Politicspolitics

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:29 AM

Will Blinky call that floor vote tuhday?

49 replies, 328 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply Will Blinky call that floor vote tuhday? (Original post)
Fred Sanford Tuesday OP
quad489 Tuesday #1
foia Tuesday #2
R. Cavu Tuesday #3
Sullivan Tuesday #4
bfox74 Tuesday #8
Solesurvivor Tuesday #9
Sullivan Tuesday #10
Currentsitguy Tuesday #11
Sullivan Tuesday #12
D26-15 Tuesday #13
Sullivan Tuesday #14
D26-15 Tuesday #15
Currentsitguy Tuesday #16
Sullivan Tuesday #19
Carl Tuesday #33
Carl Tuesday #18
Charlie Mike Tuesday #23
kevlar Tuesday #39
Sullivan Wednesday #48
Sullivan Tuesday #22
Charlie Mike Tuesday #24
DP46 Tuesday #27
Sullivan Tuesday #30
Charlie Mike Tuesday #34
Sullivan Tuesday #38
kevlar Tuesday #40
Charlie Mike Tuesday #45
Sullivan Wednesday #47
Charlie Mike Wednesday #49
Currentsitguy Tuesday #28
Carl Tuesday #31
Solesurvivor Tuesday #17
Sullivan Tuesday #20
kevlar Tuesday #25
Charlie Mike Tuesday #26
Sullivan Tuesday #29
Charlie Mike Tuesday #32
Sullivan Tuesday #35
Charlie Mike Tuesday #37
Sullivan Tuesday #42
Charlie Mike Tuesday #46
kevlar Tuesday #41
Solesurvivor Tuesday #36
Sullivan Tuesday #43
Solesurvivor Tuesday #44
kevlar Tuesday #21
Duke Lacrosse Tuesday #5
Fred Sanford Tuesday #6
Valishin Tuesday #7

Response to Fred Sanford (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:45 AM

1. Sure would be nice if she would pass that military budget bill so we don't get further behind China.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanford (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:59 AM

2. Better question: Did she remember there's a fauxpeachment going on when she woke up this morning?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanford (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:00 AM

3. I dont think she can actually blink anymore Fred

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanford (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:53 AM

4. Does it matter?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 01:00 PM

8. Nope

With or without a floor vote, Trump will still be POTUS at least until 1/20/20 and most likely four years beyond the.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 03:52 PM

9. Yeah it does

When you threaten to impeach the President you either do it or back down

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solesurvivor (Reply #9)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:00 PM

10. She doesn't need a floor vote for impeachment hearings.

You righties have only been told this about a thousand times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:09 PM

11. And until they do

The White House will continue to tell them to go pound salt, so one way or the other eventually they are going to have to shit or get off the pot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:21 PM

12. Start ignoring supenoeas then. I want to see some of this scum locked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:26 PM

13. The "scum" you are about to see locked up are playing on your team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to D26-15 (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:27 PM

14. Hahaha, dream on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:28 PM

15. No dream...fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:30 PM

16. Not Constitutionally possible

Impeachment, trial and conviction is your only recourse. Either get in gear, or go the fuck away. Since both you and I know there aren't the votes for conviction in the Senate for this sham, why are you wasting your time? All you are doing is further energizing those who voted for him the first time around.

Here in Western Pennsylvania, one of the key Blue Dog Democrat locations that elected him the last time, over the past week the yard signs have exploded all over, just like 2016, only more so.

You are guaranteeing reelection, probably by a landslide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:49 PM

19. The impeachment investigation is happening and Trump is trying to stop it.

Refusal to comply with a subpoena is contempt of Congress. What the hell are you talking about?

I could care less about what Trump's base thinks. He's committed impeachable offenses and he needs to answer for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #19)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:24 PM

33. It is not a subpoena.

Wrong again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 06:40 PM

18. You really have no idea how any of this works do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:54 PM

23. First, there are no subpoenas.

It takes more than Pelosi pretending she's co-president to invoke the authority of the House.

It takes a vote of the House to invoke the authority of the House.

Second, you cannot lock up people just because. You must first find them in contempt.

That too takes a floor vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:58 PM

39. They are not supenoeas.

Just letters from corrupt democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #12)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 12:53 AM

48. Boy, there are some ignored righties here really trying hard to reply with their worthless posts.

Sorry, can't hear you. Can you repeat that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:52 PM

22. Then they need to start locking people up for contempt of Congress.

Very simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:56 PM

24. Contempt citations require a floor vote.

False imprisonment andkkidnapping are serious crimes. So serious they can even be repelled by deadly force.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #24)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:05 PM

27. But, but ... "Orange Man Bad"!!!

Lefty thinks they're the smartest people in the room, but they might just be too stupid to read the Constitution and rules the House operates under.

Besides, it's what they want and their little hurt "Fee Fees" are all that matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #24)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:13 PM

30. You think Dems are going to kidnap people?



You are losing it.

Besides, treason and insurrection are serious crimes too. I sure hope violent extremist rightists aren't stupid enough to try that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #30)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:41 PM

34. Forcing someone to move from their immediate location

without their consent or the authority to arrest is kidnapping.

