Originally posted by firstfloor
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
The Impeachment Trial
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by RumTumTugger; 01-21-2020, 02:57 PM.
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI'm not mad at anybody, Sam. God is good!
ETA: And, what MM said!
Mountain Man has had this explained before and neither he nor anyone else has ever put forth an actual legal argument for why congressional subpoenas during an impeachment inquiry require a preceding vote. He'll never give up a talking point, even if patently false, but that doesn't mean you have to latch onto such nonsense.
--Sam"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
The woman who is speaking now (or was about 20 minutes ago if she's not still speaking) was making some good valid points, but, for CRYIN' OUT LOUD, she can't READ!!! She keeps stumbling over her words like she's too passionate or fired up to think clearly, and it's really annoying.
It's like these people were given scripts written by other people, and they haven't had a chance to look them over yet.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Interesting -- Apple has to get into EVERYTHING....
Senators bend the rules by wearing Apple Watches to Trump trial
I think by any means of common sense, Apple watches would qualify under "phones or electronic devices" not allowed in the Senate Chamber, as many Apple watches include cellular communications, allowing them to operate even if the associated iPhone is far away, or even turned off.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostInteresting -- Apple has to get into EVERYTHING....
Senators bend the rules by wearing Apple Watches to Trump trial
I think by any means of common sense, Apple watches would qualify under "phones or electronic devices" not allowed in the Senate Chamber, as many Apple watches include cellular communications, allowing them to operate even if the associated iPhone is far away, or even turned off.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostIt would be pretty obvious if someone was trying to use the watch for communicating though. And you can't really text or send emails either. It just has some canned responses you can send, there isn't a keyboard (at least not on mine). But I guess they could receive texts and emails.
But, then again, my wife has an Apple Watch --- I have a $29 walmart watch.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostAn impeachment vote is not necessary for congressional committees to issue valid subpoenas, as those committees already have subpoena power.
Mountain Man has had this explained before and neither he nor anyone else has ever put forth an actual legal argument for why congressional subpoenas during an impeachment inquiry require a preceding vote. He'll never give up a talking point, even if patently false, but that doesn't mean you have to latch onto such nonsense.
--Sam
Trump's rockstar team of lawyers is obviously aware of this precedent which is why it will form part of their opening arguments.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou're right that we have been over this before, but you're wrong that the reasoning has never been presented. Judicial precedent says that a Congressional committee subpoena is valid only if the committee is pursuing a valid legislative purpose, and if it has the authorization of its chamber. Since there was never a House vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, it fails the second test. Keep in mind, they can start the inquiry without a vote, but they can not issue any legally binding subpoenas until a vote by the House grants the authorization.
Trump's rockstar team of lawyers is obviously aware of this precedent which is why it will form part of their opening arguments.
In short, the subpoenas of the House regarding an impeachment inquiry are just as -- if not far more -- legitimate as the subpoenas issued during the Benghazi probe. And we all know how absolutely on board you were with the Benghazi probe.
--Sam"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostThis remains false and is, in fact, without judicial precedent. It has, moreover, failed spectacularly when tried in courts this last year: district and appellate courts have overruled the administration's arguments concerning "legislative purpose", following real judicial precedent that the power of Congress to investigate as a matter of oversight and legislative purpose is broad.
In short, the subpoenas of the House regarding an impeachment inquiry are just as -- if not far more -- legitimate as the subpoenas issued during the Benghazi probe. And we all know how absolutely on board you were with the Benghazi probe.
--SamSome may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostDid you mean to quote a source that supports my point?
--Sam"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostIt does not but it's not surprising, given your history of legal acumen, to find that you believe it does.
--Sam
The fact is that Trump's A-Team knows the law far better than either of us, and the precedent cited is making up a part of their opening arguments.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by VonTastrophe, Yesterday, 01:08 PM
|
26 responses
140 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 10:13 AM | ||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 09:14 AM
|
131 responses
506 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 10:00 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 08:38 AM
|
11 responses
63 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by mossrose
Today, 09:37 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 06-26-2024, 01:10 PM
|
21 responses
114 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by RumTumTugger
Yesterday, 03:29 PM
|
||
Started by Roy, 06-26-2024, 02:39 AM
|
6 responses
74 views
2 likes
|
Last Post 06-26-2024, 12:53 PM |
Comment