Posted on 12/18/2019 9:03:57 PM PST by katieanna
At 9:30am tomorrow morning, on the Senate floor, I will speak about House Democrats’ precedent-breaking impeachment of the President of the United States.
These evil lying crapholes make me sick.
Senator McConnell just left every option open. Although this may be smart politics, it leaves our republic in a state of grave instability. These are extremely dangerous times for our nation. We have survived invasion and schism but this is potentially even more serious. One side of one branch of our government is attempting to destroy another branch. Where the civil war was a conflict between regions, this situation has the potential to escalate into an internal conflict which could permanently destroy the structure of our government from within. This impeachment needs to be resoundingly defeated as quickly and definitively as possible so that similar assaults are never again attempted.
Militia in other states are preparing to travel to Virginia sometime after Christmas...maybe months. I am resigned to preparation.
It’s more than the evil in the house. We can’t live with people like Schumer and Pelosi. They lie more smoothly than I thought was possible.
Our choice is also clear. We must save our republic.
It’s quite remarkable. We have a POTUS impeached for the four time in over 200 years of American history and the do-nothing GOP Senate continues on like it’s business as usual.
McConnelly’s inconsequential gum flapping today goes immediately into the dust bin of history. Is the Party of Lincoln headed there, too? With rudderless leaders like majority “leader” McConnell that seems increasingly likely.
Great speech indeed. He recognizes the gravity of the situation!
What a stupid thing to say. What next? will you call me a troll?
Ooooh, he made a speech.
Alas, like all the other crypto-liberal hand wringers here
you are what you are
He should just announce that because of silliness, game playing, and no real evidence of anything illegal at all, the Senate hereby declares that the President of the United States is acquitted of all charges.
Good Day!
So I watch where they are and who they're seeing.....just before and after Trumps election the D-rats were on the move internationally in a big way Kerry, Hillary, Obama, Jarrett and others privately meeting with international leaders under the cover of vacations, book signings and the like. The press always reports it like they just stopped by to see a friend.....you can with certainty know that was never the case. ...and it still goes on.
Makes perfect sense.
It’s no surprise the Obamas just bought a house in Martha’s Vineyard....that area is a stronghold of d-rat Meetings and political gatherings. Same with their house in Washington DC rather than his Chicago home area. Though they’re no longer in power at the WhiteHouse they continue to ‘work’ as a alternate political entity securing and fully engaged with government officials.
I don't think I have to burden either of you with what the #Narrative would have been if McConnell had "demanded" the Articles be sent (and what would be the point anyway).
Instead the radio cuts in particular had to find McConnell's weakest argument, and there were none. CBSRadio and ABCRadio could only counter by letting Schumer's rehash of his yesterday stew play slightly longer. FoxNews well-received McConnell's entire speech.
NOW.
Lindsey was on Twitter today basically begging for a hook, and I gave it to him:
"Democrats are creating a #ConstitutionalCrisis by not sending the #ArticlesofImpeachment to the #Senate. Only a #House of ill repute would fail to abide by the instructions in the Constitution to timely deliver the Articles to the Senate!" "#ConstitutionalCrisis" "#ConstitutionalCrisis" "#ConstitutionalCrisis" "#ConstitutionalCrisis" "#ConstitutionalCrisis"
AGREED 100%.
Yours, TMN78247
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. (Article I, section 3)
I’m curious if by “Judgement...shall not extend further...” means that removal from office etc is the maximum judgement, or the only judgement, if found guilty. If the former, then would it be possible for the Senate to find Trump guilty, but then not punish him or give an insignificant punishment (like censure)?
The Constitution is explicitly limiting the Senate’s power when giving out the punishment side of the verdict if found that the individual is guilty. This means the Senate cannot sentence the individual to 300 years behind bars.
In Clinton’s impeachment trial, the Senators present (this is a very important word in this clause) failed to get the two-thirds vote needed to convict and removal from office. However, after he was acquitted by the Senate, Clinton, still in office as POTUS, was cited by a Federal District Judge for civil contempt of court for willful failure to obey the judge’s orders to testify truthfully in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. The judged ruled Clinton pay a $90K fine and was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court for disciplinary action. Clinton eventually settled where his Arkansas law license was suspended for 5 years and a fine of $25K in lieu of no criminal charges would be filed for perjury or obstruction of justice. Upon his law license was suspened he was also suspended from the US Supreme Court bar to which he resigned from during the appeal period.
In Clinton’s Impeachment he committed a crime he would have to account for after he left office. Although he was acquitted by the Senate, he was impeached by the HoR. He was cited civilly for contempt of court to which he settled on the day before he left office.
Clinton’s impeachment showed that a President, once leaving office, could be held civilly liable for actions illegally committed while in office. However, the Senate could only render conviction and sentence for removal of office and prevent from holding office again.
There is a Congressman, Representative Alcee Hastings (D), who was a Judge in the Southern District of Florida who was impeached on October 20, 1989 and removed from office for accepting a bribe and committing perjury. Since he was not disqualified from holding office he ran for office and won the seat in his district. This is important because he will be one of the managers the House sends over to the Senate for the Impeachment trial.
In Alcee Hastings case he was removed from his office as a judge but not disqualified from holding office. To date, the House has impeached 20 federal officers, 15 federal judges, three Presidents, 1 Cabinet Secretary and a US Senator.
I find the US Senator impeachment interesting because the Senate concluded that members of Congress are not “civil officers”, per the Constitution, for the purposes of impeachment. This is another discussion for another day.
Yes, a Miracle performed by the God Given Free Will of men who know they are Correct.
It IS in McConnell’s power as the Senate leader, the Senate that is the UPPER house of Congress, created as a limiter, a leveler of partison passions. No need to allow the lower house leader to “direct” the actions of the Senate. She either formally transfers the “articles” as voted, or not—McConnell can deem them as received from the CSpan recording of the entire proceedings. A stroke of a pen, acknowledges the Articles are Un Constitutional and therefore not actionable or qualified for a Senate Trial.
The demonrats can take that to whatever Court will listen- and there will not be any but their partisan hacks, who can also be impeached for their examined political bribery (remember, judges can and have been surveilled).
Trial will never begin— lousy prosecution could not prove their case to a Grand Jury, much less the Senate.
This is not a criminal trial. Not sure the same rules would apply. IMO, the impeachment will expire with the term of the house that passed it.
I don’t remember the case name but the USSC has ruled, during the House’s hearings on communism in the government and in other cases, that a person’s constitutional rights are not forfeited and that the legislature has to abide by the bill of rights for someone subpoenaed to testify. I don’t see the USSC giving the House and/or the Senate a right to ignore the rights of an accused in a trial, whether judicial or political, when there is a risk that the accused will be punished, either by a contempt charge or removal from office.
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.