Is the following argument a case of the "cart being placed before the horse"? This resolution with respect to grand jury proceedings is being used as an argument that an impeachment inquiry vote of the full house has already taken place.
 |
| source |
No formal vote has been taken in order to open an impeachment inquiry---does the resolution do this on its own? This resolution has yet to ruled upon, and the House seems to want to avoid any further rulings from the court with respect to their latest demands for information from the POTUS.
There WAS a formal vote on this resolution. Therefore, the ruling on this resolution may impact the Dems claim that an impeachment inquiry has already started.
It would seem that an established law supersedes any mere resolution. The House may have sole power of impeachment, but in order to override an established law, it would mean that they could become a law upon themselves. A formal law requires the usual process of a vote in both houses, and a signature by the POTUS. Congressional laws can also be reviewed by the Supreme Court. This declaration appears to claim that an impeachment resolution can override all of that. However, an inquiry could establish what laws were violated which would justify a formal impeachment vote. The CONUS does require that it be for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors." There is no formal finding of fact that a crime took place.
Therefore, the claim is a reach. It is just more Star Chamber stuff. The House wants to summarily overrule both the POTUS and the judiciary. Separation of Powers would be thrown out the window. The House Democrats are out of control.
But the court has to rule on it.
Democrats face consequences of skipping floor impeachment vote https://t.co/66stOYKu8B via @RollCall— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) October 10, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment