Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On Sunday, Esper said that he would comply with all requests.

Today, DOD says no.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1184241169351565313

WTH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pelosi is declining to take a vote on the impeachment inquiry.

She:

a. does not have the votes for the measure to pass.
b. is worried that it would hurt Dems in states that Trump won.
c. both of the above.

Of course she has the votes, the representatives who support the inquiry are on record via statements from their offices. What she doesn’t have is the facts. because, just today:
—the Pentagon rejects subpoena for documents
—OMB rejects subpoena for documents
—Giuliani rejects subpoena for documents
—Pence rejects request for documents

But, but, but... I thought an impeachment inquiry is to GET the facts. That is what everyone has been saying here.

It is one thing to confidentially say, "Sure, I am on board for an impeachment inquiry." Totally a different beast to go on record with a roll call vote.

What? Who said anything confidentially? There are official statements from the members and/or their press offices of every House member who is in favor of the impeachment investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pelosi is declining to take a vote on the impeachment inquiry.

She:

a. does not have the votes for the measure to pass.
b. is worried that it would hurt Dems in states that Trump won.
c. both of the above.

Of course she has the votes, the representatives who support the inquiry are on record via statements from their offices. What she doesn’t have is the facts. because, just today:
—the Pentagon rejects subpoena for documents
—OMB rejects subpoena for documents
—Giuliani rejects subpoena for documents
—Pence rejects request for documents

But, but, but... I thought an impeachment inquiry is to GET the facts. That is what everyone has been saying here.

It is one thing to confidentially say, "Sure, I am on board for an impeachment inquiry." Totally a different beast to go on record with a roll call vote.

Representatives are ON THE RECORD already. There is no confidentiality. They can be voted out of their districts at the next election.

But you knew that, and only want to spread lies to people who might not already know.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone explain how OMB is in this mix?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain how OMB is in this mix?

OMB withheld the military aid funds from Ukraine. Probably illegally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain how OMB is in this mix?

OMB withheld the military aid funds from Ukraine. Probably illegally.

Thanks. That’s what I thought but am not following as closely as most on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain how OMB is in this mix?

OMB withheld the military aid funds from Ukraine. Probably illegally.

Thanks. That’s what I thought but am not following as closely as most on this thread.

And now they've refused to comply with a congressional subpoena. Probably illegally.

It also seems that Mulvaney was closely involved with Giuliani's Ukraine plan. But that's separate from the OMB.

[Anonymous]

Why are independent civilians taking political stances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pelosi is declining to take a vote on the impeachment inquiry.

She:

a. does not have the votes for the measure to pass.
b. is worried that it would hurt Dems in states that Trump won.
c. both of the above.

Of course she has the votes, the representatives who support the inquiry are on record via statements from their offices. What she doesn’t have is the facts. because, just today:
—the Pentagon rejects subpoena for documents
—OMB rejects subpoena for documents
—Giuliani rejects subpoena for documents
—Pence rejects request for documents

But, but, but... I thought an impeachment inquiry is to GET the facts. That is what everyone has been saying here.

It is one thing to confidentially say, "Sure, I am on board for an impeachment inquiry." Totally a different beast to go on record with a roll call vote.

Completely irrelevant. House rules give Committee chairs the right to subpoena. No court can change House rules. End of story.

PS. This rule was made by Republicans to reduce the power of the minority. I guess they never expected to lose control of the House. Elections have consequences.

X 100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are independent civilians taking political stances?

Wot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's former senior adviser Michael McKinley, who resigned last week, to testify Wednesday to House impeachment investigators, sources tell Bloomberg’s congressional reporter.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Laura Cooper will testify Friday.

Here’s McKinley from today:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's former senior adviser Michael McKinley, who resigned last week, to testify Wednesday to House impeachment investigators, sources tell Bloomberg’s congressional reporter.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Laura Cooper will testify Friday.

Here’s McKinley from today:

Whoops link here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-10-16/gallup-poll-finds-52-approve-removing-trump-impeachment-update?srnd=politics-vp&__twitter_impression=true

[Anonymous]

Wow!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are independent civilians taking political stances?

LOL

[Anonymous]

New tonight: After Bolton shut down the meeting where Sondland offered Zelenskiy a meeting if he reopened the investigation, Sondland took Ukrainians to the White House basement to talk "next steps."

So Bolton sent in Fiona Hill, who heard them talking Burisma.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1067861?__twitter_impression=true