]

Trump can say all he wants about not cooperating, an increasing number of people are now defying instruction from his administration not to testify, and are obeying Congress’ legitimate subpoenas, doing their duty and testifying.

 

Oh, and I hear Gowdy has gone AWOL.

 

#All this winning

[Opl]

8 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Well yes, when a wealthy person becomes president, more people will stay at his hotels. I don't see how that is a crime. And the fact remains these are voluntary business transactions, not gifts. Your Emoluments Clause angle will go nowhere. Mark my words.

 

So the law is clear on tax returns. Apparently, it's not so clear. The matter is being litigated. So you're predicting Trump loses in the end, yes?

and in the same logic, when a wealthy person becomes President he first takes care to ensure he and his mates benefit of more tax cuts. It's not a crime, it's how you get richer. And no-one voluntarily payes taxes anyway.  

[J Town]

13 hours ago, heybruce said:

Mueller investigated Russian interference in the election and possible criminal cooperation with the Trump campaign.  He found lots of Russian interference.  He did not find conclusive proof of criminal cooperation, but made clear that Trump was not exonerated.  He documented obstruction of justice, but stated that it was Justice Department policy to not indict a sitting president.

 

Trolls post biased, fact-free rants that are often outright lies.  Your posts fit that descriptions.  And you are either a newby jumping in with these posts of someone banned for past over the top postings who created a new identity.

No sense in debating with people who won't accept truth.

[J Town]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh, and I hear Gowdy has gone AWOL.

Gowdy HAS to stay under the radar or all his Benghazi words will return to bite him in the butt.

[J Town]

7 hours ago, riclag said:

He refuses to coop with the dems

I find it ironic that your avitar/hero put Chelsea Manning in jail for ignoring a subpoena, yet allows Trump folks to ignore MULTIPLE subpoenas. Selective justice is a hallmark of a banana republic.

[Eric Loh]

56 minutes ago, J Town said:

No sense in debating with people who won't accept truth.

Perhaps these people will accept the truth in the poll by Fox News that indicate a majority (51%) support Trump impeachment. He is going down one way or the other. Good riddance. 

[riclag]

1 hour ago, J Town said:

I find it ironic that your avitar/hero put Chelsea Manning in jail for ignoring a subpoena, yet allows Trump folks to ignore MULTIPLE subpoenas. Selective justice is a hallmark of a banana republic.

And the subpoena's are from which party that's in the majority! They are destroying American democratic  Institutions with their illegal impeachment inquiry! Get the entire house vote ! Now!  

Edited October 15, 2019 by riclag

[Sujo]

35 minutes ago, riclag said:

And the subpoena's are from which party that's in the majority! They are destroying American democratic  Institutions with their illegal impeachment inquiry! Get the entire house vote ! Now!  

Whats illegal about it?

[Jingthing]

Nothing of course. It's not only legal but Pelosi is following the rules of both the house and the constitution. Indeed congressional oversight of a president that is abusing her power is a necessary duty of congress.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Sujo]

57 minutes ago, riclag said:

And the subpoena's are from which party that's in the majority! They are destroying American democratic  Institutions with their illegal impeachment inquiry! Get the entire house vote ! Now!  

They are acting legally as statedin the constitution and house rules.

 

The entire house dont need to vote. You can thank republicans for that rule change.

 

Funny how you consider acting legally is wrong. I expect trump supporters to think its strange and wrong when its done by the book.

[riclag]

19 minutes ago, Sujo said:

They are acting legally as statedin the constitution and house rules.

 

The entire house dont need to vote. You can thank republicans for that rule change.

 

Funny how you consider acting legally is wrong. I expect trump supporters to think its strange and wrong when its done by the book.

"An impeachment inquiry marks the start of the constitutional process in which the lower house of the legislative branch–the House of Representatives–votes on whether to bring formal charges against the president through an impeachment resolution, or "articles of impeachment."

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-formal-impeachment-inquiry-nancy-pelosi-1461224

 

Since the topic is about the WH refusing to coop then one has to ask, why they view this as harassment!

Get the vote!

