Thread by @HNIJohnMiller

1) This fine afternoon, I would like to start digging into the rules of the house regarding impeachment.

First, let's consult the House Rules committee.

....

No results. Okay then.

2) Here we go!

"The House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House is a reference source for information on the rules and selected precedents governing the House procedure."

This should be useful.

govinfo.gov/collection/hou…

3) Here's the version adopted by the 115th congress and still in place today as of March 2017.

govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GP…

Ah, impeachment! Page 613 of the PDF. Read along with me.

4) Lot of historical background, but the key remains there are articles of impeachment that pass the house. I'm still reading, but I would like to direct your attention to House Resolution 803 of the 93rd congress, congress.gov/bill/93rd-cong…

5) "Authorizes the House Committee on the Judiciary to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to impeach President Richard M. Nixon."

Hold on, there's a bit more.

6) "States that the Committee may require, by subpoena, interrogatory, or otherwise, information... Provides that such authority may be exercised by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting jointly or by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee." HOLD UP

7) 'the chairman and ranking minority member acting jointly' AHHHHHH. There we go.

A formal impeachment inquiry requires the cooperation of the minority members of committees. At least in this case.

Back to the House Practices! Let's dig a bit further.

8) "In 1974 the grounds for invoking the impeachment power against the President were illustrated when the House initiated an inquiry into President Nixon’s conduct" So the House Practices document acknowledges the inquiry portion of the impeachment proceedings.

9) Interesting.

So, three important impeachment proceedings against the president. Andrew Johnson, Nixon, and Bill Clinton.

10) Andrew Johnson, no official impeachment inquiry, just a resolution before the drafting of articles of impeachment, which basically was a revolt against his removal of a cabinet member, a move the House vehemently disagreed with.

11) Bill Clinton was similar in that there wasn't an official impeachment inquiry, as the impeachment was based on what had occurred during the Ken Starr independent counsel investigation.

12) Nixon was different in that it was the House who did the investigating; Johnson, it was a policy conflict, and Clinton, the investigating had already happened.

And there's the rub with the impeachment attempt against Trump.

13) The number one sign that Mueller didn't come up with SHIT against Trump (up yours @SethAbramson ) is that, unlike with Ken Starr's investigation against Clinton, the House didn't use Mueller's investigation to begin impeachment proceedings. They could have, but didn't.

@SethAbramson 14) On the flipside, the Andrew Johnson impeachment led to the precedent after its defeat in the Senate that the House should not impeach the president based on policy conflicts. The best equivalent would be the House attempting to impeach Trump over firing Mattis.

@SethAbramson 15) AND HERE WE FUCKING GO!

Page 624 of the pdf

govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GP…

"Under the modern practice, an impeachment is normally instituted by the House by the adoption of a resolution calling for a committee investigation of charges against the officer in question."

@SethAbramson 16) Pelosi and the Democrats are OFFICIALLY, by the House Practices which have been updated as recently as March 2017, are in violation of impeachment proceedings per modern practice.

AHA! THERE WAS AN OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY VOTE ON BILL CLINTON!!!

@SethAbramson 17) To note, I say page 624 of the pdf, of the document itself its actually page 614. If you get confused.

ANYWAYS:

"In the 105th Congress, an independent counsel transmitted to the House.. a communication containing evidence of alleged impeachable offenses by [Clinton.]"

@SethAbramson 18) "The House adopted a privileged resolution... referring the communication to the Committee on the Judiciary, immediately releasing portions to the public, restricting Members’ access to the communication, and restricting access to committee meetings and hearings"

@SethAbramson 19) So, similar to what's happening now, BUT THERE WAS A RESOLUTION BEFOREHAND. AN ACTUAL VOTE.

"Later, the House adopted a privileged resolution reported by the Committee on the Judiciary authorizing an impeachment inquiry by that committee"

AND A SECOND ONE FOR THE INQUIRY.

@SethAbramson 20) "Resolutions introduced through the hopper that directly call for an impeachment are referred to the Committee on the Judiciary"

So, remember @RepMattGaetz trying to get access to the impeachment proceedings?

He's in the House Judiciary.

Which Pelosi has cut out entirely.

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz 21) NOT ONLY is there not a single privileged resolution (basically a house resolution that gets priority over other house business) authorizing any of this, but this all has to go through the House Judiciary committee, but the GOP members of the committee are being kept out!

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz 22) "whereas resolutions merely calling for a committee investigation with a view toward impeachment are referred to the Committee on Rules."

The committee which... is also not involved with any of the proceedings.

Alright then.

So none of this is actual proper procedure.

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz 23) Just looked. The terrible trio of Oversight (chaired by Rat King Elijah Cummings), Intelligence (with the dynamic duo Swalwell Schiff), and Foreign Affairs (which contains Omar, Lieu, AND Julian 'I'm running for president remember?' Castro) are the ones involved. Not Rules.

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz 24) What's the deal @RulesDemocrats? You guy's don't want to enforce the modern practices on impeachment which should rightfully go through either your committee or the Judiciary Committee?

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz @RulesDemocrats 25) Back to pdf

"Committee impeachment investigations are governed by those portions of rule XI relating to committee investigative and hearing procedures, and by any rules and special procedures adopted by the House and by the committee for the inquiry." So, all these? Violated

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz @RulesDemocrats 26) "[A few times}, the House agreed to a resolution authorizing the counsel to the Committee on the Judiciary to take depositions in an impeachment investigation and waiving the provision of rule XI that requires at least two members to be present."

ANOTHER RESOLUTION! DRINK!

@SethAbramson @RepMattGaetz @RulesDemocrats 27) Essentially, ALL OF THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO VOTES AS PRIVILEGED RESOLUTIONS. PERIOD.

Pelosi and the Democrats are running roughshod over the House Practices.

And it is HILARIOUS that they think people won't notice.

/end