Politicspolitics

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:06 PM

A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment

Lindsey Graham: A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment.

52 replies, 399 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 52 replies Author Time Post
Reply A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment (Original post)
Micrometer Oct 8 OP
TheyLostTheirForums Oct 8 #1
Micrometer Oct 8 #3
Horsefeathers Oct 8 #18
Horsefeathers Oct 8 #17
Carl Oct 8 #2
Micrometer Oct 8 #6
Carl Oct 8 #7
Micrometer Oct 8 #8
Carl Oct 8 #9
Micrometer Oct 8 #10
Carl Oct 8 #11
Micrometer Oct 8 #12
Carl Oct 8 #15
DavesNotHere Oct 8 #24
swifty Oct 8 #4
Carl Oct 8 #5
docgeezer Oct 8 #13
Micrometer Oct 8 #14
Carl Oct 8 #16
Solesurvivor Oct 8 #20
Currentsitguy Oct 8 #21
Micrometer Oct 8 #22
Currentsitguy Oct 8 #23
Micrometer Oct 8 #25
Currentsitguy Oct 8 #29
Micrometer Oct 8 #33
Currentsitguy Oct 8 #36
Micrometer Oct 8 #40
Solesurvivor Oct 8 #44
Micrometer Oct 8 #47
bfox74 Wednesday #51
Let it go Oct 8 #19
oldenuff35 Oct 8 #26
Micrometer Oct 8 #27
oldenuff35 Oct 8 #28
Micrometer Oct 8 #30
oldenuff35 Oct 8 #31
Micrometer Oct 8 #41
oldenuff35 Oct 8 #42
Micrometer Oct 8 #43
Steelydamned Oct 8 #32
Micrometer Oct 8 #34
Steelydamned Oct 8 #38
Charlie Mike Oct 8 #39
SickOfThisMess Oct 8 #45
bfox74 Wednesday #50
Grebbid Oct 8 #35
LexTalionis Oct 8 #37
PrescientWon. Oct 8 #46
Banshee 3 Actual Wednesday #48
bfox74 Wednesday #49
nolidad Wednesday #52

Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:09 PM

1. Say, what are your pronouns, poster?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheyLostTheirForums (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:12 PM

3. What?

I don't understand your question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #3)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:51 PM

18. says what?..........

Exactly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheyLostTheirForums (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:50 PM

17. A quoob just alerted on this*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:11 PM

2. Pelosi said this.

&t=39s

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:17 PM

6. That's interesting.

Perhaps this time she is right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:19 PM

7. In other words your talking point fell apart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #7)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:22 PM

8. Perhaps this time Graham is right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #8)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:22 PM

9. Keep digging the hole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #9)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:24 PM

10. Do you agree with this statement?

A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:26 PM

11. Do you agree with Nance at the same time?

She is Speaker now isn't she?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:31 PM

12. If you don't want to answer the question, that's OK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #12)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:49 PM

15. You posted something you though was profound with no apparent knowledge of what

the person in control of the House said at the same time.

That ignorance of history is not my fault nor is the obvious attempts you are trying to make to wiggle out of it.
What Graham said then is of no relevance to today but what Pelosi said is as she is the one trying to corrupt the process as she did with her attempt to "deem" barrycare passed without a vote.

Stew in the pot you boiled here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:32 PM

24. Is she speaking during the house debate over an impeachment inquiry vote? Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:14 PM

4. Can't wait to hear Graham's impeachment quotes read back to him in the Senate trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to swifty (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:16 PM

5. See Pelosi above and weep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:33 PM

13. I'm not so sure. The legislative and executive branches

of government are coequal according to the constitution. I think there is a process for requiring the President to provide information, and I don't believe a statement from the Speaker is it. Perhaps there is a Constitutional scholar among us who can enlighten us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to docgeezer (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:36 PM

14. I think that statement applies in an impeachment context.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 08:50 PM

16. Based on nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:14 PM

20. The congress has to subpoena them, asking them doesn't count as obstruction

They're not in charge of that branch of the govt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:21 PM

21. I think that is what Trump is trying to force

That is due to their coequal status, barring a formal vote, the Executive Branch is under no obligation to obey Congressional demands.

Really this is a grey area not exactly addressed in the Constitution. I suspect it will take the Supreme Court to sort it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #21)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:24 PM

22. I expect the House will take a vote and make it a formal impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:30 PM

23. I agree, or at least I suspect

Really, though, I would like a USSC Decision. It would help clear this up for future Administrations.

What this really is, if you wade through all the bullshit and political posturing, is a power struggle between two branches for supremacy. If you go back and read the Federalist Papers, this kind of thing was expected with a certain level of regularity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #23)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:32 PM

25. I think the USSC established a precedent when it forced Nixon to comply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #25)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:37 PM

29. We shall see

Considering there is little recourse outside of formal Impeachment, that is why I suspect this is the end game. It is quite obvious Trump is daring them to do it.

