Mark Levin said on his show yesterday that if he recuses then Kamala Harris could preside over the case.
He said that’s just what the libtards in the press are saying and said they are just making things up
Mark Levin said on his show yesterday that if he recuses then Kamala Harris could preside over the case.
+++++
That sounds logical but looks like a disaster for any Trump plan to introduce evidence of fraud. The Presiding Officer, potentially Harris, would have the power to disallow any evidence she wants. And the only way to overrule her decision would be by a vote of the Senate. And so the Judge would, in this crazy case, be the tiebreaker and the Dems would prevail.
This is nuts. But the Constitution and the rules of the Senate DO NOT require Justice Roberts to preside over a Senate trial of a citizen.. I assume he could if he wanted to but he would be on solid ground if he refuses.
But in either case I have serious doubts that the evidence that needs to be presented will be found admissible. I think a Senate, with the Dems in control, can reject anything it want to.
That’s just not so.
Good. The sheeple need to see more of what a nasty bitch Obamala Harris can be.
Here’s the text:
“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.”
“Mark Levin said on his show yesterday that if he recuses”
Is he recusing himself or ruling it is not legitimate?
“Mark Levin said on his show yesterday that if he recuses”
Is he recusing himself or ruling it is not legitimate?