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

pnwmom

(108,979 posts)
Wed Oct 9, 2019, 10:51 PM Oct 2019

NYT: Trump wants a fight. Pelosi can hit back. With rules, rigor, and resolution.

Why Pelosi is RIGHT not to take an impeachment vote.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/opinion/impeachment-inquiry-trump.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

First, there is nothing magical about a House vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry. The administration’s letter calls it a “necessary authorization,” but that’s simply false. A vote isn’t required by the Constitution, federal law or the rules of the House of Representatives. The White House is basing its demands for a vote solely on the fact that a similar vote was held by the House during the impeachment proceedings for Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. But in those cases, the votes were necessary to equip the inquiries with additional investigative authority, such as expanded subpoena power; subsequent changes to House rules make that step unnecessary.

From the Democrats’ perspective, there are several reasons not to hold a full floor vote. Most significant, Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to avoid a situation in which the House leadership is conceding that the White House can dictate any of the terms of how an impeachment is conducted, and what sort of process counts as “legitimate.” Once the House makes that concession, the White House will again move the goal posts, undermining Congress’s role as a coequal branch with the authority to manage its impeachment inquiry.

Ms. Pelosi also wants to protect Democratic members who represent more conservative districts from having to take a difficult vote that might come back to haunt them in 2020. This isn’t a very compelling rationale, especially when those same members will almost surely be called upon to vote on articles of impeachment soon enough.

Finally, Ms. Pelosi knows that Mr. Trump has no intention of cooperating with an impeachment inquiry, even if it were authorized by a vote. Instead, he would use what would likely be a party-line vote to further disparage the inquiry as a partisan hit job.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT: Trump wants a fight. Pelosi can hit back. With rules, rigor, and resolution. (Original Post) pnwmom Oct 2019 OP
Yeah thats about par for NYT SlogginThroughIt Oct 2019 #1
They are right. What is there in here that you disagree with? n/t pnwmom Oct 2019 #2
Nothing. SlogginThroughIt Oct 2019 #5
They are right -- and so is Mme Speaker Hekate Oct 2019 #3
Thank goodness they were smart enough to keep her as Speaker. n/t pnwmom Oct 2019 #4
GOPers already say that even with a vote for an inquiry, cooperation would be a "hypothetical" Captain Zero Oct 2019 #6
 

SlogginThroughIt

(1,977 posts)
5. Nothing.
Thu Oct 10, 2019, 12:08 AM
Oct 2019

There is nothing that I disagree with.... Until tomorrow when they post something ridiculous to keep the back and forth going. I have been less trusting of the NYT lately. I think their reporting has fallen off. When they started hiring climate change deniers is when they jumped the shark for me.

YMMV

Captain Zero

(6,806 posts)
6. GOPers already say that even with a vote for an inquiry, cooperation would be a "hypothetical"
Thu Oct 10, 2019, 12:46 AM
Oct 2019

I say fuck 'em and the hypothetical horse they rode in on.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NYT: Trump wants a fight...