You and I are on different sides here, I suspect, but our reasoning seems to jive.

I suspect, like Clinton, he will emerge stronger as a result.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:42 PM

33. Yes, we seem to agree on the process.

Have a pleasant evening, Currentsitguy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #33)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:04 PM

36. I am trying

My wife is sick with a sore throat. I've zonked her out with Theraful and lozenges, and have retreated to my home office to give her some peace and quiet. Sitting here drinking about two fingers of Rye and listening to George Thorogood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #36)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:55 PM

40. Hornitos and Linda Ronstadt here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #25)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:24 PM

44. Precedent doesn't matter, let me know the rule where they have to testify

without a subpoena

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solesurvivor (Reply #44)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:45 PM

47. We don't need no stinking rules!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to docgeezer (Reply #13)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 02:49 AM

51. I heard some legal talking heads other day saying the house committee has

not subpoenaed anything yet. Instead in their formal letters to Trump they use terms like "...a request conveying subpoena...". So at this point their "requests" have no meat, it's just salad with no dressing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:14 PM

19. Go ahead and vote to impeach! DO IT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:33 PM

26. They can impeach him for having tuna instead of ham for lunch. The senate will tell them to FO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldenuff35 (Reply #26)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:34 PM

27. Like trump would eat tuna!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #27)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:35 PM

28. I can't stand the crap but maybe he eats big macs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldenuff35 (Reply #28)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:37 PM

30. Well then we'll impeach him for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #30)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:39 PM

31. That makes as much since as everything else they are doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldenuff35 (Reply #31)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:00 PM

41. Well, sense we are making cents, you look foolish,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #41)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:03 PM

42. It would not be the first time but as long as I piss off the left, I'm good.

But then again you cut mechanically... prob making buggy whips or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldenuff35 (Reply #42)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:18 PM

43. I have spent time fabricating various objects.

You don't piss me off, you make me laugh

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:41 PM

32. Absolutely outrageous!

And unprecedented too!

Well...maybe not...'entirely' unprecedented....

9 Times The Obama Administration Fought Subpoenas or Blocked Officials from Testifying Before Congress


9. Fighting subpoenas in the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation investigation

8. Refusing to let the White House social secretary testify on party crashers scandal

7. Refusal to provide subpoenaed Solyndra documents

6. Justice Kagan's Obamacare conflict on interest

5. White House refuses to allow political director to testify

4. Treasury officials blocked from testifying on Obamacare subsidies

3. Ben Rhodes not allowed to testify on Iran Nuclear Deal

2. Lois Lerner refuses to testify on IRS targeting

1. Eric Holder refuses to provide subpoenaed Fast & Furious documents

https://pjmedia.com/trending/9-times-the-obama-administration-fought-subpoenas-or-blocked-officials-from-testifying-before-congress/

There was history before November 2016 you know....



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Steelydamned (Reply #32)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 09:43 PM

34. Geez, what a load.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #34)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:19 PM

38. Heh...

..Oh, it's a "load" alright; a load of instances of the previous occupant of the Oval Office telling the Congress to go pound sand with their requests and demands. Much like the current occupant is doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #34)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:25 PM

39. No reason to abide by rules if the Democrats don't have to.

It's not like they have a police force or army.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #39)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:35 PM

45. I was just wondering exactly who was going to go out and arrest

those who ignore their silly "letters of request" for information and/or request for testimony?

Do they truly have fantasies about having that much authority?

If so, I guess they never listened to their mothers...

"You'll go blind if you keep doing that!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #34)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 02:17 AM

50. Maybe you can point out which instances are false so that we all know.

Thanks in advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:03 PM

35. "Quotes are rarely meaningful or authoritative" - Abraham Lincoln

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 10:14 PM

37. I would just do what was done when Obama was president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 11:38 PM

46. then just impeach him...

get it over with.

The Senate will take a dump on it and find him NOT GUILTY in like a day and a half.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 01:56 AM

48. Eric Holder was subject as well hypocrite dems did nothing but laugh

dems dont have the testicles to impeach trump

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 02:14 AM

49. A request is just that, a request.

When Pelosi takes a vote and officially makes it an impeachment inquiry she can subpoena.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Original post)

Wed Oct 9, 2019, 02:12 PM

52. But there is no formal inquiry taking place!

Congress can have committees and investigations. but until they have the whole house vote on a formal impeachment inquiry according to house rules, anyone can safely ignore subpoenas, from all these committees investing impeachment- they are not formally approved yet!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics