Sunday, October 13, 2019

Balance of power...Impeachment of...

 The Battle of Pelosi VS Trump
The Republic or a representative government is just that... A form of governing to express the will of the many...
interesting times we are living in....

Here we have political partisanship running unchecked with the balance of power in the Republic in play..
Below are the words in the constitution regarding WHO can start the impeachment process.
"The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. ... The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Notice that the above words mentions the HOUSE... Not the leader of the house or the head of a committee..
When the constitution says, 'The House' the meaning is clear the All House members must vote to initiate the impeachment process otherwise any past or future leader of the house could, on a whim start impeachment based on  political and partisan desires without any regard to the wishes of the other members of the house...
For any House speaker to declare an action that has national and international consequences without a single vote on the record is contrary to the mission statement of the constitution.
For the House to use the powers of Sub Pennae to demand papers and documents from the White House with the aim of impeachment without taking a vote makes the whole thing NULL and VOID because a committee or the speaker was not given the authority via the votes of all members of the House.
Some will Vote YEA some will vote NAY.... But let them vote. With out a the entire impeachment process is unconstitutional and there fore null & void...

Go here for a PDF on House of Representatives, Rules for Impeachment

To some of you, below are a few pages of House rules for impeachment...
Note... Right to counsel representation for person being investigated for removal is noted below

The Impeachment Process in the House of Representatives Under the U.S. Constitution, the House of Representatives has the power to formally charge a federal officer with wrongdoing, a process known as impeachment. The House impeaches an individual when a majority agrees to a House resolution containing explanations of the charges. The explanations in the resolution are referred to as “articles of impeachment.” After the House agrees to impeach an officer, the role of the Senate is to conduct a trial to determine whether the charged individual should be removed from office. Removal requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
The House impeachment process generally proceeds in three phases: (1) initiation of the impeachment process; (2) Judiciary Committee investigation, hearings, and markup of articles of impeachment; and (3) full House consideration of the articles of impeachment. 
Impeachment proceedings are usually initiated in the House when a Member submits a resolution through the hopper (in the same way that all House resolutions are submitted). A resolution calling for the impeachment of an officer will be referred to the Judiciary Committee; a resolution simply authorizing an investigation of an officer will be referred to the Rules Committee. In either case, the committee could then report a privileged resolution authorizing the investigation. In the past, House committees, under their general investigatory authority, have sometimes sought information and researched charges against officers prior to the adoption of a resolution to authorize an impeachment investigation.
Impeachment proceedings could also be initiated by a Member on the floor. A Member can offer an impeachment resolution as a “Question of the Privileges of the House.” The House, when it considers a resolution called up this way, might immediately vote to refer it to the Judiciary Committee, leaving the resolution in the same status as if it had been submitted through the hopper. Alternatively, the House might vote to table the impeachment resolution. The House could also vote directly on the resolution, but in modern practice, it has not chosen to approve articles of impeachment called up in this fashion. Instead, the House has relied on the Judiciary Committee to first conduct an investigation, hold hearings, and report recommendations to the full House.
Committee consideration is therefore typically the second stage of the impeachment process. In recent decades, it has been more common than not that the Judiciary Committee used information provided from another outside investigation. The committee might create a task force or a subcommittee to review this material and collect any other information through subpoenas, depositions, and public hearings. Impeachment investigations are governed by the standing rules of the House that govern all committee investigations, the terms of the resolution authorizing the investigation, and perhaps additional rules adopted by the committee specifically for the inquiry. 
If the committee determines that impeachment is warranted, it will mark up articles of impeachment using the same procedures followed for the markup of other legislation. If the Judiciary Committee reports a resolution impeaching a federal officer, that resolution qualifies for privileged consideration on the House floor; its consideration is the third stage of the impeachment process. The resolution can be called up at the direction of the committee and considered immediately under the hour rule in the House. If called up this way, amendments could be precluded if a majority voted to order the previous question. A motion to recommit, with or without instructions, is in order but is not subject to debate. Alternatively, the House might alter these procedures by unanimous consent to, for example, set a longer time for debate or to allow brief debate on a motion to recommit. A resolution reported from the Rules Committee could also be used to structure floor debate. 
If the House approves the impeachment resolution, it will appoint managers to present and argue its case against the federal officer in front of the Senate. 
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Initiation of the Process ................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction of a Simple Resolution ......................................................................................... 2 Raising a Question of the Privileges of the House .................................................................... 2 Outside and Preliminary Investigations .................................................................................... 3 Authorization of Committee Investigation ...................................................................................... 4 Committee Action ............................................................................................................................ 6 Investigation and Hearings ........................................................................................................ 6 Markup of Articles of Impeachment ......................................................................................... 7 Member Access to Information Prior to Full House Consideration .......................................... 8 Consideration of Articles of Impeachment on the House Floor .................................................... 10 Reported by the Judiciary Committee ..................................................................................... 10 Offered on the Floor as a Question of the Privileges of the House ......................................... 12 Appointment and Role of House Managers in the Senate Trial .................................................... 13


