Image 01 Image 03

House to Hold Vote to Formalize the Procedures of the Impeachment Inquiry

House to Hold Vote to Formalize the Procedures of the Impeachment Inquiry

It’s a procedural vote

Monday, Speaker Pelosi announced that the House will hold a vote this week to formalize procedures in the impeachment inquiry. As of yet, the hearings have been closed-door hearings, without public access.

The vote is a procedural one and will “establish rules for public hearings, provide due process rights for the White House and allow information to be transferred to the committee that would ultimately consider the articles of impeachment”  and the first time Congress will go on record over the impeachment theater.

From CNN:

The House is moving toward the next phase of its impeachment inquiry, setting up a vote later this week on procedures that could quickly lead to President Donald Trump becoming the third president in US history to be impeached.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Monday the House would vote on Thursday to formalize the procedures of the impeachment inquiry into Trump and Ukraine, in what will be the first time the House will go on the record on the proceedings.
The vote signals a move into the next stage of the investigation following several weeks of closed-door depositions, as Democrats said the resolution would establish rules for public hearings, provide due process rights for the White House and allow information to be transferred to the committee that would ultimately consider the articles of impeachment.
House Democrats are discussing a time frame that would include public impeachment hearings before Thanksgiving and votes on whether to impeach Trump by Christmas, according to multiple Democratic sources. But Pelosi did not put a time frame on it at a closed-door leadership meeting on Monday to discuss the resolution and she has been hesitant to do so, as the timing is subject to change depending on how witnesses cooperate or if additional leads come up, according to multiple Democrats.
Still, the working theory among Democrats is there will be another week or two of closed depositions, and that public hearings before the House Intelligence Committee could begin as soon as the second week in November, when Congress returns from a one-week recess.
House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler told CNN on Monday that it’s “possible” a vote could be held in his committee on articles of impeachment before Christmas. “My preference is to do it right,” the New York Democrat said, adding that the panel would have to “get reports from the other committees first” detailing their findings.

Pelosi’s letter:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The democrats have gone from a “Joke” to a serious joke

Impeachment is a certain ticket to Trump’s second term.

    MattMusson in reply to NotKennedy. | October 29, 2019 at 6:47 am

    But this is just a vote to Affirm the Inquiry. So, Democrats can go back to the voters and still deny they voted for Impeachment.

      Not to mention the following is not true:

      “…provide due process rights for the White House…”

      They are doing nothing more than voting that what they are already doing is just fine. Which it is not.

      JackinSilverSpring in reply to MattMusson. | October 29, 2019 at 9:59 am

      Your comment is supported by Tom Lifson’s piece in the American Thinker.

Keep coming commie libs…

Why is it called an impeachment inquiry?
Is this the real thing or just another game?

    Conservative Beaner in reply to snowshooze. | October 28, 2019 at 10:29 pm

    Still isn’t a real impeachment but a continuation of the same circus act.

    It doesn’t matter what it is called. Mark Twain used to ask, “How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg? Four, because calling it a leg doesn’t make it one.”

    Unless the Dems show a streak of honesty (yeah, right), the ‘rules’ they will ram through will not resemble anything like the Nixon or Clinton impeachment rules. If so, it is the job of every Republican to hammer those differences like a horseshoe on an anvil, 24/7.

I read this as the third President to be impeached and NOT removed from office.
This time I see the left taking a huge hit for their actions. And given the timing of the vote that Nancy has pushed off as long as she had is the reaction to the Barr investigation going to a Criminal investigation.
It’s narrative they are after.

    alaskabob in reply to oldgoat36. | October 28, 2019 at 10:25 pm

    This just will rip the divide open beyobd repair between left and right. “Polarizing” will not even come close to describing the chasm. It will be Israeli-Palestinian conflict equivalent until one side decisively and totally wins. Death, deportation, or demotion (inferior second class— a civilian and not a citizen) will be the lasting fate of the loser if this comes to blows.

What I see is the seditionist trying to get ahead of the I.G. report and the Durham criminal investigation in hope that they can destroy Trump before the whole conspiracy is exposed.

Fortunately they fail to understand the full constitutional prosses.
1) even if they manage to get this vote through the house, they then have to get 67% of the house to approve articles of impeachment.

2) Then the Senate has to be agree to take up the articals and begain a trial.

3) Then if the Senate takes the trial. A two thirds majority has to vote to remove the President.

4) This only removes the President.

5) Then they have to repeat the process to remove the Vice President.

Even at best this pipe dream will not take place before the Horowitz repot is published. And probably not take place before the first of the Durham indictments are handed down.

Let us assume that the Democrats have some magic spell to make this happen. Does anyone believe that the American voters will just roll over and submit to a one party rule?

While I am doubtful that this will happen, I have been disappointed before.

    gospace in reply to Shadow5. | October 28, 2019 at 10:39 pm

    The Constitution simply states that the house has the sole power of impeachment; it does not specify a 2/3 vote. A simple majority will suffice unless the house binds itself to some other higher threshold. I’m not even certain that such binding would be constitutional.

