Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hostage; Cboldt; mrsmith

I understand it is good practice to ‘officially’ not recognize actions from the other congressional chamber until it is so ‘officially’ informed.

But also in law and justice there are principles such as the statutes of limitations and the right to a speedy trial. For most crimes the state can’t indict someone and then wait years before starting the trial.

Taking that principle to impeachment also makes sense, especially given the gravity of the charge (even though in this instance the charge itself is nonsensical, in theory this is the most severe charge Congress can impose on a POTUS). The Senate doesn’t have to allow a ‘rolling impeachment process’. They can insist that they won’t recognize an impeachment that isn’t processed within some reasonable time frame following the vote in the House because that is the right and reasonable and legally consistent thing to do - especially given the consequences.

Congress can remove a POTUS for specific and grave reasons. Impeachment by definition means it requires urgent consideration for the sake of the Republic. The House Democrats have made a mockery of it and there is no reason for the Senate to tolerate their playing with fire. Make them pay a political price, posthaste.


57 posted on 12/20/2019 3:32:11 PM PST by monkeyshine (live and let live is dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: monkeyshine
Speedy trial, at least in the 6th, is for criminal prosecution where the suspect might be jailed. And man, what the courts find as "speedy" is a real hoot. It's measured in years.

There is an inherent statute of limitiations in impeachment of a president. His term of office.

Now, I do agree that the general principle of credible government requires expediency, as well as accuracy and fairness. It's up to the two branches of Congress to navigate that, and right now they are proving they are idiots.

59 posted on 12/20/2019 3:36:46 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine

Of course, once the Senate receives the impeachment, it can judge it on matters such as timeliness and House procedure.
However, until receives it, it doesn’t exist for them.

And that’s good. We don’t need them making trouble for each other (which is precisely the destructive thing Nancy is doing).


62 posted on 12/20/2019 3:43:40 PM PST by mrsmith (Dumb sluts (M / F) : Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine
If the senate acts, it should pass a sense of the senate resolution that the house is obliged to exhibit the articles of impeachment forthwith. That puts the two houses on their own formal record, and still allows each chamber to fully exercise it's own power.

The DEMs are using the House to call the senate corrupt, and the GOP is using the senate to ridicule the House and it's stupid impeachment case.

The public is watching, sort of.

78 posted on 12/20/2019 4:14:41 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine

Had just read this before posting #105.

You and I are on the same page as far as principles and rights such as a right to a speedy trial.

In normal order, the Senate would wait for the House to respectfully present the articles. Pelosi’s mistake was to state in public she would withhold presentment indefinitely. That’s a violation of principles of jurisprudence.


107 posted on 12/20/2019 6:07:44 PM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson