Mitch McConnell Fires Back: Let’s Adopt The 1999 Rules — With The Option For Dismissal

Hotair ^ | 12/18/2019 | Ed Morrissey

[novemberslady]

bttt

[grey_whiskers]

Schumer can eat a bag of himself.

[rightwingcrazy]

“It will be tough for Schumer to object to using rules that every Democrat supported in the previous impeachment trial”

The Democrats are shameless and immune from consequence, so, no, I don’t think it will be tough for him.

Here, let me help. DifferentThisTimeOrangeManBadweObject. There.

[dhs12345]

Ya. Turnabout is fair play.

[Paladin2]

Somebody tie Romney to the roof-rack of a car and drive him to Mass.

Tomorrow.

[caww]

Well it’s never about rules, Shulmer, pelosi and rest break them anyway...and they will do so here as well.

[Repealthe17thAmendment]

The Democrats are starting to have concerns about Mitch's strategy.

Hoyer: ‘We need to talk about’ delaying Senate impeachment trial

[Mercat]

Makes me happy.

[Cboldt]

Upon the conclusion of the President's presentation, Senators may question the parties for a period of time not to exceed 16 hours.

After the conclusion of questioning by the Senate, it shall be in order to consider and debate a motion to dismiss as outlined by the impeachment rules.

S.Res.16 - 106th Congress

Mpotion to dismiss followed presentation by the president, at least that's what the rules say. Who knows what they actually did.

[mass55th]

The Democrats do it to themselves every time. They change the rules when they are in charge to suit their needs, but then, when the shoe is on the other foot, and the rules they had previously put into place, come back and bite them in the ass, they scream “No fair!!”

[Cboldt]

In Clinton impeachment, Clinton participated in the Starr process, and also in the House process. He had opportunity to argue his case.

Both sides were permitted to file motions in advance of presenting opening arguments -- "except for motions to subpoena witnesses or to present any evidence not in the record."

There is no defense on the record.

[DoodleDawg]

Remember when the Senate could come to a unanimous, bipartisan approach to rules governing an impeachment trial?

That was 20 years ago when there was a willingness for Democrats to work with Republicans and vice versa. Now neither side is willing to work with the other.

[mrsmith]

Yeah, good precedent.

I don’t like a Party Line vote to dismiss.
I wonder if there’s only one dismissal vote allowed, not sure it will succeed at first.

Also Trump will do much better if the Senate votes than Clinton did. Good PR.

[mrsmith]

Thanks.

[lurk]

Chuck always presents himself as the writer of the rules and the pre-determined winner of the contest. When it doesn’t go his way, he screams of cheating.

[bk1000]

Careful, Mitch.

Remove Trump and the boogaloo will begin.

[billyboy15]

“The Democrats do it to themselves every time. They change the rules when they are in charge to suit their needs, but then, when the shoe is on the other foot, and the rules they had previously put into place, come back and bite them in the ass, they scream “No fair!!”

Right and I’m lovin’ watching these morons blow themselves up.

If stupid was concrete the Democrat Party would be f’n Hoover Dam.

[Cboldt]

Wow. What a bunch of lunatics.

Now the Hosue DEMs want to run the Senate too? What can't they do?

[Yo-Yo]

It will be tough for Schumer to object to using rules that every Democrat supported in the previous impeachment trial, not without making it even more clear that House Democrats didn’t produce a case for removal before rushing it to the Senate.

More importantly, and more embarrassingly for Chuckie, they are THE VERY RULES SCHUMER HIMSELF VOTED FOR in 1999.