- Pelosi’s proposed resolution authorizes proceedings for an “existing investigation”
- There is no existing investigation
- No Committee has been authorized to conduct an impeachment inquiry
- No Committee has been authorized to conduct any inquiry incidental to an impeachment inquiry
- The proposed resolution does not authorize any investigation
- The proposed resolution does not legitimate recent hearings
Pelosi’s sore losers have been acting lawlessly. Their hearings lack authority. Don’t Fall For Pelosi’s Putsch!
The proposed resolution authorizes committees to conduct proceedings for an existing inquiry. The resolution does not authorize any committee to conduct an inquiry. To date, no committee has been authorized to conduct any investigation.
Nancy Pelosi targeted in ethics complaint filed by 40 conservative groups
A coalition of conservative groups has filed an ethics complaint against House SpeakerNancy Pelosi, D.-Calif., alleging she has “hypocritically usurped” the authority of the president and “weaponized” impeachment proceedings.
“In launching her ‘official’ impeachment inquiry without benefit of a vote of the full House of Representatives and without indicating anything remotely qualifying as ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors’ that is the subject of the inquiry, Speaker Pelosi has weaponized impeachment,” reads the complaint, led by Tea Party Patriots Action’s Jenny Beth Martin and signed by 40 different groups.
The complaint adds that Thursday’s scheduled vote on a resolution codifying the impeachment inquiry is “inadequate at this stage” and says Pelosi’s “one-person decision” is in violation of historical precedent. In previous cases, the House has launched an official impeachment inquiry into a president by holding a vote of all the members.
For Pelosi, the risk of not impeaching Trump has exceeded the risk of impeaching him
Since ascending to the Speakership of the House in January, Nancy Pelosi(D-Calif.) has had a difficult line to walk. The more progressive wing of her caucus wanted to move quickly on impeaching President Donald Trump citing campaign finance violations, the emoluments clause, and the then still-to-be-concluded Mueller investigation. Meanwhile Democrats elected in more moderate districts worried that impeachment would hurt their re-election chances.
Many decisions that leaders make involve the balancing of risks. In criminal justice, the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” is intended to convey a decision that we — as a society — should worry more about the risk of convicting an innocent person than the risk of letting a guilty one walk free. Regulatory decisions also often reflect this “risk-risk” tradeoff. If we regulate vaping products too loosely, these products may harm people. If we regulate them too tightly, we risk more deaths from people smoking tobacco rather than vaping.
Lying Schiff’s Star Witness Alexander Vindman Tied to Ukrainian Arms Dealers, Ukrainian Oil and Gas and the Atlantic Council