Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

GOP Leaders Raise Important Questions on Impeachment Process, But Democrats Aren’t Answering

GOP Leaders Raise Important Questions on Impeachment Process, But Democrats Aren’t Answering

The biggest question of them all is: Why won’t you hold a House vote on a formal impeachment inquiry?

https://youtu.be/BvPQokKmZjs

After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave her public blessing last week for House Democrats to launch a formal impeachment inquiry of President Trump, members of the GOP House leadership read her the riot act.

Not only did she announce her support of an inquiry before reading the transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call (which hadn’t even been released at the time), but she also didn’t name the specific alleged impeachable offense Trump committed.

Furthermore, she sidestepped having the House vote on a formal impeachment inquiry, which has been the process the three times this issue has come up before (for Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton).

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise has become one of the more vocal members of the GOP leadership on this issue. He made the rounds over the weekend on the cable news networks asking questions Democrats either aren’t answering or aren’t answering honestly.

On Fox and Friends Saturday, Scalise brought up House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff’s “parody” reading of the Ukraine call in which he made up a conversation that did not happen. Scalise also pointed out that in spite of the impeachment fever that has consumed Democrats, House Democrats did not cancel a two-week recess. He found it odd that the House has not had an actual vote on an impeachment inquiry (transcribed):

Oh, by the way, if they were so serious, why did Adam Schiff have to start his committee hearing with a parody, a joke, trying to make fun of this and actually lying about what really happened and trying to make up a conversation between the president and Ukraine President Zelensky?

Why, by the way, if it’s so serious, and think about this, Nancy Pelosi is saying she wants to start impeachment proceedings against a president of the United States. She didn’t even require a House floor vote, which has always been the case to start impeachment. But, if she really thought he should be removed, why did she then leave town for two weeks? The next two weeks, Congress will not be in session.

He said if Pelosi and all House Democrats onboard with impeachment were serious, they’d stay in Washington, DC, and “work day and night to get to the bottom of the facts.” This is all about appeasing the Democratic base, not facts, he asserted.

Watch his interview below:

He brought up the  lack of a floor vote in an interview with NBC News’ Chuck Todd on Sunday:

Scalise: It sounds like you’re reading a lot of these Democrat talking points. The people that have been saying for years that the president was involved in all these other things and then none of it turned out to be true. The Mueller investigation was their ticket to impeachment.

Shouldn’t, by the way Chuck, shouldn’t they first have voted to start an impeachment inquiry, which has always happened? This is only three times in the history of our country that Congress has moved articles of impeachment. And they wouldn’t even do that.

It’s like they’re trying to shield their members from voting on this while they continue to go down the drumbeat of impeachment. Because, as the author of impeachment articles said, he’s concerned that president will get reelected. That’s not why you impeach a president. We’ve got an election next year to deal with that.

Watch:

The lack of a House vote on a formal impeachment inquiry appears to be one of the biggest issues Scalise and other GOP leaders like House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy have with the Democrats. McCarthy tried twice last week to get a resolution to the floor that expressed disapproval over no impeachment inquiry vote. The resolution was tabled both times.

If you’re getting the impression that House Republicans are being deliberately left out of this process, you’re not the only one. Sen. Chuck Grassley raised alarm bells over this on Saturday:

Rep. Doug Collins, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, took it a step further in an interview he did with Lou Dobbs Thursday. He suggested the reason Democrats aren’t putting this to the House for a vote is because that’s when “due process rights have to kick in.” Here’s what he said (transcribed):

This week, we saw something that should disturb every American. We saw the Speaker of the House abuse her power … by going before the American people and basically lying by saying “we’re going to start an impeachment inquiry. It’s now formal.” She’s not truthful about that.

If they were really serious about that, they’d have to put it on the floor. If they actually put it on the floor, that meant – and this is something nobody reports – when they actually do an impeachment inquiry it means that all of a sudden due process rights have to kick in. It can no longer be the Adam Schiff Lying show story, it can no longer be the Jerry Nadler I Don’t Know What I’m Doing show.

