Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×

  • Current Donation Goals

    • 2023-24 - Budget
      Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Impeachment Trial

gonzoron

By gonzoron
in Out of Bound Forum

 Share

Guilty or Not Guilty?  

4 members have voted

  1. 1. Guilty or Not Guilty?

    • Guilty-Abuse of Power
      2
    • Not Guilty-Abuse of Power
      2
    • Guilty-Obstruction of Congress
      2
    • Not Guilty-Obstruction of Congress
      2

Recommended Posts

swordfish Mentor

swordfish

Posted
Posted

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/some-house-democrats-push-pelosi-to-withhold-impeachment-articles-delaying-senate-trial/ar-BBY8MUq

WASHINGTON — A group of House Democrats is pushing Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders to withhold the articles of impeachment against President Trump that emerged from the House on Wednesday, potentially delaying a Senate trial for months.

The notion of impeaching Trump but holding the articles in the House has gained traction among some of the political left as a way to potentially force Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, to conduct a trial on more favorable terms for Democrats. And if no agreement is reached, some have argued, the trial could be delayed indefinitely, denying Trump an expected acquittal.

The gambit has gained some traction inside the left wing of the House Democratic Caucus this week. Representative Earl Blumenauer, Democrat of Oregon, said Wednesday, as his colleagues debated the impeachment articles on the House floor, that he has spoken to three dozen Democratic lawmakers who expressed some level of enthusiasm for the idea of ‘‘rounding out the record and spending the time to do this right.’’

‘‘At a minimum, there ought to be an agreement about access to witnesses, rules of the game, timing,’’ Blumenauer said of a Senate trial.

Another Democrat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said there is ‘‘serious concern about whether there will be a fair trial on the Senate side’’ and acknowledged active talks about withholding the articles.

After the impeachment vote Wednesday, Pelosi would not rule out the idea of withholding the articles.

The notion has been most prominently advocated by Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor who has advised the House Judiciary Committee on the impeachment process. In a recent Washington Post op-ed, he wrote that ‘‘the public has a right to observe a meaningful trial rather than simply learn that the result is a verdict of not guilty.’’

Senate minority leader Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, has asked McConnell to call several Trump administration witnesses, including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton. McConnell has dismissed those requests and signaled that he expects to hold a relatively short trial that will end with a summary dismissal of the impeachment charges.

Republicans have scoffed at the notion of the House withholding the articles, noting it hardly counts as leverage to deny the GOP the ability to remove a president that the party wants to keep in place. Some aides further argued that withholding the articles would only fuel Republican arguments that Democrats are engaged in a partisan abuse of the Constitution.

Democratic leaders may be forced to deal with the issue in the coming days. Blumenauer said he had already raised the issue with House majority leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and other top Democrats, as well as Pelosi.

Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Hoyer did not rule out the idea: ‘‘It’s an interesting proposal. I don’t think that that’s the path we will follow, but that does not mean we will immediately deliver it. There are considerations related to other legislation.’’

A senior Democratic aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity said the impeachment articles will not be immediately transmitted to the Senate Wednesday. Rather, they will be held until Pelosi names impeachment managers, the House members who will present the case for Trump’s removal in the Senate.

‘‘There will be a debate and vote on that resolution’’ naming the managers, the aide said. If a significant number of Democrats refuse to vote for that resolution, they could force the issue.

The timing of that vote is unclear; the House is expected to recess for the winter holidays as soon as Thursday and not return until Jan. 7.

Blumenauer said that if McConnell does not agree to call the Democratic witnesses and stage a fair trial, Democrats could simply hold on to the articles and continue to investigate Trump. The House is involved in multiple court cases seeking documents and testimony that have yet to be resolved.

‘‘Who knows what would happen to augment the record? This ought to be able to play out,’’ he said. ‘‘There’s no advantage to rushing this.’’

But the notion of prolonging the impeachment process indefinitely is almost certain to infuriate House members from competitive districts, who have pushed Pelosi for months to keep the investigation focused and limited to Trump’s Ukraine conduct.

Wow - anyone care to comment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muda69 Grand Master

Muda69

Posted
Posted

Does the trial even really matter?  The democratic side of the uni-party has had their partisan day in the sun by voting to impeach and now the republican side gets their during a show trial in the senate.   

The political damage has already been done regardless of the outcome, which is all the dems really ever wanted.

 

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muda69 Grand Master

Muda69

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, swordfish said:

You think this damaged the President?

Not really.  But the democrats sure do, and now they can use the "he was successfully impeached!" rhetoric in all their campaign advertising for the 2020 election.   

But the main issue is the the democrats simply do not yet have a POTUS candidate that can defeat Mr. Trump.

 

 

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Impartial_Observer Mentor

Impartial_Observer

Posted
Posted

Say what you want about Pelosi, she's a shrewd politician. The press seems to have jumped on this withholding the articles angle. It's interesting to watch this play out. 

On the bright side of things it's refreshing to see the D's suddenly embrace the Constitution. I take it this means and end to any gun control legislation?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gonzoron Veteran

gonzoron

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don’t think Pelosi wanted to impeach to begin with. 
This needed to be investigated, but that could have been done without impeachment. 
I haven’t ever supported Trump’s impeachment, it creates more problems than it solves.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Impartial_Observer Mentor

Impartial_Observer

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

I don’t think Pelosi wanted to impeach to begin with. 
This needed to be investigated, but that could have been done without impeachment. 
I haven’t ever supported Trump’s impeachment, it creates more problems than it solves.