    A 2/3 vote is specified to be found guilty in the Senate.

    “…they then have to get 67% of the house to approve articles of impeachment.”

    50% +1. The Clinton vote was 228–206 on Perjury, and 221–212 on Obstruction of Justice.

Christopher B | October 28, 2019 at 9:55 pm

Snow, I think Pelosi is playing two games. 1) pretending she really didn’t have to do this because Trump and the GOP working together forced the Dems to go on record with a formal process. 2) Providing cover for red district Dems to say they are just supporting an inquiry or hearings, so they can waffle on whether they will actually vote to impeach (which they will, of course, but they can confuse the rubes a bit longer)

    oldgoat36 in reply to Christopher B. | October 29, 2019 at 6:12 am

    This is the formal vote on an Impeachment Inquiry, so it isn’t voting to impeach on specific supposed crimes. This is what Trump required to start cooperating. The National Socialists would still need to put forth the rules of this kangaroo court tactic.
    I think it is being rushed to have something to push against the bad news to come out with the Criminal Investigation and IG report, but I don’t hold much hope for the IG report.
    The propagandists will spin this as being impeachment, it certainly doesn’t sound that way, as an inquiry is not the same as voting for articles of impeachment. This is pushing the issue closer, no doubt, but without charges this isn’t really a meaningful vote other than to create targets for those leftists who vote it forward that are in swing districts.
    I see this as them painting themselves into a corner which they might not get out of. Schiff being in charge could be a good thing only in that the man is deranged and makes plenty of claims where there is no there there.

“And now WH says because she’s holding a vote everything done so far is “irreversibly illegitimate”

Plausible. Guaranteed that would be the Dems’ totally predictable play were the situation reversed.

As it stands, Trump can use executive privilege to block House demands for testimony and documents. However, Judge Howell’s recent decision gave the House Judiciary Committee the full judicial authority to subpoena testimony and documents.

Trump does not have the authority to have legal representation present, nor can he cross examine or call witnesses of his own. The Republican members of the House can cross-examine, but they do not have subpoena power.

By calling this vote on Thursday, Pelosi hopes to ‘share’ the subpoena power granted to the House Judiciary by Judge Howell with the entire house while still excluding the Republicans and the President from fulling participating in the proceedings.

This will allow the House to actually impeach the President with no due process whatever.

    oldgoat36 in reply to stablesort. | October 29, 2019 at 6:18 am

    This is where McConnell should step in and investigate every witness that the National Socialist Party has, only it should be open doors unless it involved national security in any way.
    Goudy is all for the closed door hearings, but he strikes me as a strange one in certain views he holds, and despite his entertainment with the way he interrogated people in the investigations he was part of, none of those investigations went anywhere. It may have been due to lack of power to go further, but he came out seeming more showboat than a boat that could float.

As near as I can tell, the DOJ is sitting on its hands instead of an emergency appeal of Judge Howell’s ruling. The deep-state it seems, is getting another bite of the apple.

    I’d be willing to guess the White House is staying away from the word ‘Emergency’ like poison ivy, which only makes sense.

    So far, the whole goal of the Dems is to conflate motion with progress. By running around in circles and keeping all the testimony secret, they can pretend that horrible, terrible, awful, gross, icky things are being revealed. One thing for absolute (censored) certain is that if I were subpoenaed, I’d bring my counsel, period. (Yeah, we non-lawyers like to make fun of you, but when we need you, we *need* you.)

      oldgoat36 in reply to georgfelis. | October 29, 2019 at 6:23 am

      Expect leaks from Schifface, one sided ones to be sure, that give as much credence as his “parody” of Trump’s phone call.
      Its setting up the narrative, it is to push public opinion, but the National Socialists are relying on Schiff to be an honest broker which he is far from being.
      This is to gin up support of their impeachment effort to affect the coming election even more than it is to remove Trump.
      This is part of their “civil war” that they are fighting through the courts and through phony claims.

According to the letter, Pelosi is requesting a vote on whether the House should continue the current process to determine if an impeachment investigation should be opened. The point being, Pelosi is not requesting that any impeachment inquiry be authorized only that some vague pre-impeachment inquiry continue. Depending upon the “rules” set for the pre-impeachment inquiry, the Republican may or may not be able to schedule their own witnesses or to publicly question the Democrats witnesses. And, still, without a vote for a formal impeachment inquiry, the House may not have any enforceable subpoena power.

More smoke and mirrors.

    So much like the pre-pre-meeting to set up the rules for the pre-meeting for the test run of the walk through before the meeting that nobody really wants and has been delayed every month it was scheduled. I’ve been there at work. Sometimes, Dilbert is astonishingly accurate.