It now has to be set where there’s due process, where there’s subpoena rights for myself as the ranking member [and] for the chairman. There’s places where the president and his legal team can weigh in. It becomes a formal proceeding. All they want to continue to do now is have the show. That’s why they don’t put it on the floor.

His comments about Pelosi, Trump, and due process start at around the 1:45 mark below. Watch:

Although the House is on a recess for two weeks, select members of at least three key House committees will still be conducting impeachment-related business:

On Friday, Schiff, along with Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Eliot Engel and Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings subpoenaed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanding documents related to Ukraine by Oct. 4. (The House is not scheduled to return from recess until Oct. 15.)

Additionally, a press release from the three chairs said the committees have scheduled depositions for five State Department officials over the next two weeks.

[…]

House Democrats say they want the inquiry to move “expeditiously,” and while Pelosi said Thursday she has not given the relevant committees any deadline for finishing their work, Rep. Maxine Waters, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, told BuzzFeed News’ AM to DM she and the other chairs believe they can finish their work before the end of the year.

And if Scalise, McCarthy, and Collins are correct, it will largely be done without any Republican input or any due process for the president.

Calling this a stunningly dangerous precedent to set doesn’t quite seem to cover it.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | September 30, 2019 at 5:13 pm

Thanks for the update and links Stacey.

Interesting read to go along with this.

“Why Nancy Pelosi Now Supports Impeachment Even Though It’s Insane”

“….This is about Pelosi losing control of her caucus should she continue to resist impeachment, and Pelosi sensing a looming electoral disaster of monumental proportions should impeachment be launched outside the parameters she defines….”

https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/30/why-nancy-pelosi-now-supports-impeachment-even-though-its-insane/

Of course, she didn’t name any “impeachable offense”…

For one, there isn’t one.

For another, she just gave the House Committee Chairmen carte blanche to go after President Trump on anything and everything tey can come-up with.

    And Trump should be declassifying all the Russia stuff and everything he finds about biden’s quid pro quo for his druggie kid.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d swear they’re fanning the flames of war. I do know that that’s how they roll.

    oldgoat36 in reply to Mark. | September 30, 2019 at 6:38 pm

    We’ve been in a “cold” civil war since at least Bush’s term in office, but the Republicans have been too stupid to see it.

    This has been building for decades.

    They want a revolution, like the Bolshevik revolution, they have telegraphed their hatred of the Constitution. They don’t believe in the Bill of Rights, unless it ONLY pertains to them. The Bill of Rights would never be passed today, and frankly, much of it is in shreds and is largely ignored unless they use any of the Amendments erroneously in claims that the right have violated them.

    Cold wars can only go on so long before they burn themselves out or till they go hot. The left just wants the right to be seen to “start” it, otherwise they are fine with continuing to shred the whole Country apart till there is no recourse left available. I had stated many times that Obama pushed many times in a effort to give an excuse for their revolution to go forward. His escalation of racial tensions which was tied to his efforts to discredit law enforcement was calculated. And it was almost always based on lies and twisting of facts which pushed it forward.

      jmccandles in reply to oldgoat36. | October 1, 2019 at 9:59 am

      @ Oldgoat

      You sir Nailed it !

      paracelsus in reply to oldgoat36. | October 1, 2019 at 11:41 am

      The Socialist-Progressives managed to remove Richard Milhous Nixon from office and have been congratulating themselves ever since. They’ve figured (and rightly so) that if they can do this to a very highly popular president (look at the election results), they can do it successfully to anyone.

Occam’s scalpel suggests that, despite 12 trimesters of trial and failure, impeachment is not politically congruent, let alone viable. The Democrats would be committing self-abortion if they progressed with a warlock trial.

I think they want a war. They know they are not going to win 2020.

Of course, she didn’t name any “impeachable offense”…

For one, there isn’t one.

