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

Skip to comments.

"New Witnesses" In An Impeachment Trial is Unconstituional
self ^ | January 28, 2020 | Uncle Sham

Posted on 01/28/2020 4:34:32 PM PST by Uncle Sham

The Constitution gives the power of impeachment solely to the House of Representatives. It means that only the House can do the discovery phase of gathering evidence and then putting together Articles of Impeachment to then present to the Senate for the Senate to judge. The Senate can ONLY judge that which the House has constructed and presented. Any witnesses can ONLY be from the witnesses who are included in the Articles presented by the House.

Asking the Senate to help the discovery phase by introducing new evidence at an impeachment trial is the same thing as asking a judge or jury to help the prosecution do it's job in the courtroom. It also would put the Senate in a position of being part of the evidence gathering phase of impeachment that our constitution clearly prohibits as this is only assigned to the House of Representatives. If the House wants new witness testimony, they have every opportunity to get it with the rules that are in place. They can call Bolton to testify IN THE HOUSE, then if they decide to incorporate his testimony into an Article of Impeachment, they are free to do so and then present THAT article of impeachment to the Senate.

In my opinion, if the Senate allows new testimony, Trump's legal team has grounds for getting the entire proceeding thrown out as being unconstitutional.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: impeachment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 last
To: Uncle Sham
There is no constitutional basis to then allow the House to then say, Oh, by the way, he might be guilty of that too.

I don't think anyone's asking to bring new charges.

The House cannot force the Senate to judge an accusation that is not presented as an article of impeachment. By asking for "new" evidence/testimony, this is actually what they are attempting to do because this "new" evidence/testimony is not part or parcel to the articles of impeachment currently being presented to the Senate.

New evidence is not a new accusation, it adds additional weight to an existing one.

You do realize that there's no evidence in the articles of impeachment, only accusations. Right?

81 posted on 01/29/2020 3:27:45 PM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: semimojo
"This would be the first without witnesses."

Not true. There are 18 witnesses cited in these articles of impeachment. Calling them for testimony in the Senate phase is the up to the Senate. This isn't a Perry Mason episode.

82 posted on 01/29/2020 3:47:38 PM PST by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham
Not true. There are 18 witnesses cited in these articles of impeachment.

The poster was arguing for no witnesses in the Senate, and this would indeed be the first time that happened.

83 posted on 01/29/2020 3:53:36 PM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: semimojo

This one hasn’t included the rational for calling other witnesses, it was a conviction the House is asking the Senate to approve. Other cases came from the House with far more than a conviction.


84 posted on 01/29/2020 3:58:10 PM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 last

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.

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