Posted on 01/31/2020 6:09:16 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
What are the Dems going to say...you're a political appointee...appointed by a Republican. That would go over big.
Just curious, why wouldn’t the VP be brought in to break a tie?
Exactly. The Senate role in an impeachment process is to act as the jury and simply judges whether or not what is contained within the article of impeachment presented to them by the House is sufficient grounds upon which to remove a sitting President.
The Senate can not become part of the prosecution team's effort in any way if it is to be seen as "fair". Allowing "new" testimony, or "new" evidence which is not included in the evidence/testimony submitted by the House amounts to the Senate becoming part of the prosecution effort. This is blatantly unconstitutional as the House is given the sole power to impeach.
A "fair" trial would let the accused face his/her accuser. This did not happen. A "fair" trial would have a jury selected by the prosecution and agreed upon by the defense. This did not happen. In fact, 47% of the jury were adversaries to the defendant with 4 of those actually trying to take his job. In an election year, having your political opposition judging your possible removal from office is anything but "fair". There are so many unfair aspects that are inherent in this particular impeachment effort that for the democrats to suggest it is illegitimate if even more unfairness isn't allowed is quite a joke. Let's hope most Americans aren't laughing.
Conflict of interest.
And quite correct.
“Schuck has no smarts whatsoever to bring up Andrew Johnson”.
You’re right. Schuck forgot who he was speaking to. Schuck and the other Rats are so used to spouting their crap to their ignorant followers who know no better and believe every word. Not too smart Schucky.
I think you’re right.
Thank you for that good input..
You’re most welcome.
Lol....I’d say Lindsey is a lush. A bunch of them are. Pelosi certainly is.
It didn’t take much effort.
“Roberts made Schumer look like a complete dumbass.”
We have an expert who may know about the Andrew Johnson impeachment.
It takes quite a bit to understand given the obvious problems with who will be in charge after the CW.
+1000000
That’s good thinking.
We have the foundation (The Constitution) to re-build on.
Nicely played.
I said ptty much the same thing:
He can’t vote. He is not a member of the US Senate.
Good point.
while I agree with your thoughts... lets wait until the demos do their dripdripdrip, nonstop for the next five days...
While they cook up something out of the box to kavanaugh our president.
and I look for God to take his own unique direct action on this, so that it is not our political acumen or strength that wins the day... but the shocked amaze that comes from individuals and organizations, when it is GOD and ONLY He, who issues the writing on the wall that ends the wickedness.
stay tuned... is in order for us all.
You really want the guy next in line to the presidency to be potentially casting the vote to oust the boss? Think about that for a moment, especially considering back in the day, the VP could have belonged to the other party (Twelth Amendment?).
Good news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.