For another, she just gave the House Committee Chairmen carte blanche to go after President Trump on anything and everything they can come-up with.

Why did no Republican call him out?? It took a text froma constituent before a word was said. Pencil neck now wasnt to hold out till December. Still waiting for one of the dirt diaper leftistto show anything TRumpdid wrong. Schiff CucHK you Nutty Nancy NUtty Nadler. Does anyone understand what Treaty 106-60 signed by Clinton play is into this?

Pelosi knows that if she doesn’t move fast her goose is cooked. If the truth comes out it will show the she was complicit in the attempted coup. The reason she won’t allow a vote for impeachment is because that would give the GOP certain rights, and she can’t have that now, can she? And now McConnell has said that the Senate will comply with the House, apparently without a House vote for impeachment. The UniParty has built a railroad and they’re trying to send President Trump up the river.

    f2000 in reply to Elric. | September 30, 2019 at 6:45 pm

    “And now McConnell has said that the Senate will comply with the House, apparently without a House vote for impeachment. ”

    Well, no. That isn’t what he said. McConnell said that under current Senate rules he’s obligated to “take it up” if the house passes articles of impeachment (that would require a majority vote). He went on to say that “take it up” doesn’t define how long they have to take it up for or how. They could take it up then vote to dismiss the complaint, they could hand it to a committee for further investigation (or eventually dropping it), or they could put it to the full Senate for a trial. There’s a lot of leeway in what McConnell said.

      I vaguely remember reading that (checks Wiki) out of 11 charges sent up from the House in Andrew Johnson’s impeachment, the Senate only took up 9, and just ignored the others. And to be honest, some of the charges brought up against Johnson were just as stupid as what the Dems are wanting to use against Trump.

      I think the Clinton impeachment was the only one that followed an actual crime, in the order that the founding fathers had laid down.

I’m wondering if congressional republicans could file suit against this action taking it up to the Supreme Court?

If there was no vote, which there wasn’t, then why should anyone obey any subpoenas sent out regarding this matter?

It seems to me that this is just an announcement of intent by Pelosi, without being binding or official. In this case why should any information be sent to these scum? It is only to look for ways of twisting the word of the President into a lie to fit their propaganda, and you know Schiff will leak everything that passes through his Schiff Stained fingers.

I think every response to these leftists should be as soon as you hold your vote we will release documents pertaining to your inquiry, provided you also produce the supposed crime along with the statutes on the law(s) you are claiming the President broke. Otherwise this is just another attempted coup.

If Trump broke laws, enumerate them. Site specific instances in his own words, or actions performed and witnesses who can verify these actions and words from FIRST HAND witnessing, then Trump will lose any support he has enjoyed.

If they are unwilling to do their job as it had been done in the past, then why should their requests be considered legal?

    “If there was no vote, which there wasn’t, then why should anyone obey any subpoenas sent out regarding this matter?”

    Normally, you’d be right, but in January Pelosi changed the rules of the house to allow the committees this power without a vote.

      Just because Nancy hath proclaimed it, does not make it legit. I expect the Trump administration to punt a vast number of these fishing subpoenas at about a million dollars of political campaign funds received per.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to georgfelis. | October 1, 2019 at 2:44 pm

        Keep this in mind. The information that the Democrats want is mostly protected by either Executive Privilege or Grand Jury Secrecy. Trump and Barr have already made clear that they will assert Executive Privilege on pretty much everything the Democrats want. They have little if any legal oversight power, since most of what they want, for obvious reasons, directly involves the President and things that he, or his closest advisors, have done or said. This is a Separation of Powers issue, where the President’s Article II Powers are at their strongest, and the House’s Article I Powers are at their weakest. With a 5-4 Supreme Court, and over 150 judicial confirmations by Trump, this won’t be close.