Edited October 15, 2019 by riclag

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, riclag said:

"An impeachment inquiry marks the start of the constitutional process in which the lower house of the legislative branch–the House of Representatives–votes on whether to bring formal charges against the president through an impeachment resolution, or "articles of impeachment."

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-formal-impeachment-inquiry-nancy-pelosi-1461224

 

Since the topic is about the WH refusing to coop then one has to ask, why they view this as harassment

Get the vote

The articles of impeachment have not yet been presented.

 

The vote will take place when they are and not a moment earlier.

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, riclag said:

Since the topic is about the WH refusing to coop then one has to ask, why they view this as harassment!

The Dems know that voting is just the WH tactics of delay and procrastination. If they decide on the vote, there will be hearing and the house Republicans can called on witnesses turning the hearing into a circus.  Good try but the House Dems not buying it. 

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The Dems know that voting is just the WH tactics of delay and procrastination. If they decide on the vote, there will be hearing and the house Republicans can called on witnesses turning the hearing into a circus.  Good try but the House Dems not buying it. 

Yes, it's a cynical and predictable effort of the white house trying to delegitimize a completely legitimate, necessary, and constitutionally protected process. Impeachments may be rare in American history and good for that, but there are cases where there is no other choice. Nixon for example. Now this president. 

[wayned]

Trump w2ants a full house vote to force the representatives in those purple districts that the Dems took from the GOP in 2018 to show their true colors.  Once the vote is taken he will go about trying to destroy them with his hateful rhetoric and tactics.

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, wayned said:

Trump w2ants a full house vote to force the representatives in those purple districts that the Dems took from the GOP in 2018 to show their true colors.  Once the vote is taken he will go about trying to destroy them with his hateful rhetoric and tactics.

Yes that's one of the reasons. They also want the democrats to rush the process and proceed with articles before all the evidence that is realistically possible to hear is heard. Then they can use that as a defense in the senate that it was a shoddy rushed investigation and a so called witch hunt. Americans more and more and not being fooled by the 45 tactics. Of course his core base is still mostly solid and will likely remain mostly solid until the bitter end, whatever that looks like. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by Jingthing

[riclag]

2 minutes ago, wayned said:

Trump w2ants a full house vote to force the representatives in those purple districts that the Dems took from the GOP in 2018 to show their true colors.  Once the vote is taken he will go about trying to destroy them with his hateful rhetoric and tactics.

 the whole Trump hating world is convinced that he is impeachable. Bring it on! Bring a formal impeachment with all of its fixings etc "due process".

Don't hide behind  baseless dem accusations  to sway public opinion which has been going on now and  before he was POTUS.  

[atyclb]

16 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

 

 

So Congress' decision whether to impeach is contingent on the actions of one cable news channel that has a small percentage of the TV news audience? That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

As far as "the House waited"... CORRECTION. The House is STILL waiting. There have been endless investigations and hearings with the goal of getting Trump. The only thing that has changed now is the name of the ongoing witch hunt.

 

Now let's get to Trump's family. Contrary to the numerous predictions of Don Jr. and other family members doing the perp walk as a result of the Mueller scam, it hasn't happened. So your assertion about appeals is completely meaningless. That said, if you can articulate how Trump's endless appeals somehow prevent law enforcement from taking action against family members, let's hear it.

 

As far as being patient, I needn't be. There have been several years of desperate ploys to get Trump. You're the people who need to "be patient", not me.

 

me senses some legal acumen in your sleeve.

 

despite what u wrote is known by any 1st year law student dont expect law, logic or reason to be understtod or appreciated here.

 

anyway all a moot point since scientific scholar, professor aoc already made it clear the world will end in 12 years.

 

the best advice is for us to get our things in order in the time remaining

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Think we have consensus that Trump don’t have the people support as President. 

Meaning the majority.

Never did.

Never will. 

He had a chance after he was elected to try to unify the country but he did the exact opposite BIGLY.

All part of his bizarre and successful campaign to impeach himself.

Pelosi has no choice.

[Sujo]

27 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Trump understands it's the electoral college that counts.

 

Re your PS, I never took the DC bar exam, but I'm sure I could have passed on the first attempt, unlike Hillary.

