Posted on 09/29/2019 10:04:26 PM PDT by rintintin
The Republican leadership issued a memo Saturday clarifying that the Senate must take action if the House of Representatives approves articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The statement came in response to concerns that the Senate could simply refuse to hold a trial.
“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles to the Senate,” stated the memo, which was obtained by HuffPost. “The rules of impeachment are clear on this point.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also said as much in a March interview with NPR: “If it [impeachment] were to happen, the Senate has no choice. If the House were to act, the Senate immediately goes into a trial.”
(Excerpt) Read more at huffpost.com ...
What kind of BS is this? The Constitution doesn't says the Senate "must" hold a trial. If the House votes through an illegitimate sham impeachment - without a formal vote on beginning impeachment inquiries, and without allowing Trump to confront his shadowy CIA hearsay accuser - then the impeachment does not rise to the credibility of deserving a trial.
Also, if the vote includes Dem congressmen who are candidates for president, their obvious conflict of interest renders the exercise fraudulent.
Senate GOP "leadership" should lead. It looks like they may be taking us down the garden path.
> “... without a formal vote on beginning impeachment inquiries, ...”
I think McConnell was aiming at putting a vote to the Senate on having the trial and knew ahead of time the vote would block the trial from ever getting started.
In this context, the Senate would review the House’s Articles of Impeachment and vote whether they want their time spent in a trial or not. If the Articles are shabby and partisan, chances are the Senate will say no-go.
If the house votes for articles of impeachment, the Senate can immediately impose Scottish law and find that the articles are not proven.
Personally, I’d want a secret ballot imposed on a vote for the legitimacy of the articles. Let the cowards who want to end Trump just for defying the order of things see how strong their hand actually is. I doubt they would have the guts to even vote against him in secret, but it would be useful to know that if not.
Thank goodness we get to go 4 years without a legislative branch of government. Just an executive and a preoccupied judicial one so inept they issue FISA warrants because Michael Isakov wrote about something.
At this point I think they all want Trump gone so they can get rid of the headache and get back to lining their pockets by selling off this country to China.
If a Senate trial happens, get the popcorn.
Discovery will be FUN to watch.
Yeah, the House has avoided a vote even on an Impesachent inquiry.
How should the renate respond… to nothing?
The only clause in the Constitution that governs this matter says this:
“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.”
There are no other requirements, rules, mandates or prohibitions on the Senate’s trial of an impeachment in the rest of the Constitution.
All that matters here is that the Constitution grants full, unchallengeable, non-reviewable. plenary authority to the Senate to conduct the trial. It’s logically impossible that such authority does not include the authority to do nothing. There is no clause that says anything equivalent to “The Senate SHALL conduct a trial, whenever a Federal official is impeached.”
That said, holding a trial might be the only way to get the true facts out to the public, including whatever documents or other information that might need to be declassified.
the trial can consist of an instant vote. They’ve done it before...
This is why the impeachment inquiry is such a joke. The House is attempting to do the Senate’s job while not voting for thr Senate to actually do the job. Funny how no one is mentioning this.
With the NSA data, who needs discovery? A simple Executive Order to declassify/disclose gets the job done.
True. But there is no requirement that you act upon them.
Not sure what you mean. The only vote in the House that matters to the Senate is if they vote to impeach. That would come after any impeachment inquiry.
If the GOOBers think 2018 was bad, wait until they see what happens to their jobs if they cooperate with the commie ‘RATs and their overthrowing of America’s president. They haven’t seen Jack Sh*t yet.
“...When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”
Not so sure I am comfortable with THIS CJ presiding....whatever presiding actually means in this case.
This describes the mechanism to halt any "trial" from going forward.
The impeachment vote in the House is like a Grand Jury vote on bringing an Indictment in the regular world of law--an Impeachment is a political Indictment. We all know the old saw re Grand Juries indicting a ham sandwich--a la Pelosi's politically galvanized House Grand Jury.
The indictment (Impeachment) is so phony and without weight that Senator McConnell will quash the bogus Articles into oblivion with a Senate vote on the Merits.
There will be no Trial opened up in the Senate.
No. The Senate should stop it. The following article from the Spectator, by the way, should have been posted as a proper excerpt in news and editorial.
Senate Shouldn’t Dignify Impeachment Parody With a Trial
The Spectator
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3782368/posts
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.