Regardless of what might instigate an inquiry into whether impeachment is warranted, there are normally three formal stages of congressional action. First, an impeachment inquiry is authorized, and this is most often accomplished through the adoption of a simple resolution (H.Res.___) directing the Judiciary Committee to investigate an official. Second, the committee conducts its investigation, prepares articles of impeachment, and reports them to the House. Third, the full House considers the articles of impeachment and, if they are adopted, appoints managers from the committee to present the articles in the Senate. As discussed in detail below, the House relies upon many of its usual procedures to consider the resolution explicitly initiating an investigation, conduct the investigation, and consider the articles of impeachment.5
Initiation of the Process
Introduction of a Simple Resolution A Member can initiate an impeachment process by drafting a simple resolution and placing it in the House hopper, the way all simple resolutions are submitted to the House. If the resolution directly calls for an impeachment, it will be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. If it instead calls for an investigation of an official by a standing committee or proposes the creation of a special committee for that purpose, the resolution will be referred to the Committee on Rules, which has jurisdiction over the authorization of committee investigations. No special procedures restrict when such a resolution can be submitted, although historically they have been submitted relatively infrequently.6 
Raising a Question of the Privileges of the House A resolution calling for an impeachment can also be offered on the floor by any Member as a question of the privileges of the House instead of being submitted through the hopper. To do so, a Member gives notice of his or her intent to call up such a resolution. The Speaker must then schedule a time to consider the resolution within two legislative days. (The majority and the minority leader do not need to give notice; if either leader raises a qualifying question of privileges of the House on the floor, it is considered immediately.) The full House could dispose of an impeachment resolution raised in this fashion in any number of ways, including by referring it to the Judiciary Committee instead of by voting on the resolution directly. The House could also agree to a motion to table the resolution and thereby dispose of it permanently and adversely.7 
                                                 5 This report assumes some familiarity with the procedures of the House of Representatives. For an introduction to these procedures, see CRS Report 95-563, The Legislative Process on the House Floor: An Introduction, by Christopher M. Davis. 6 From 1789 to 2011, Members attempted to initiate impeachment resolutions against federal judges 98 times (see CRS Report R41110, The Role of the House of Representatives in Judicial Impeachment Proceedings: Procedure, Practice, and Data, by Betsy Palmer, p. 3), and no resolutions impeaching federal judges have been introduced since then. Since 1789, Members have attempted to initiate impeachment proceedings against at least 11 Presidents. Archived CRS Report 98-763, Congressional Resolutions on Presidential Impeachment: A Historical Overview, by Stephen W. Stathis and David C. Huckabee (available to congressional clients from the authors), identifies nine Presidents with proposed articles of impeachment filed against them from 1789 to 1998, and data from LIS.gov identifies additional resolutions submitted since 1998. 7 For more information on this process, see CRS Report R44005, Questions of the Privileges of the House: An Analysis, by Megan S. Lynch. 