Then you know the impeachment investigation is legal. If not, you fail.

[metisdead]

Off topic trolling posts and the replies about the election results have been removed. 

 

Other troll posts and replies were removed. 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, riclag said:

 the whole Trump hating world is convinced that he is impeachable. Bring it on! Bring a formal impeachment with all of its fixings etc "due process".

Don't hide behind  baseless dem accusations  to sway public opinion which has been going on now and  before he was POTUS.  

It’s not ‘due process’ to follow the old rules that were replaced by the Republicans

 

It is ‘due process’ for the Speaker of the House to present Articles of Impeachment and for the house to vote on those Articles of Impeachment.

 

Congressional committees (in which Republicans also sit) are undertaking investigations to determine the Articles of Impeachment.

 

Once they are present, the House will vote.

 

I understand, given the wide range of Trump’s corruption being exposed by the investigations, why Trump and his team are putting out the ‘Impeach Now’ talking point while at the same time refusing to cooperate.

 

They, and it appears you too, haven’t yet grasped that Pelosi is in control of exactly how Trump’s impeachment will be executed.

 

Worse still for Trump, she’s not a fool ready to swallow his bait.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Chomper Higgot

[JHolmesJr]

19 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Given Trump's and poor impulse control it's not at all inconceivable that he would do just that. Now it's come out that Trump tried to force Rex Tillerson to free a corrupt client of Giuliani even though it was illegal. He's promised pardons to hasten the building of the wall. He's an ignoramus. He has called for impeaching Pelosi and Schiff!

Senator Harry Reid, a highly respected Democrat, disagrees with you.

Unconventional smartness is still smartness.

[JHolmesJr]

Well, my take on this secretive impeachment enquiry is that the Dems are 

terrified to publicly look like fools twice in a row. Mueller's report gave them nothing

to prosecute. So they're keeping this enquiry hidden just to prevent people from

seeing through their impeachment sham. I think they're going to drag this out as long as they can,

with cherry picked leaks and no full facts...hoping to build up negative press for Trump.

Desperate strategy.

[bristolboy]

13 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Well, my take on this secretive impeachment enquiry is that the Dems are 

terrified to publicly look like fools twice in a row. Mueller's report gave them nothing

to prosecute. So they're keeping this enquiry hidden just to prevent people from

seeing through their impeachment sham. I think they're going to drag this out as long as they can,

with cherry picked leaks and no full facts...hoping to build up negative press for Trump.

Desperate strategy.

You mean the report which said it did not exonerate Trump of Obstruction of Justice?

[bristolboy]

23 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Senator Harry Reid, a highly respected Democrat, disagrees with you.

Unconventional smartness is still smartness.

Where did Harry Reid disagree with any of the following?

 

"Given Trump's and poor impulse control it's not at all inconceivable that he would do just that. Now it's come out that Trump tried to force Rex Tillerson to free a corrupt client of Giuliani even though it was illegal. He's promised pardons to hasten the building of the wall. He's an ignoramus. He has called for impeaching Pelosi and Schiff!"

[Kelsall]

The letter from the WH to Schiff and Pelosi, the subject of the OP, lays it all out.

 

"In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances," he said.

 

The letter also says, "Put simply, you seek to overturn the results of the 2016 election and deprive the American people of the President they have freely chosen."

 

This is just one of about 10 attempts to do just that.  Like the others, it will fail.

 

[bristolboy]

14 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

The letter from the WH to Schiff and Pelosi, the subject of the OP, lays it all out.

 

"In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances," he said.

 

The letter also says, "Put simply, you seek to overturn the results of the 2016 election and deprive the American people of the President they have freely chosen."

 

This is just one of about 10 attempts to do just that.  Like the others, it will fail.

 

Clearly written by a lawyer and designed to please an ignoramus. The kind of ignoramus who called for the impeachment of Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff.

The Constitution is very clear about this.. It belongs entirely to the discretion of the House and the House gets to set its own rules. There's no wiggle room there.

[Jingthing]

Ignoramus, troll, or both?
It's still hard to believe that any president of the United States really doesn't know that you can't impeach congressmen. But in this particular case maybe it's possible?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app