Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does Pelosi need a majority in the House to start Impeachment hearings? [View all]FBaggins
(26,727 posts)42. Not buying it
It has been reported by too many outlets for it to just be made up. And the argument goes back to May.
You're putting too much weight on your own interpretation of what the process is and assuming that House leadership agrees with you. Re: your "For example, the impeachment process isn't started by "drafting articles of impeachment." - We just saw that this was incorrect with Green's proposed articles. If the House had decided to vote directly on those (and pass them of course), it would be all over. It isn't the normal process, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen that way. The House makes its own rules.
From the NYTimes. Note my emphasis at the end.
Against that backdrop, some Democratic staff members and lawmakers have been arguing that it is unnecessary to gain the full chambers approval to launch an inquiry, in part because the Judiciary Committee chairman has already gained the power to issue subpoenas and take depositions authorities that earlier impeachment inquiry resolutions had granted.
The Judiciary Committee has been flirting with the topic of impeachment for months, subpoenaing witnesses and holding hearings designed to better understand Mr. Trumps behavior and potentially develop charges against him. In a hearing focused on Mr. Muellers report earlier this month, Mr. Nadler said that articles of impeachment are under consideration as part of the committees investigation, although no final determination has been made.
By formally declaring that the panel is doing that in a court filing, Democrats are trying to get past the internal debate without forcing members from moderate districts to vote on whether to do so. Ms. Pelosi approved the language in the lawsuit, according to a person familiar with its drafting.
The Judiciary Committee has been flirting with the topic of impeachment for months, subpoenaing witnesses and holding hearings designed to better understand Mr. Trumps behavior and potentially develop charges against him. In a hearing focused on Mr. Muellers report earlier this month, Mr. Nadler said that articles of impeachment are under consideration as part of the committees investigation, although no final determination has been made.
By formally declaring that the panel is doing that in a court filing, Democrats are trying to get past the internal debate without forcing members from moderate districts to vote on whether to do so. Ms. Pelosi approved the language in the lawsuit, according to a person familiar with its drafting.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Does Pelosi need a majority in the House to start Impeachment hearings? [View all]
ProfessorPlum
Jul 2019
OP
I would think that any committee chair could initiate the hearings but I think they would look to
Autumn
Jul 2019
#3
I don't believe that there aren't enough votes -Look at the list of Democrats that haven't announced
Pachamama
Jul 2019
#36
you don't bring something to the floor without the votes...and there is a very real chance
Demsrule86
Jul 2019
#27
No, they can start hearings that head towards impeachment and have damn near the same
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#5
Yep, its starting to look like this. Pelosi has an uphill climb because of not holding BushCo ...
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#17
No, they haven't "called off the 2020 elections" - and that will happen ONLY if enough Democrats
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#19
Correct, that's why I type "effectively" ... they don't have enough minerals to call off the ...
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#21
If you think "impeachment is about all we got" you're really saying they've called off the election
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#26
... effectively ... yes, I don't see how 2020 is going to be more free and fair than 2016 or 18
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#30
How would that be influencing people not to excecise their power to call their reps and demand
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#33
He will stonewall impeachment too...he doesn't care about prececdent or laws...and the moderates
Demsrule86
Jul 2019
#28
Moderates can do the right thing and keep their seats if there's justificaton for their actions.
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#29
Sorry that is completely unrealistic...if impeachment is unpopular and moderates do it anyway...
Demsrule86
Jul 2019
#52
Nixon impeachment 40% Trump impeachment 45%, ... the polls are either lying or they're not
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#53
+1, I wonder if it was like this during beginning of Nixon impeachment process
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#18
Cool, and impeachment became more popular after the process began it looks like. I pray Red Dons
uponit7771
Jul 2019
#22
Actually, impeachment became more popular BEFORE the impeachment inquiry was opened
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#23
Yes - those were the Senate Select Committee hearings in the spring and summer of '73
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#25
""For example, the impeachment process isn't started by 'drafting articles of impeachment.' We just
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#43
You don't seem to understand the distinction between the committee "considering Articles"
StarfishSaver
Jul 2019
#51