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 ...
The President has plenary authority to declassify absolutely anything. And plenary authority to send as many Marine Divisions and/or National Guard units as necessary to enforce his EO’s. He could have CIA and/or NSA headquarters taken over by the military, or simply bombed into non-existence.
In fact, the CIA is the only civilian US intelligence agency. All the others are military agencies, and cannot lawfully disobey a Constitutionally-valid order from the US military Commander In Chief.
I just heard Peter Schweitzer on Mark Levin explain that Hunter Biden purchased companies with dual use technology for China.
One of the companies Biden invested for China was charged with stealing nuclear secrets from the U.S.
Hunter Buden never registered as a foreign agent.
#6. Re the Senate and Discovery re impeachment proceedings. So far they haven’t done a damned thing about real Discovery re Benghazi (33 wounded eyewitnesses were forced to sign under threats, a non-disclosure agreement). Nothing on Red Chinese influence in California - Feinstein, Chu, Lieu, etc and the old Al GOre-Nuns with the Money scandal of the 90’s.
Nothing about a subpoena for Steele, Mifsud, Sater, etc. for their role in interfering in US elections as well as setting up innocent people in order to form a conspiracy against Trump (Carter page, Papadopolous, Flynn/Gates?, etc).
Nothing about the fraudulent attempt to smear Justice Kavanaugh, AGAIN.
Nothing about Fusion GPS and its connections to the Democrats and Moscow.
I’ve given 4 congressional testimonies including one in executive session (dealt with internal security issues), worked for a congressman, and covered the Hill as a reporter.
I’ve seen good congressional investigations and bad ones. Even helped to prevent a major attack on a witness by providing a committee information they simply forgot to get from the witness (who was also working for me in an undercover capacity for a short time).
A good congressional inquiry will uncover a lot of information, good and bad. A great investigation will take the enamel off of our enemies’ teeth and that’s the way it should be.
Sen.Burr - useless; Graham - ok and has a lot of potential; Grassley - when conscious, not bad but someone has to wake him up; Don’t even know who runs the Sen. Armed Services Committee but I’m sure that aren’t like old Rep. Ed Hebert (D-La), HASC, who I testified before in 1974.
We need fighters, not politicians. Politicians are a dime a dozen and ineffective. Fighters are scare and worth their weight in gold. America needs more fighters and less politicians. PERIOD.
IF the House ever gets around to voting for impeachment...and they impeach....
The Senate must take that political football and run with it. They must actually bring it to trial with discovery.
If they do not. If they quash the House impeachment, it will look bad in the eyes of the voters. Not in the eyes of the progressives. They're mind is made up against Trump. Not in the eyes of the conservatives, our mind is made up for Trump.
This election (like many others, including the 2016 election) will depend immensely on how the "independents" and more conservative (D)'s vote. Those that voted for Trump in 2016. We need them...again.
Without those votes, there simply isn't enough conservatives for Trump to be re-elected.
We can not afford to have the Senate say...no thanks, we're not going to take up that impeachment. Such a move won't sit well with those fence sitting voters.
The Senate must proceed, but with full investigation and airing out of all the (D)'s dirty laundry and illegalities....and THEN vote to not convict.
That will give the fence sitters the confidence they need to vote again for Trump in 2020.
Well put.
Pelosi is trying to “have it both ways” and the media wants to help her.
The Senate should simply dismiss the charges, because there was no impeachable offense.
Even though the Constitution calls this a "trial," we saw in the Clinton impeachment trial that the Senator still think of themselves as Senators first, jurors second. This means that that the Constitutional power of each chamber to make its own rules applies to the trial in the Senate, too.
This means that the "trial" does not have to operate like any civil or criminal trial. It's actually a loose term as applied here, more like a body that decides one's political fate. The Senators will debate the rules of the trial before it begins. I expect the Democrats to try to limit the subpoena power of the President, that is, his ability to call witnesses in his defense. The Democrats may also try to limit the scope of the defense to only what was in the article of impeachment, and not allow the President to call into doubt the veracity of other Congressional Democrats. They may even try to limit the number of days that the President has to offer his defense and who may be allowed onto the Senate floor in his defense (e.g., no Giuliani).
The wild card here is the part of the Constitution that says that the Chief Justice "presides" over the trial. Does this mean that he is simply a figurehead who rubber-stamps anything that the Senators demand, or will he actually run the proceedings and exercise his authority to "preside" as HE sees fit (separation of powers)? Rehnquist seemed a bit weak, to me, in this aspect during the Clinton trial. I'd like to see a more assertive "presiding" by a Chief Justice to ensure that the Legislative and Executive branches both get fair treatment, even thought this is the Senate's playground.
So, I'd like to see the President's team try a trial tactic of motioning the Chief Justice for a summary judgment, saying that the outcome is obvious. I'd like to see the President's team declare that the articles of impeachment are flawed, that they are based on unproven hearsay by biased witnesses, that the procedures that produced them in the House were illegitimate, that there were no "high crimes and misdemeanors" committed by the President, and that the nation would be severely harmed by proceeding with this when an election is less than a year away. Essentially, let the people decide.
The House Democrats would naturally object, and Roberts would hear their objections. Then Roberts should decide for the President and summarily end the trial. No Senator will be on record voting for or against, so they are all protected with their constituents. The House will say they did their part. The Chief Justice will be somewhat rehabilitated with conservatives. The People will be spared a national embarrassment.
And the President is free to begin his reelection campaign.
-PJ
At the end of the day the Senate can do whatever it wants—full stop.
My personal opinion—since there is an election that will be less than a year away by the time the matter officially reaches the Senate—they should just say that this is fundamentally a political matter that the voters can and will decide in the upcoming November election—and the Senate does not want to waste its time or resources.
For what it may be worth, the Senate has the sole power to conduct an impeachment trial. But, there’s no constitutional mandate that it decide to do so.
Impressive experience and insight. Thank you for sharing.
Well since it’s a coup attempt and not an impeachment they can all go ### themselves and rules don’t apply anymore and CW will break sooner than later anyway.
I HATE that I have to admit that.
I DONT want to shoot anyone or get shot at.
Or see HELL on earth.
9/11 was enough for me. And that would be very minuscule compared to an all out CW.
But I do miss my buildings :(
IMPEACHMENT HARVESTING
Democrats will Re-Impeach repeatably until 2020.
Get ready for Impeachment the Sequal part 6
part 7
part 8
I have a new tagline...
The Senate could do nothing more or less than make a big noise between Senate Democrat and Republican members. That would not provide an education for voters.
It’s up to voters to educate other voters—not politicians. If we continue to cower in fear before criminal punks instead of issuing our own convincing political speech as individuals, everyone will lose. If you are all afraid of displaying signs and bumper stickers or window decals, install cameras and prepare to defend yourselves.
Great tagline. It should be leafleted and posted in the real environment through the U.S.A.
IMPEACHMENT HARVEST UNTIL PRESIDENT HILLARY
Pelosi will Re-Impeach until she is President,
and then appoint Hillary as VP,
then resign,
then President Hillary reigns.
Has anybody asked McConnell whether, if Ruth Buzzy were to kick the can, he would allow the senate to vote on whomever Trump nominates, while Trump is on trial in the senate?
BTW, how is Buzzy doing?
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.