This remains a BS GOP defensive move. THERE IS NO

REASON to have a vote before the inquiry is completed. There are whistle blower complaints against the president that Congress is obligated to investigate. When the investigation is complete, the Committee - which includes dems and repubs by the way - will either recommend impeachment or it won't. THEN there will be a vote.If that vote is affirmative to impeachment, THEN there will be a trial in the Senate.

If this was a whistle blower complaint of illegalities against someone who was not POTUS, the FBI WOULD NOT BE SHARING INFO DURING ITS INVESTIGATION!! Nor would a Grand Jury. If the investigation resulted in charges being filed, THEN the charged individual would be able to see the evidence against him/her, and the public will see it during the trial.

Nobody's rights are being trampled on and the GOP is NOT being excluded from inquiry hearings, despite what the WLBOTUS and his sycophants are crying about.

(In response to this post by Hoos Operator)

Posted: 10/16/2019 at 08:03AM

PREV NEXT REPLY

Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:

Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:

Current Thread:

Pelosi: No House vote on impeachment inquiry -- Hoos Operator 10/15/2019 10:06PM

Nothing there in the biggest nothingburger in history. ** -- MasterRusty 10/16/2019 08:06AM

This remains a BS GOP defensive move. THERE IS NO -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 08:03AM

She doesn't have the Senate votes. ** -- Blah 10/15/2019 10:31PM

Does the Senate vote on whether or not to have an impeachment inquiry? ** -- JMHoo 10/15/2019 11:17PM

Huh? On 9/26, 225 House reps went on record that they wanted an inquiry. -- Blah 10/15/2019 11:32PM

If they have 225+ votes for an impeachment inquiry, why aren’t they going -- JMHoo 10/16/2019 06:52AM

Because standard procedures DO NOT CALL FOR A VOTE -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 08:04AM

That's an entirely different vote. But carry on with your rants while -- Hoodafan 10/16/2019 08:19AM

Some people, like you, just refuse to listen to actual facts ** -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 08:53AM

This would be about a vote to open a formal inquiry, which sets the rules -- Hoodafan 10/16/2019 09:54AM

None of that is true. No vote is needed to conduct an inquiry -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 10:28AM

For the umpteenth time, no one ever said this vote is required. That's not -- Hoodafan 10/16/2019 10:44AM

Oh hooda, there is no evdience whatsover that you -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 10:46AM

Return to your babbling about totally different votes then. ** -- Hoodafan 10/16/2019 10:55AM

Kenneth Starr was a special counsel.. ** -- hoothat 10/16/2019 10:32AM

Many Dems from traditionally red leaning (and some purple leaning) -- Tuckahokie 10/16/2019 07:00AM

I know. Just playing with Blah. It’s so easy to do these days. ** -- JMHoo 10/16/2019 07:12AM

LOL. You don't even know the difference between an impeachment inquiry ... -- Blah 10/16/2019 10:22AM

A few of your fellow Trumpanzees are clueless enough to run around yelling -- WahooRQ 10/16/2019 07:48AM

So you don’t think D is guilty of crimes...LOL!!! ** -- Hooooooooooooooo 10/16/2019 07:03AM

I assume “D” is Trump? I don’t think anyone is seriously accusing him of -- JMHoo 10/16/2019 07:10AM

OMG ** -- WaxHoo 10/16/2019 08:54AM

Obstruction of justice violates the criminal code right? ** -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 08:05AM

For publicly asserting executive privilege? Good luck. ** -- JMHoo 10/16/2019 09:09AM

THAT'S what you call it? More like an elected official exercising -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 09:31AM

Mueller? They’re not going to impeach him for anything in Mueller report. ** -- JMHoo 10/16/2019 09:39AM

Perhaps that will stay out of scope. Although if any -- 111Balz 10/16/2019 10:01AM

I would be stunned if the articles were not, at a minimum, supported -- HoosQ 10/16/2019 10:05AM

Why? It’s a slam dunk. Right? ** -- Hokieesith 10/15/2019 10:30PM

Irrelevant ** -- WaxHoo 10/15/2019 10:52PM

She doesn’t have to ** -- WaxHoo 10/15/2019 10:15PM