a question of privilege.24 It was debated under the hour rule, with the chairman yielding time to other Members for purposes of debate only. The Judiciary Committee chair moved the previous question before any other Member was recognized to control time under the hour rule, and the House ordered the previous question 342-70. The resolution authorizing the investigation was then agreed to, 410-4.25 
Committee Action The standing rules of the House that affect committee investigations apply as well to impeachment investigations by the Judiciary Committee. A resolution authorizing an impeachment investigation might place additional limitations, or grant additional authorities, to the committee. In addition, the committee itself might adopt rules specific to an impeachment inquiry.26 It has not been unusual for the Judiciary Committee to authorize subcommittees or to create task forces to conduct impeachment investigations, and in that case the full committee would establish the authority of the subcommittee or task force. 
Investigation and Hearings Under House Rule XI, committees have the authority to subpoena persons or written records, conduct hearings, and incur expenses (including travel expenses) in connection with investigations.27 Rule XI, clause 2(h)(2), requires two committee members to take testimony or receive evidence. In past impeachment proceedings, the House has agreed to resolutions authorizing committee staff to take depositions without Members present, and the Judiciary Committee has agreed to internal guidelines for the mode and conduct of depositions.28 In the 116th Congress, pursuant to H.Res. 6, the chairs of all standing committees (except the Rules Committee) as well as the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence may order the taking of depositions by committee counsel. In modern practice, the federal official under investigation is generally allowed certain rights, including the right to be represented by counsel. If a committee were to conduct hearings, these proceedings would generally be governed by House and committee rules (and any specific rules agreed to in the authorizing resolution). Under
                                                 24 Deschler’s Precedents, vol. 3, ch. 14, §5.8, pp. 480-481 and §7.4, p. 513. 25 “Investigatory Powers of Committee of the Judiciary with Respect to Its Impeachment Inquiry,” Congressional Record, vol. 120 (February 6, 1974), pp. 2350-2363. 26 In 1974, the Judiciary Committee unanimously adopted procedures for the Nixon impeachment inquiry concerning, for example, the presentation of evidence by committee counsel and the opportunity for the President’s counsel to respond. For the full procedures, see Deschler’s Precedents, ch. 15, §6.5, pp. 498-499. For procedures concerning the confidentiality of evidence and other materials, see ch. 14, §6.9, pp. 503-504. In 1998, the committee approved procedures for the Clinton impeachment inquiry modelled after these procedures. See U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Authorization of an Inquiry Into Whether Grounds Exist for the Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States; Meeting of the House Comm. on the Judiciary Held October 5, 1998; Presentation by Inquiry Staff Consideration of Inquiry Resolution Adopting Inquiry Procedures, committee print, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., December 1998, Committee Print Ser. No. 8 (Washington: GPO, 1998). 27 For more information on subpoenas, see CRS Report R45653, Congressional Subpoenas: Enforcing Executive Branch Compliance, by Todd Garvey.  28 House Practice, p. 616. See, for example, H.Res. 424 in the 111th Congress. See also the remarks of the Rules Committee ranking member that he did not object to approval of H.Res. 424 because he had secured a commitment from the Judiciary Committee that the committee would agree to internal guidelines regarding staff depositions that would protect the minority. Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 155 (May 12, 2009), p. H5444. 

Sunday, October 6, 2019

Abolish the CIA?

                                 An Argument for the Abolition of the CIA
Considering the troubles and crimes the CIA has been accused but never charged with...
The CIA's failure at predicting much less stopping terrorist attacks at home or abroad...
Today or for the past 3 years the CIA has been front and center into the take down of a duly elected official because that official has no tail to be stepped on or don't align with their vision.
The placement of CIA agents to spy upon the very presidency constitutes an act of treason.
The CIA no longer serves the people they've become self serving and out of control.
I would be just and poetic justice if  by their own actions their worst fear comes to fruition.
The CIA together with the FBI tried to control the result of an election. When that failed they tried to use an insurance policy. That failed too. What next an assassination?
We are sure that the current CIA together with the FBI are a clear and present danger to the Republic and as such it should be abolished...

There is historic precedents for such action and it is very constitutional
Here the presidential powers...

Below the CIA Dirty Laundry list
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CIA_controversies

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP99-00418R000100100009-2.pdf

https://www.hoover.org/research/intelligence-failures

Old dog listening to music

<!--





Whistle blowing on the presidency...

A truly incredible moment we are living in...
lest not forget how we got here, where the CIA and the NSA agencies all are spying the executive office...
A book was written that detailed the crimes and malfeasance of a former politico. lets say it was a secretary of state or a vice president...
This book detailed with evidence the crimes and lawlessness of that person...
This same book is ignored by the talking heads and general media... This same person that is mentioned in the same book is on Audio and video bragging how he/she used the powers of the executive office for personal benefit... That is also ignored by CNN, Washington Post, The Hill, NY Times, Bloomberg and others.
lest not forget, current and future presidents have the obligation to investigate alleged crimes committed by the previous occupants of the White House.. To look the other way will be to be complicit in the same crime...
Again
A book detailed the crime..
A video and audio exist of the accused bragging of the crime...
But the current presidency is accused of political gamesmanship for asking the countries where the crimes were committed to investigate further...
It's not known what is going on with people who refuse to look at the obvious..
A president can not be prosecuted for asking that an alleged crime be investigated regardless of where and when.

This Is A Fact
The presidency finds itself in a damn if you do, damn if you don't regarding Biden..
What is not OBVIOUS to Republicans and centrist is the following...
Mr. Trump did not need any help at all from other governments to bring down the Biden run... All Mr. trump need to do was.... wait out for Biden to be the Democratic nominee, Then hit him with the video of Joe bragging  of the crime at all of Trumps Rallies...
This is a Fact that is ignored by the partisan elected and non elected officials in and out of governments

This book offers better details
https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Empires-American-Political-Corruption/dp/0062569368
Link to Video of Biden Bragging of crime.
https://twitter.com/GOPChairwoman/status/1176872944347353089
What is truly unforgivable by any standard or political affiliation is the fact that the FBI, CIA, NSA even the DOJ Spied upon an elected person because that person does not play political softball. Will these agencies continue to behave the same way with the next president? Who or what will stop them?
The future of the Republic depends upon the answer to these questions...

 Thanks for reading
A. B. Judea