Posted on 12/19/2019 4:16:08 PM PST by Bigtigermike
A House Democrat impeachment expert just wrote an opinion article stating that impeachment is a process not a vote and that Trump could legitimately say he wasn’t impeached at all because impeachment is seen through the lenses of the constitution as a whole -impeached in the House and then sent to the Senate for the trial. You can’t have one without the other
You have to pass them out to have them be valid. Otherwise it’s like a reso or bill that is not passed out. It dies without action when the House adjourns and becomes a nullity.
Bump
In other words
Peach fo five “ain’t gonna” happen!
If I did not believe God is in control, this would upset my somewhat!!! :0)
That is a fair reading of left-wing Harvard law professor Tribe's opinion. He and others argue the House has the right to determine when and how it will prosecute the President, subject to the Senate's rules. As much as you and I might dislike it, I think it is the better argument.
As a side issue, the R senators will have sworn to be fair and impartial at any impeachment trial. It is a damn shame, if not professionally negligent, that McConnell has stated he will coordinate closely with the defendant and Lindsey has said "I will not be fair."
Would any sane attorney who could avoid it expose a client to such a legal setting?
We know a great number of people around the world hate Trump; it appears Pelosi has a deep bench of clever advisors who are serving her well.
So here’s a question... does this vote bind a future congress? Can Nancy individually hold back this transmission until after the election? Does she hold this in her hip pocket and play it when RBG hangs up her black robe?
Many jurisdictions I believe have what is called a "Statute of Frauds" which dictates that all real estate contracts must be in writing. Automobiles are not real estate. If I verbally offer $10k for a car and the dealer says, "fine", then a verbal contract exists and is enforceable. The power to impeach rests solely with the House and they have exercised that power.
I certainly don't recommend verbal contracts when significant amounts are involved, as enforcing such a contract can be difficult.
As for California, last time I checked the transfer of ownership of real estate does not take place when the contract is signed. It takes place when the seller delivers the signed deed, typically to an escrow company. This detail can significantly effect any controversy that arises during the sale. There is an ugly story in my past that explains how I know this.
Trump has been impeached. To believe otherwise is to believe that the decision on whether or not to impeach Trump rests solely with Nancy Pelosi. The Constitution has no mention of "the Speaker of the House" nor does it grant any powers to such a person.
What I DID say is we are in uncharted waters here with this impeachment which obviously was IMO
The president was clearly impeached. you may have suffered an injury. See your doctor for further examination.
.................................................
Wrong! According to the Harvard legal professor who testified for the Democrats AGAINST the President, impeachment is a process not a vote, and until the House vote is transmitted to the Senate for adjudication with the Chief Justice presiding of the trial, NO IMPEACHMENT HAS OCCURRED!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2Lv7OVI6eM&feature=youtu.be
12 Days of Trump
peace offering. enjoy and chillax
wrong
you suffer from Harvardphilia. Too many others say he was impeached including him. Search the net and get a thousand sources.
Lastly Trump says he is impeached I guess him and his dumb advisors don’t know what the hell they are talking about.
Lastly i how he was impeached . i watched it on TV and saw the final vote. Now he referred to as the third impeached process all day today everywhere, but your place. But if you believe Harvard like you do the three experts Nadler brought in, I defer to your academic prowess.
Was he impeached or wasn’t he?
Harvard scholars will be debating for years, yet most people will still get up tomorrow morning, shower, brush their teeth, eat breakfast, send their kids to school, and go to work not really giving a hoot about whether this sham railroad process was genuine or fake.
Why? Because Trump is still your president and snowflakes are still triggered!!!
And the formal document transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate is the equivalent of the signed deed. The "statute of frauds" is of very recent vintage...the authors of the Constitution would not recognize it. The functioning of Congress is and must be more formalized (and always has been).
There are many things in the internal rules of the branches of the Congress that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, which wisely leaves those up to the membership of those bodies.
The House has voted on articles of impeachment. Statutory impeachment, however, has NOT happened until the Senate receives the official documents of that process.
So here’s a question... does this vote bind a future congress? Can Nancy individually hold back this transmission until after the election? Does she hold this in her hip pocket and play it when RBG hangs up her black robe?
Where does it say that? Does failure to deliver the documents to the Senate then negate the will of the House? This would convey great power to whoever has the ability to prevent delivery.
There is a saying that "ignorance of the law is no excuse".
If the House passes a bill, which is approved by the Senate, and signed by the President, then I am expected to know its effect and can be held to account if I don't.
I see no reason not to expect the Senate to recognize the official acts of the House in a similar manner.
Agreed. I also see it as a constitutional process that Pelosi has curtailed. How is it different than passing a bill in the house and then refusing to send it to the senate? The speaker of the house is effectively pocket vetoing it.
Article I says that the House will have the sole power of impeachment. It doesn’t say impeachment isn’t a thing until it’s sent to the Senate.
He was charged - like going to a Grand Jury - if the Grand Jury decided not to indict and start trying to prosecute, did the person actually get charged, or was the attempt for nought?
Voting for something, and not following through is like the frog that decided to jump off the lily pad - but never followed through so the decision is meaningless.
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.