None of that is true. No vote is needed to conduct an inquiry

around whistle blower complaints against the POTUS. the Gop members of the investigating committees are included and can cross examine.witnesses.Witnesses can be acompanied by counsel.
Its really no different than any other criminal investigation within the domain of a grand jury or just by a law enforcement agency.
All of this vote shit is just the GOP wanting to get the names of reps voting yes ON RECORD.
Due course will provide ample opportunity for that.

And look up your history. The House began inquiry into Nixon in october 1973. A formal vote (to conitnue a more exhaustive investigation based on the findings of the Inquiry) did not happen until 3 months later.
Clinto had been under the Starr investogation for a good while. there was no need for the House to do any further investigation so they went from Starr's findings and recommendation straight to an impeachment vote.

(In response to this post by Hoodafan)

Posted: 10/16/2019 at 10:28AM

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