LogFAQs > #927861596

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 239: Saudi You Think You Can Dance?
xp1337 09/24/19 1:08:50 AM #151:	HeroDelTiempo17 posted... I'm not 100% sure on this (and part of this is the dem's shitty messaging), but no, it isn't. The HJC voted on rules for it, and there are certainly ongoing related investigations, but the House itself has to launch a formal impeachment inquiry that should give them more official power to investigate. The whole thing is peak \/ House Judiciary, the Chair - Nadler - in particular, says they are engaged in an impeachment inquiry and their court filings have said as such. He argues that there is no requirement in the Constitution or the House Standing Rules stating he needs a full House vote to initiate and conduct one and that the floor votes held for Nixon and Clinton were to obtain investigative authorities they did not possess at the time but that they now do under the current House rules. Republicans are arguing that it is not an impeachment inquiry, just "standard" oversight and that the full House vote is necessary for it to be considered an impeachment inquiry. Ultimately it may come down to how a judge rules in said court filings. Here's a NYT article on it all that is probably the most succinct summary of the arguments for/against I've seen: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/13/us/politics/trump-impeachment-definition.html --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out? <cite>xp1337 posted [p:927861596] in Politics C... [t:78026276]...</cite> <quote>HeroDelTiempo17 posted...</cite> <quote> I'm not 100% sure on this (and part of this is the dem's shitty messaging), but no, it isn't. The HJC voted on rules for it, and there are certainly ongoing related investigations, but the House itself has to launch a formal impeachment inquiry that should give them more official power to investigate.</quote> The whole thing is peak \/ House Judiciary, the Chair - Nadler - in particular, says they are engaged in an impeachment inquiry and their court filings have said as such. He argues that there is no requirement in the Constitution or the House Standing Rules stating he needs a full House vote to initiate and conduct one and that the floor votes held for Nixon and Clinton were to obtain investigative authorities they did not possess at the time but that they now do under the current House rules. Republicans are arguing that it is not an impeachment inquiry, just "standard" oversight and that the full House vote is necessary for it to be considered an impeachment inquiry. Ultimately it may come down to how a judge rules in said court filings. Here's a NYT article on it all that is probably the most succinct summary of the arguments for/against I've seen: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/13/us/politics/trump-impeachment-definition.html --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1