With the Democrats trying to us the UK, Ukraine, Russia, Italy, and Australia to steal 2016 and now - as you already said - acting as a law unto themselves - they are the treasonous insurrectionists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #34)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:54 PM

38. Most would understand that authority to arrest and actual arrest are needed before incarceration.

I didn't realize that you are so poorly versed on simple law that I needed to spell it out for you.

Pursuing a legal investigation in to suspected impeachable behavior and actions is not lawless.

Interfering or obstructing the investigation of those actions is treasonous and insurrectionist, especially if violence is implied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #38)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:59 PM

40. It isn't legal.

Plus you have no fucking clue what treason means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #38)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:45 PM

45. Kidnapping does not require incarceration.

Although I'm curious to know how the Democrat insurrectionists plan to arrest people and not incarcerate them.

There is no suspected crime because none of your fake non inquiries have named a crime.

For example, cops and prosecutors cannot compel people to appear without showing legal and factual sufficiency.

Seeing as no constitutionally convened inquiry exists, no allegations detailed, no consent of the House granted - there's nothing to comply with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #45)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 12:45 AM

47. Trump doesn't get to make up new laws and rules and obey only the ones he likes.

The impeachment investigation is solid. Subpoena power is solid and enforceable.

Take it like a man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #47)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 02:50 AM

49. Lefty projecting again.

"The impeachment investigation is solid. Subpoena power is solid and enforceable."

Name the crime and cite the authority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:09 PM

28. I suspect

That will be a matter for a federal judge, most likely the Supreme Court to decide.

They are coequal branches. It's a grey area whether Congress has that power.

I suspect this showdown is exactly what Trump wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:18 PM

31. The DUmp is not a good place to learn civics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 05:45 PM

17. Precedent says otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solesurvivor (Reply #17)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:51 PM

20. There is no precedent for this situation.

Precedent isn't binding either.

Nice try. Sorta.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #20)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:56 PM

25. So you admit

your pathetic lying democrat representatives need rigged system to move forward.

Doesn't say much for you or them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #20)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:00 PM

26. If you get to make up rules ad hoc so does everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #26)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:09 PM

29. Nobody is making up rules except Trump and his supporters like you.

Trump is under investigation, not Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:20 PM

32. You entire post was you bleating that the House can do whatever it wants.

Precedent be damned.

And, yes, Dems are under investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #32)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:41 PM

35. No it wasn't. It was about what Dems can and can't do according to the law.

And there is no precedent for this case.

And investigations of Dems by RW bloggers don't count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #35)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:51 PM

37. Show us Congress' constitutional authority to subpoena anyone

let alone the Executive branch.

We'll wait.

It's not bloggers investigating corrupt democrats. It's the DOJ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #37)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:06 PM

42. The SCOTUS has firmly established Congressional power to subpoena. It's settled law.

Is that the RW plan? Try and split hairs on everything?

Boy are you in for some fun.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #42)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:48 PM

46. With the consent of the full House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:00 PM

41. This is false.

Plenty of dems under investigation, and with good reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #20)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:49 PM

36. Yes there were votes of going forward with impeachment inquiries

Nice try but crack a book once in a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solesurvivor (Reply #36)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:10 PM

43. Presedent is not binding. Don't know how else to break it to you....

Oh, and your side isn't running the impeachment so your fake complaints are inconsequential.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #43)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:16 PM

44. Well then when we have enough conservatives on SCOTUS and they overturn Roe

don't screech on about "precedent" okay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sullivan (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 07:52 PM

21. You are lying

just like your democrat leaders.

It is not working.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanford (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:57 AM

5. It's not possible to get a quorum. The House is in recess until next week.

Pelosi planned it that way, so that the fake push for impeachment can be allowed to wind down naturally. And so it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duke Lacrosse (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 12:38 PM

6. Natch.*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duke Lacrosse (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 12:58 PM

7. They problem is

they are about to be in a catch 22. The committees want to investigate but are being stonewalled by Trump doing the unthinkable and saying no. This is going to force them to go from invitations to subpoenas, but their subpoena power is limited to legitimate legislative purpose. At the moment they are working in a gray area where they are trying to not have their members take an actual vote until they have real hard evidence of criminal activity. This is because they are aware that if they pull that trigger there is no going back and if they come up empty handed they are going to have to explain to independent voters why they voted for something that didn't have justification. Their base is comfortable with that but independents are not ok with it even a little bit. In addition, they want all this wrapped up before the new year which means their timeline can't afford an extended court battle over the definition of legitimate legislative purpose so to move forward they will have to cave and take that vote or allow the effort to spill into the campaign which will make anything short of success even more damaging to them.

This is why Trump is stonewalling them, he wants them to have to play the hand out with their chips all in from the draw. If they come up empty handed it costs them not just the presidency but the HoR and several members of the Senate. Trump is setting them up to pay the price for using the power of government to run witch hunts. Give her credit where due, it seems as though Pelosi is the only one over there with enough foresight to see the gambit but the inmates are running her asylum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics