Posted on 12/18/2019 8:44:23 PM PST by BurgessKoch
Sorry, supposed to say speedy trial.
That’s been my thought as well.
I’m certain Cocaine Mitch and the rest of the (harumph) “Senators” have TV just like we do. And they already know what the articles of impeachment are.
So, they can simply move ahead and Pelosi Galore can hold onto her articles as long as she wants.
Because doing that doesn’t mean anything.
Excellent deduction...... Mitch should give her 24 hours.......hand them over........ or be charged with obstruction of justice.
“Trump is scarred because like all victims anywhere
and everywhere since time immemorial he was asking for it.”
-Libs, neverTrumpers, and people like you, probably
” unless presented to the Senate within 10 days of passage”
Being that weeks of debate and posturing have occurred prior to the vote, I see no reason for the 10 day period. Once the vote is taken, 10 minutes should be sufficient to refer the issue to the Senate.
“This is all politics and no laws have been broken. “
plenty of laws (proper procedure etc) broken, by the dems.
President has been publicly “politically” indicted. Sixth amendment protections should apply to President Trump because that is in the Constitution as well.
Hit post too soon, add the 4th and 6th to this matter and the President has a good case before the court to have the right to exonerate himself by through a trial.
Seems to me that the Senate cannot do much absent a presentation of the charges. You can’t have a trial if there are no charges so there is nothing to “dismiss”.
The President is not impeached yet. Only articles requesting impeachment on 2 counts have been approved to be forwarded to the Senate.
I know we conflate the two and say 3 presidents have been impeached: they have not. Charges were brought and, in 2 cases, failed. This one should fail also.
THAT said, this seems like a prosecutor trying to decide whether to proceed with a trial after the grand jury indicts.
Not sure she can do that. She might want to check that Constitution she wrapped herself in.
Yeah, people like me. You found me out.
-PJ
This isn’t the early 1800’s. We don’t have to wait for the Democrats to walk some piece of parchment up the senate steps and lay it before the clerk as if it were Holy Writ. We all saw the hearings & the house vote. It’s in the public record. If the house doesn’t send managers to formally present the impeachment then the senate can just as informally dismiss the charges.
Or let them never send the articles, then we can rescind them in 2021. ;p
Really, this is a bizarre strategy by the rats, one wonders how they come up with this nonsense.
“The woman is ill. That’s the only explanation for it.”
When Nancy’s not slurring her words as if she’s drunk she’s acting as if she has “sundowners” (a form of dementia). Still, the strategy has been cooked up in the cloak rooms and Nancy is doing her bit to present it. It does make you wonder who is calling the shots.
“It is clearly a case of ignoring the House’s duty to provide the Articles to the Senate,”
Nancy DID provide the Articles to the Senate — for all the world to see. She did it when they were published.
She thinks two can’t play her game?! She thinks because a small contingent of her angry thugs didn’t parade the printed documents to the Senate she didn’t provide them? That’s just theater.
The Senate has the Articles; she provided them. Now let them do their job.
I know EXACTLY who is calling the shots, George Soros!!! He OWNS the Dem party lock stock and barrel!!!
Senate Rules on Impeachment - Part of the Senate Manual
Senate trial procedure starts when House managers walk over. Not before. The issue is in the House. It can do with it what it pleases. The House has no rules for impeachment, it just makes things up on the fly. Shows the House to be unregulated, out of control, unprofessional, and so on. The institution is failed, just like the rest of the government.
That actually happened once. It has interesting and historical significance.
Short version, it can't.
That’s exactly what I think. With current-day media, no “walk” is necessary. The Senate received the Articles last night.
Nope. But there is nothing that says the House can't take pointless votes either, other than the ridicule it exposes them to.
“And how would they proceed to act on some vague exclamation “The President is impeached “ without seeing the particulars...”
Summary dismissal. That’s what all the players seem to want. Trump has said he’ll take “a long trial or a quick dismissal”. Lindsay Graham seems to want this over quickly. Makes me wonder how he’s wrapped up in this Ukraine mess? McConnell seems like he could go either way, but it wouldn’t be wise for him to tip his hand as the majority leader, but my guess is that he’d rather dismiss. Last of all, Nancy’s gamesmanship seems to be forcing the Senate to go the quick-route.
This leaves us wondering... what was all of this about? I think a couple of things.
1. Nancy gave the Crew what they wanted (impeachment) but on HER timetable and by HER shake-n-bake rules. It’s far enough ahead of the election that MSNBC and CNN can corral all the disappointed Democrats and get them re-focused on keeping the House in Democrat hands.
2. Preventing an ‘impeached’ president from appointing any more federal judges. RBG is going to die very soon. The Dems would rather the USSC limp along with 8 Justices than give Trump his 3rd nominee.
3. Re-impeachment? I think that there may be a do-over after then election. I think the Democrats expect that their eventual nominee is going to be crushed. They will point to nefarious deeds by the President as the reason and impeach him again. This time they will take their time about it, touch all the bases and drag it out. They think this will immobilize the president (see #2).
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.