I think this is at least partly about taking the air out of the news cycle when the Horowitz report hits.

    oldgoat36 in reply to Cornfed. | October 29, 2019 at 6:27 am

    I’m not convinced the Horrowitz report will be anything more than other reports… intent laden, mistakes made, bla, bla, bla. I hope I am wrong, but the last report was a dud despite the information found. No connecting the obvious dots.

More Pelosi/Schitt/Commie Bullshit. Nothing more than kabucki theatre. Nothing will change with this vote except the commies will say it is now legitimate. But it isn’t. Nothing will change.

12 trimesters? A late term impeachment, really? It’s because he’s a baby… warlock, right? One failed witch hunt after another after another.

I fear the Democrats have taken us all far past the point of no return. If Trump is not impeached/removed from office, then the radical Left will do the only thing left to them which is social unrest in the extreme. If Trump is removed from office, then the ramifications for the country will be long felt and profound. In either case, this will result in the dreaded black swan event that will crush the markets and more. What this ultimately boils down to is that the Democrats are more than willing to destroy the country to make a point about Trump. Consequently, when the investigations are complete, there will likely be no Democratic Part left. It really makes one wonder how anyone could hate another so badly that they were willing to destroy everything, including themselves, to get at them.

    mailman in reply to Cleetus. | October 29, 2019 at 5:17 am

    The radical left is being fed 24/7 by the unhinged democrat media machine which is just making the left even more rabid in their hatred towards anyone who isnt like them.

    oldgoat36 in reply to Cleetus. | October 29, 2019 at 6:31 am

    The leftists have been pushing hate. It’s why they divide people into specific hate groups so those people only look at their own smaller issue, and untruths and outright lies are told to fire them up. It’s sad, but too many voters are single issue voters, those who rarely if ever think beyond their own interests.
    It’s counting on the right sitting back and keeping on taking it. If that fails, then they want the first “shots” of the civil war to be fired from the right, even though the violence has already been occurring from the left brown shirts.

    CKYoung in reply to Cleetus. | October 29, 2019 at 2:30 pm

    The social unrest will be in the big blue cities. A few mayors might even tell their police forces ‘give them room to destroy.’ If it gets bad enough, the police won’t show up anyway, most live in the suburbs. The sheep who flee the wolves will not get a warm reception outside the big blue cities, especially if they escape in their Prius with the “I’m with her” bumper stickers. The rural, 2A areas are going to be fine. By the time National Guard forces can assemble, the big blue cities will already have been burned to the ground. Many sheep will suffer. When it’s all said and done, when they ask “why did this happen?” The only answer will be “democrats.” (this post is in no way an endorsement or desire for violence. I hope we can stave off a hot civil war, but if it does go hot, it will not turn out the way they imagined).

    There are people with that much hate. I’ve talked with them.

    That reminds me, I need to check that the back-up iron sights on my rifles are sighted in.

2smartforlibs | October 29, 2019 at 7:05 am

This should make the minority party all but irrelevant.

The DimWitDems are walking the gangplank to their own destruction. Remember this when you vote in 2020 and remove them all from public office !!

Pelosi….why’s no one picked through her and her husband’s finances, etc.?

    ronk in reply to xsnake. | October 29, 2019 at 11:14 am

    I think she would fall under the emoluments clause, since anything she does that benefits her husband would affect her, California being communal property state

The Constitution states that “The House shall have the power to impeach”. It doesn’t say the speaker of the House. It says the House and that means ALL of its members. Without a vote by ALL members, to authorize impeachment, nothing she is doing is legitimate.

the fun hasn’t started yet, wonder how they will keep everything secret when the senate begins the trial, does the senate have a right to see what they are doing now, those secret meeting in the SCIF? what about the whistle-blower reports, do they get to question the people that made th0se reports? I don’t think the democrats thought very far ahead. is there anything that says the senate can’t do those things now.

It is being reported that this impeachment floor vote is not going to happen

Looks to me like the Dems are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Why have a procedural vote when all of their efforts to establish grounds for impeachment have imploded?

I hope Trump has a field day with this.

that could quickly lead to President Donald Trump becoming the third president in US history to be impeached.

Oh, that CNN. What a bunch of cards. I can practically hear a spectral Sidney Greenstreet saying, “By gad, sir, you are a character, that you are.”

That “quickly” ship sailed months ago.

“We have to vote for the impeachment inquiry before we can decide on the impeachment vote”.

What the article did not cover was when these procedures will take effect? It never stated that they’d be of immediate effect.

I see this as having something in place for when they DO finally go to the House for a vote on opening impeachment proceedings; that these will then be the rules under which the House will conduct the impeachment process.

Meanwhile, everything continues as it is.

breitbart is making sort of a big deal about the first democratic ‘defection’, that’s not a big deal at all, if they do vote they will have exactly the number they need, the democrats in iffy districts will get the chance to vote no, and if any republicans cross over that means another iffy democrat will be able to vote no and over their butt