        The one exception though to the assertion of Executive Privilege for White House conversations, etc, is in the case of a formal impeachment inquiry – the Nixon exception (Nixon asserted Executive Privilege, and lost in the Supreme Court). The House Dems would have a decent chance here if they had initiated their impeachment inquiry through an open House vote. They didn’t. Instead, it was initiated by Speaker Pelosi and a handful of her henchmen in a private setting, and it has eliminated any role for either the minority or the President himself. It looks very much like a kangaroo courts, and I expect that depriving both the House minority and the President any due process will result in the courts ultimately treating the House Dems’ like the partisan witch hunt that it is – which means that Trump’s assertion of Executive Privilege will most likely not be overridden by the Judiciary.

        The Dems are unlikely to prevail with overcoming grand jury secrecy either. The exception to grand jury secrecy that they see to be trying to use is for grand jury testimony used in a court hearing. Except that impeachment is not a criminal trial, but rather, here, it is a purely political stunt.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to georgfelis. | October 1, 2019 at 2:44 pm

        Keep this in mind. The information that the Democrats want is mostly protected by either Executive Privilege or Grand Jury Secrecy. Trump and Barr have already made clear that they will assert Executive Privilege on pretty much everything the Democrats want. They have little if any legal oversight power, since most of what they want, for obvious reasons, directly involves the President and things that he, or his closest advisors, have done or said. This is a Separation of Powers issue, where the President’s Article II Powers are at their strongest, and the House’s Article I Powers are at their weakest. With a 5-4 Supreme Court, and over 150 judicial confirmations by Trump, this won’t be close.

        The one exception though to the assertion of Executive Privilege for White House conversations, etc, is in the case of a formal impeachment inquiry – the Nixon exception (Nixon asserted Executive Privilege, and lost in the Supreme Court). The House Dems would have a decent chance here if they had initiated their impeachment inquiry through an open House vote. They didn’t. Instead, it was initiated by Speaker Pelosi and a handful of her henchmen in a private setting, and it has eliminated any role for either the minority or the President himself. It looks very much like a kangaroo courts, and I expect that depriving both the House minority and the President any due process will result in the courts ultimately treating the House Dems’ like the partisan witch hunt that it is – which means that Trump’s assertion of Executive Privilege will most likely not be overridden by the Judiciary.

        The Dems are unlikely to prevail with overcoming grand jury secrecy either. The exception to grand jury secrecy that they see to be trying to use is for grand jury testimony used in a court hearing. Except that impeachment is not a criminal trial, but rather, here, it is a purely political stunt.

This is the way Pelosi passed ObamaCare too. She couldn’t get the floor vote so she “deemed” it passed. It ultimately went to joint committee and revised by John Roberts to make it constitutional.

I don’t think it will get to the Senate unless they cut a deal with the Turtle and Republicans beforehand. The Democrats know the Senate will never vote for impeachment. They just want to sully Trump’s historical legacy for posterity. They also do not have a candidate who can defeat Trump so it is a mystery to me why Pelosi would guarantee an election blowout in 2020 that will destroy the party.

If this isn’t part of a plan where Pelosi saves the party from the communist Squad, the Democrats will be the de facto American communist party. In my lifetime, every time the Democrats lurch to the left, the Republicans follow up by declaring a new middle that is also much further left. That is why Trump has to drain the Republican swamp in 2020. So far, the RINOs are hanging in there. We are still talking McConnell and Graham so things really haven’t changed yet.

    oldgoat36 in reply to Pasadena Phil. | September 30, 2019 at 7:05 pm

    What this type of action could put into effect is a dictatorship for whatever party is in power in the hands of the Speaker. It is based on “I don’t like him, and Hillary lost”, in this case, and if this does proceed, as it’s looking more likely to, it effectively rewrites the Constitutional division of powers.

    This could very well end the US as we know it. Thus it means win or lose the leftists win.

    This third world banana republic action is why I feel Barr made a huge error in not going after indictments against Comey already. Laws used to mean something in this country, but since the left continually live above the law in most cases, the law means less and less. In a country of laws Hillary would at the very least have been brought to trial for infractions that others have been convicted of and sent to jail for.