As do I. I meant to say that in my post, but failed to do so. She's shrewd politician, one angle no one seems to be talking about it possibly she doesn't send this to the senate, which in effect solves her issue with having it to begin with. 

I have no doubt a deal was made to shut up the opposition when she became speaker again in January. If she opts to head to greener pastures next year, she has no one to answer to, certainly no the D Party. I also find it interesting is we haven't heard a word from the young movers and shakers in a LONG time. Is VOC still the house?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swordfish Mentor

swordfish

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

As do I. I meant to say that in my post, but failed to do so. She's shrewd politician, one angle no one seems to be talking about it possibly she doesn't send this to the senate, which in effect solves her issue with having it to begin with. 

I have no doubt a deal was made to shut up the opposition when she became speaker again in January. If she opts to head to greener pastures next year, she has no one to answer to, certainly no the D Party. I also find it interesting is we haven't heard a word from the young movers and shakers in a LONG time. Is VOC still the house?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-tulsi-gabbard-present-vote-impeach-trump

Yep - but the press has been very careful not to cover her as much.  Perhaps the  shrewd speaker laid down some rules for the MSM to ignore AOC.

Mrs. Shrewdness better be careful of her words - the once solemn and prayerful Catholic speaker now "has a spring in her step after impeachment"........

BTW - If she determines it in her best interest to not send the articles to the Senate (for whatever reason) the Senate can throw the whole thing out.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gonzoron Veteran

gonzoron

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, swordfish said:

BTW - If she determines it in her best interest to not send the articles to the Senate (for whatever reason) the Senate can throw the whole thing out.......

Impeachment comes with an expiration date? Please expound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gonzoron Veteran

gonzoron

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, swordfish said:

BTW - If she determines it in her best interest to not send the articles to the Senate (for whatever reason) the Senate can throw the whole thing out......

Here's what I found, from the U.S. Govt. Printing Office.  

    An impeachment may proceed only when Congress is in session. 3 
  Hinds Sec. Sec. 2006, 2462. However, an impeachment proceeding does 
  not expire with adjournment. An impeachment proceeding begun in the 
  House in one Congress may be resumed in the next Congress. 3 Hinds 
  Sec. 2321; 111-1, Jan. 13, 2009, p __. An official impeached by the 
  House in one Congress may be tried by the Senate in the next Congress. 
  Manual Sec. 620; 3 Hinds Sec. Sec. 2319, 2320.
      Although impeachment proceedings may continue from one Congress to 
  the next, the authority of the managers appointed by the House expires 
  at the end of a Congress; and managers must be reappointed when a new 
  Congress convenes. Manual Sec. 620. Managers on the part of the House 
  are reappointed by resolution. Manual Sec. 604; Deschler Ch 14 
  Sec. 4.2.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
swordfish Mentor

swordfish

Posted
Posted

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/18/pollak-senate-can-acquit-even-if-house-doesnt-transmit-articles-of-impeachment-constitution/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) appears to be considering an idea Democrats have floated for several days of holding back the articles of impeachment to exercise leverage over the Senate and the president.

She declined formally to transmit the articles to the Senate on Wednesday evening after the House voted to impeach President Donald Trump.

Unfortunately for them, the Senate can act, regardless — and would vote to acquit.

 

That’s because the Constitution is absolutely clear about the Senate’s authority. Article I, Section 3 says: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”

That is all.

The Chief Justice presides over a trial involving the president, but the Senate makes the rules. And the Senate is controlled by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who regards what the House has done with contempt.

You’re in Cocaine Mitch’s court, now.

Politico outlined Democrats’ new idea, citing constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe (but, interestingly, not the Constitution itself). Pelosi hopes to pressure McConnell into holding a “fair trial” — this, after she and her party broke every relevant House rule and precedent, and several Amendments in the Bill of Rights, all in the name of their “sole Power of Impeachment.”

They forget that a “fair trial” applies to the accused, not the accuser, and has since 1215.

Set aside, for the moment, that holding onto the articles of impeachment would contradict everything Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the Democrats have said for weeks about the “urgency” of impeachment. They needed to stop him before he could “cheat in the next election,” we were told — that’s why the House could not wait for the courts to rule on the White House’s resistance to stop congressional subpoenas.

All of that would be exposed as a lie.

If Pelosi refuses to submit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, McConnell can convene the Senate anyway, summon the Chief Justice, and swear in the Senators as jurors. Democrats can boycott, but they can’t stop the trial.

McConnell can then propose to dismiss the charges or even hold a vote to acquit the president.

 

Pelosi can hide the articles of impeachment in Adam Schiff’s basement forever, and it won’t make a bit of difference.

Case closed.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

 

Any Legal Beagles care to deposit your .02 worth to this one?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Impartial_Observer Mentor

Impartial_Observer

Posted
Posted

From what I understand, the rules in the senate are up to the senate, the constitution is largely silent. As we saw in the house the party in power can basically make it up as they go. 

My real fear here is dangerous precedents are being set. Both parties need to realize that sooner or later the other idiots will be in charge. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Howe Newbie

Howe

Posted
Posted

Democrat super hero and House impeachment Constitution scholar Noah Feldman:

If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BARRYOSAMA Newbie

BARRYOSAMA

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Howe said:

Democrat super hero and House impeachment Constitution scholar Noah Feldman:

If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

That would be awesome.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...