Posted on 01/15/2020 2:29:50 AM PST by knighthawk
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, pitched the idea of witness reciprocity on Tuesday during a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other GOP leaders who convened to discuss strategy for the upcoming impeachment trial that will decide if President Trump is removed from office, Fox News has confirmed.
The idea would mean if Democrats call a witness, such as Trumps former National Security Adviser John Bolton, Republicans would in turn be allowed to call a witness.
Likely candidates to be subpoenaed by the GOP include former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and the unidentified whistleblower who reported a July phone call between President Trump and the leader of Ukraine.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The caller had it ass-backwards. He's referring to the case of Alcee Hastings, who was impeached as a Federal judge and convicted in the Senate. His punishment was his removal from office, but the Senate did NOT forbid him from serving in office again ... which is why he's now a crooked member of Congress instead of a crooked Federal judge.
WRONG.
Free Republic has never understood an elector.
Colonists had zero electricity so communication was via people. Votes are signed & sealed.
Elector votes are UNCHANGEABLE.
And throughout the year 2020, the Free Republic posters will get the Constitution wrong over and over and over ...
A 2/3 vote is necessary for conviction in an impeachment trial. If convicted Trump would be ineligible to run. Otherwise theres no way to prevent him from running.
A wobbly GOP leadership conceivably could conspire to deny him the Republican nomination, but that would not prevent Trump from running he just would have to do so as an independent or as another partys nominee. In any case a Senate vote could not accomplish this. The only relevant Senate vote is the impeachment trial, which requires 67 votes for conviction.
Free Republic has never understood an elector.
Free Republic?
Everyone?
Every single person on the site?
Except you?
Well....congrats.
Whether they like him or not, Trump is the driving force behind the 2020 election, and it will be epic.
_________________
You’re right, but it never ceases to gall me how hard it has always been for ‘know it alls’ to say anything good about DJT. Yet, I know enough about leadership to understand that great leaders must accept the weight of the yoke brought on by non-achievers who find themselves feeling so inadequate when they stack their limited achievements against those of a true leader. The envoy turns them into unrelenting backbench nitpickers.
An impeachment is first and foremost a trial. A trial has a discovery phase. The democrats have done all their discovery during the witch hunt investigation they held.
Why would you deny President Trump his right to discovery?
He can call ANYONE he wants to if they have even a small tangential connection to the trial. Which means EVERY piece of corruption on the left from Burisma to Jeff Epstein (who did not kill himself) to obama's many scandals (fast and furious etc) to schitt's and nadler's and pelosi's financial records, to pelosi's son working for Ukraine etc etc etc are ALL fair avenues of discovery.
All of these things go to prove that the Hunter Biden Ukraine corruption was just one small part of a RICO known as the democrat party. And as such it is the President's duty to root it out.
Cruz is thinking strategically but he may be ignorant that normal people, especially women (even ones who hate the President), hate the impeachment follies and anyone who is seen to perpetuate it for one milisecond longer is an instant loser!
So you expect Hunter Biden to appear amid a withering storm of media hostility, take the stand, and say, "You got me, copper. I was taking $83 000 a month to funnel to a secret fund controlled by Barack Obama and Valerie Jarrett to undermine President Trump"?
Is that what you think will happen if Biden testifies?
Move to dismiss.
No. I expect him to plead the Fifth which totally vindicates Trump for 2 reasons: (1) It justifies his demand for an investigation, and (2) The charges should be dismissed on principle because a key witnesss constitutional protections effectively block the defendants right to present evidence in his defense.
I noticed that they put old Bug-Eyes on the list of House Managers. I guess they think that makes him immune to being called as a witness?
https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_electors
Sorry but you are wrong. There were electors in 2016 who did not vote for either Clinton or Trump. (Colin Powell technically finishes third in the 2016 election with 3 EVs).
The Constitution yields the manner of choosing electors up to the states. It most certainly does NOT require electors to vote for any particular candidate. They are free to vote for anyone they choose. In practice they almost always vote for the popular vote winner of the state they represent, but theres nothing in the Constitution that requires them to do so. Heck, theres nothing in the Constitution even requiring a popular election to choose electors. All states do so via election, but thats the choice of each state, not a Constitutional requirement.
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.