    We are living in very dark days, and it is brought to us almost exclusively from the National Socialists.

    President Donald J. Trump has said it himself. He isn’t doing this for him. He had a great life, has a great family, built a great business, but he is gladly taking the slings and arrows for us. That will be a legacy no impeachment can tarnish.

    You are spot on with the Overton Window comment about the GOP shifting to the left just because the democrats dragged them there.

    I’m going to do everything I can to see a PDJT win in 2020. I’m hoping the MAGA/KAG agenda takes back the House and we pick up at least a few more in the Senate.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OOAVoz5cmaM

Everyone should realize that the Dems changed the rules, just like the ICIG did for hearsay. It’s what they did, here in California, to get their super majority. Don’t believe me though:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/28/pelosis-house-rule-changes-are-key-part-of-articles-of-impeachment-being-drafted-over-next-two-weeks/

politics vs high crimes and misdemeanors.
impeachment is a political process, not a criminal trial.

This is only three times in the history of our country that Congress has moved articles of impeachment.

Not correct, as I’m sure Scalise knows. A President has been impeached by House vote only twice (three, counting Nixon—which was a Judiciary Committee vote, not a House vote). However there have been several House impeachments of federal judges, a high percentage of which have resulted in removal from office, and one Cabinet secretary. (There was one House attempt to impeach a Senator, too, but the Senate refused to act on it.)

Unless there are arrests and trials — soon — nothing will change. “Bill Barr is studying the issue. Just wait until the IG report comes out! Just wait for the Durham investigation!” On and on and on. I know a “rope a dope” strategy when I see it.

So far, I’ve seen no evidence that anything will happen to the guilty parties. They will leech off American taxpayers for the rest of their worthless lives and die of old age in their beds.

President Trump, please PROVE ME WRONG.

    So far, Barr has been Comey without the high drama. The end result has been “no action”. So again, we await an IG or other report that we already know is incriminating. Will Barr ever act on the facts? Hopes for a constitutional rescue are fading. If the system is broken, are we going to just shrug our shoulders and take it?

    The first step would be to stop predicating everything we say with “Not that I’m a (fill in the blank)… conspiracy theorist, racist, homophobe, etc… and engage with the full force of our arguments backed with proven facts and with conviction. We are still not doing that.

    Trump has put it all on the line and now, so has Pelosi. How about us? Is this just a parlor game? We are the ones who will have to live with the outcome so we better be willing to engage in the fight.

Nancy Pelosi will be the first to tell you that rules are for little people. And they as heck don’t apply to the Democrat snakes, alligators and fork tongued lizards crawling in the swamp.

The GOP disgusts me. Except for Nunes, not one of these a55sh0les has stood with Trump against the criminal ‘rats. Not one. Trump and non-party allies have done all the fighting.

I tend to believe most of the GOP is as corrupt as the Dem Party.

Scr.ew them. Here’s hoping Barr burns the entire Dem Party and their Uniparty pals of the GOP.

Impeachment leads to a trial in the Senate. Witnesses are called and sworn testimony is given/taken. Several issues will come up. Ukraine. crowd strike. podesta group. manafort. fusion gps. clinton foundation. uranium one… I could go on and on. The witnesses will have to carefully navigate between their answers and the documented evidence. Horowitz, Huber, Durham will be providing that documented evidence. So we will finally get to see guys like james comey get sworn in and answer for many of the things he did. Why do you think the DoJ decided not to indict him for illegal leaking etc? mccabe, strzok, yates, rice, lynch… they are all going to come in and testify under oath. The first thing every one of them is going to say, if they are smart, is “I plead the 5th.” Even mitt romney is going to look like an absolute corrupt deep state puppet if he can’t see clear to move for a directed verdict of acquittal. By the way, romney may have to recuse himself any evidence turns up he had business dealings in Ukraine. The democrats really haven’t thought this through. Dragging their dirty laundry into what is sure to be the most watched televised event in history isn’t a good plan.

    murkyv in reply to CKYoung. | September 30, 2019 at 8:48 pm

    Shouldn’t all of the Senators running for President also have to recuse themselves?

