Posted on 12/23/2019 8:16:40 AM PST by edwinland
Let me propose an alternative course for Pelosi. Apprise McConnell that she will forward the impeachment recommendation as soon as the Supreme Court rules on the three cases currently pending in the lower courts concerning the president's refusal to provide the documents and witnesses requested by the House Intelligence Committee and the tax returns requested by the Ways and Means Committee. The Supreme Court has already agreed to take the latter case. Chief Justice John Roberts can be urged to accelerate the schedule in all three cases, and report the verdicts prior to the customary end of the Supreme Court session in June.
In all three cases, White House lawyers have made the same argument; namely that the President has the constitutional authority to ignore all congressional requests, because he cannot be indicted, convicted, or investigated. In brief, as President he stands above the law. All the lower court rulings thus far have dismissed this argument as frivolous. Perhaps the cases can be bundled and decided by the Supreme Court sooner rather than later.
If the decision follows the precedent set in Nixon v. United States (1974), where the Supreme Court ruled, quite quickly, that Nixon had to release the White House tapes, then witnesses and documents unavailable to the House will become available for a Senate trial. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans prefer a full and fair trial that includes such testimony and evidence. If McConnell refuses to yield to the political process that generates, Pelosi can stand pat until he caves. If never, so be it. It must be a full and fair trial or nothing.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
As an aside, the author never asks the totally obvious question: why did Pelosi move to impeach BEFORE those cases play out?
That's the $64,000 question.
The answer is that the House never authorized an actual impeachment resolution that would have given them real subpoena authority and one of the courts already ruled exactly that way.
So why didn't she pass such a resolution, then win the court cases, then impeach?
Because in the meantime the Republicans in the House would have had rights to call witnesses.
After the actual impeachment resolution passed, the Republicans also have no right to call defense witnesses, but she's still pursuing the cases so she can subpoena the Mueller grand Jury testimony and witnesses she things will be favorable to her side.
McConnell doesn’t have to do crap. The buck never got there, why legitimize it? This is Nancy’s tarbaby.
President Trump didn do nothin’.
She should block it indefinitely. That will teach that White House.
So CNN is suggesting that Congress do the exact same thing that they are impeaching the president for?
The House has absolutely no power to tell the Senate how and when to conduct the trial. SCOTUS has already ruled on this.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-740.ZS.html
The air of wrongdoing is better that the air of acquittal for the Dems. As long as they can keep the stain on Trump the better in their minds.
This is quite the deceptive gambit. They are counting on the public's ignorance of history and the law. After all, who's not in favor of a "fair" trial? Most folks have never even heard of the Magna Carter, which in 1215 A.D. set forth the concept of a fair trial FOR THE ACCUSED, not for the prosecution.
Senate GOP should say send us Articles in five days, or the first vote we call will be a vote to dismiss all charges, for denying Trump his due process rights both during the House inquiry and then denying him a Constitutionally guaranteed speedy trial.
DemocRats don’t want a “fair trial”. They showed that with the inquisition/witch hunt/hearings by not allowing any witnesses with exculpatory testimony.
“until White House is forced to reveal all “
WELL well well!! Okay, have a seat, Nancy..
Let’s start with illegal surveillance..
I ... don’t understand.
Pelosi is holding back something the Senate doesn’t want, until the Senate does what she demands.
AKA:
Pelosi: “I’m gonna punch your friend, but I’m not gonna do it until you give me $20!”
McConnell: “But I don’t want you to punch my friend.”
P: “GIBSMEDA MONEYS!”
M: “No.”
P: “AAAAAAA!!! I’M NOT GONNA PUNCH HIM TILL YOU GIVE ME $20!”
M: [wanders off]
I’d like to see Mitch either flat-out announce, or else hold a vote in the Senate to determine that President Trump is not impeached. Not until Pelosi sends over the articles.
Taking advice from CNN is how Nan got herself into this predicament in the first place.
Americans actually prefer that CNN seditionists
are given a fair trial before being
burned alive at the stake or hung publicly.
Well a court ruling would make it even more obvious that the "Obstruction of Congress" charge was bogus. Especially if the court found in Trump's favor.
But I don't know if that is her reason. Not sure she needs any good reason to do anything. She does not seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Fine. Block it.
We can also discuss money laundering by RATs in Ukraine and how many other countries?
BOMBSHELL: Rudy Giuliani exposes money laundering schemes in Ukraine; records lead to Burisma, Bidens
Pelosi’s Son Now Involved In Ukraine Scandal- Democrat Party In Shambles
https://rightwingtribune.com/2019/10/04/pelosis-son/
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.