    We know they won’t, but…

    If only your were describing the true nature of the Republican party. I maintain that the Dems HAVE thought this through and we are still just engaged in kabuki theater. There won’t be any “dirty laundry” episodes if the GOP stays true to form and cuts a deal beforehand.

    We don’t need senators and congressmen being pundits on news shows while sitting on their hands with mouths taped shut on the Senate and House floors. Graham is chairman of the Judiciary Committee and has the power to take action yet doesn’t. McConnell is majority leader and…. so what? We cheer his yet unproven picks on judges but he is still one of the corruptest swamp critters in the swamp. He has as much dirty laundry as anyone in DC so why wouldn’t he cut a deal with Pelosi? We are still fighting the “there but the grace of God go I” problem with crooks investigating crooks.

    There is no more room for hope based on this being just the latest phase of the big 3D chess game. We are about to learn the truth about the corrupt nature of our government and whether it can be saved within the constitutional framework. If there are any patriots in our government, it’s time for them to show themselves and take action. This impeachment is NOT a good thing and CAN be stopped if McConnell and the rest of the snakes do their constitutional duties and act as honorable men.

    artichoke in reply to CKYoung. | October 1, 2019 at 9:50 pm

    Has that been true in past impeachment trials? I believe it was not with Clinton’s impeachment, or if so it was very limited. The testimony was gathered first at the House level.

    The Senate trial took only a few days. Doors were locked and armed guards were stationed within to prevent any senator leaving. I still don’t think we know what went on there; what we do know was leaked, not publicly released.

What is most depressing about this is that we are not seriously asking, “How many Democrats will refuse to walk the plank for Pelosi,” but “How many Republicans will vote to impeach/remove Trump?” It like asking ourselves on December 8, 1941 how many American generals will fight for the United States, how many will join the Axis, and how many will style themselves #NeverAmerica “neutrals”.

There is no way Pelosi would agree to this unless BOTH of the following were true: (1) she has at least one House Republican prepared to vote for impeachment to make it “bipartisan”, and (2) she also has Mitt Romneycare and a few other GOP Senators willing to drag the Senate trial out for weeks or months while blocking efforts to investigate Biden, Comey, Clapper, and the rest of the Deep State. There will be no due process in the House (just a few sound-bite generating hearings where Trump and the Republicans will be blocked from presenting evidence), and a grinding Senate trial designed to permanently damage Trump even if they can’t reach 67 for removal.

And then there are the impertinent, kick-over-the-tables questions like, “What are you impeaching him FOR?” and “Where’s your evidence?”

You know, anarchist-cookbook crackpot questions no one should have to put up with.

Eastwood Ravine | September 30, 2019 at 11:51 pm

Can Trump call a joint session of Congress to address Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment slander process rather than a real impeachment process? Tell them to put up or shut up?

    artichoke in reply to Eastwood Ravine. | October 1, 2019 at 9:48 pm

    Can he? Can he force people to speak at it? Can he force Nancy Pelosi to answer questions from Mitch McConnell or other Republican senators?

    He can probably call such a session to give a speech himself, which is an interesting and novel thought. After all he must speak “from time to time” about the state of the union, which can be on demand, not just once a year.

It has a second prong: drive the stock market down so they can point and say: “The economy is terrible.”

The House Dems don’t need no stinkin’ “important questions.”

They didn’t need them either on the day they passed Obamacare through the House, it was a Sunday and I watched that travesty live. Several Republicans had very substantial parliamentary objections to how this was being done, but in place of the usual parliamentarian they put a Dem. congressman, Jesse Jackson Jr., who overruled every one of the Republican objections.

When the Dems have a goal, they’ll go for it by any means necessary.

“GOP leaders” is an oxymoron.

Damn that corrupt rat mcconnell.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend