Monad Portal
Was it me?
gotta start somewhere.
If the Senate allows a fair trial...
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
gotta start somewhere.
christiefan915
Catalyst
He has a stranglehold on the party like I've never seen, and I thought it was bad with bush.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Why aren't you arguing for Ivanka, Jared and the rest of the trump kids to be investigated? I bet you never spent even two minutes reading about their iffy wheeling and dealing, hypocrite.
Monad Portal
Was it me?
he brought independents and people who haven't voted in 30 years out of the woodwork for one reason, pledging to fix bad trade agreements and enforcing the border.
this is about rejecting the new world order. I wish dems had the balls to reject bad things.
on edit: I get its retarded to say one reason and then name two things.
christiefan915
Catalyst
1. When you stop calling everyone "nutbags" I'll take your wiseass comment under consideration.
2. HB was on the board because the Burisma people asked and he accepted. Just like these people did: "Polish president Aleksander Kwasniewski [was appointed] to its board. Three years later, Burisma added Cofer Black, a former CIA official and foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, to the board." Has trump said Cofer Black needs to be investigated?
3. It appears Burisma does no business with the US so what do cons think Joe Biden can do for it?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Scmancy has to transfer the articles first......THEN it will become an impeachment.......................
If Impeachment Articles Are Not Delivered, Did Impeachment Happen?
By Andrew C. McCarthy
December 19, 2019 5:44 PM
It’s hard to believe the Speaker’s latest stunt will go on for very long.
I’ll confess: Last night, when I was first told that Speaker Nancy Pelosi was toying with the idea of not delivering the two articles of impeachment voted by the House against President Trump, I assumed it was a joke.
For these last weeks, the Democrat-dominated chamber has been in a mad rush to impeach the president. Democrats even tacked on article two — “obstruction of Congress” — because, they told us, time could not be wasted engaging in the usual negotiation and litigation over legislative demands for executive branch information. Trump is a clear and present threat to “continue” undermining our elections, we were admonished. That’s why he needs to be impeached right now. That’s why the political class cannot responsibly leave his fate up to the sovereign, the People, who will vote in November.
But now that the deed is done, it’s . . . hey, not so fast.
Pelosi and Democratic leadership have convinced themselves there may be advantage in delaying the formal, ministerial delivery of the impeachment articles — as if Mitch McConnell were in as much a hurry to receive them as Democrats were to conjure them up. The thought is that this latest strategic petulance might pressure Senator McConnell into promising a full-blown trial, including summoning as witnesses top aides of the president whom the House didn’t bother to summon because tangling over privilege issues would have slowed up the works.
So it’s not a joke, but I still have to laugh. When I was a prosecutor negotiating plea deals, I always found the most pathetic defense lawyers were the ones who acted like they were playing with the House money when, in stark reality, it was they who needed something from me. Now here’s Pelosi trying to play hard to get with McConnell who, I imagine, couldn’t care less how long Democrats want to dither.
What we’ve just seen is the most partisan impeachment in American history, every step of it politically calculated. Obviously, if Democrats perceived advantage in stretching the process out, it would still be going on. There would be more witnesses; more 300- or 600-page committee reports to try to add heft and gravity to vague allegations of inchoate misconduct; more speeches about Trump as a threat to democracy and life as we know it; etc., etc.
To the contrary, Pelosi & Co. want this train wreck in the rearview mirror ASAP. The public is indifferent and polls are edging in Trump’s favor. On our local news this morning, the third impeachment of a president of the United States in American history couldn’t crack the top stories — it came in behind cold weather (in December) and the rescue of an elderly man in a gym by a couple of off-duty cops.
No one, of course, has to explain this to McConnell. In public, at least, he’s not a laughing-his-head-off kinda guy, but if he were, he would be.
It’s hard to believe the Speaker’s latest stunt will go on for very long. In the Senate this morning, the Democrats’ minority leader, Senator Chuck Schumer, renewed his demands about trial procedures, discovery, and witness testimony. There was no discernible hint of doubt that the House would soon deliver its impeachment articles, such as they are.
But since we’ll be playing trivial pursuit for a more few hours (days?), we might as well ask: As long as the House withholds the impeachment articles from the Senate, has Trump been impeached?
In the law, there are many situations in which an outcome is known, but it is not a formal outcome until some ministerial act is taken. A grand jury can vote an indictment, for example, but the defendant is not considered indicted until the charges are filed with the clerk of the court. A defendant can be found guilty by a jury, but there is technically no conviction until the judgment is “entered” by the trial court, usually months later when sentence is imposed. An appellate court can issue a ruling that orders a lower court to take some action, but the lower court has no jurisdiction to act in the case until issuance of the appellate court’s “mandate” — the document that formally transfers jurisdiction.
Plainly, Congress has similar ministerial acts of transference that must occur in order for legislation to pass. Were that not the case, Speaker Pelosi would not be talking about delaying the transfer of impeachment articles.
So it’s all well and good for the Speaker to hold up the works that Democrats, five minutes ago, were breathlessly telling us had to be carried out with all due haste. But many scholars take the position that the Constitution requires a trial if there has been an impeachment. If such a trial cannot properly occur unless and until articles of impeachment have been transferred from the House to the Senate, and Speaker Pelosi won’t transfer them, has President Trump actually been impeached?
Sure, it’s a stupid question . . . but we’re living in stupid times.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...chment-happen/
The entire article is stupid.
YES...the president HAS BEEN IMPEACHED.
The articles will eventually go over to the Senate for the trial. My guess is that it will only be a few days...but that delay does not mean he has not been impeached.
As the pathetic writer (a former Giuliani attorney and political hack for the National Review) noted, the delay will not go on for long.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello christiefan915,
That kind of a cult following occurred in WWII, but nothing since has come as close as this.
That kind of a cult following occurred in WWII, but nothing since has come as close as this.
Actually, he hasn’t been impeached.
Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate
According to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote.
By Noah Feldman
“Now that the House of Representatives has voted to impeach President Donald Trump, what is the constitutional status of the two articles of impeachment? Must they be transmitted to the Senate to trigger a trial, or could they be held by the House until the Senate decides what the trial will look like, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has hinted?
The Constitution doesn’t say how fast the articles must go to the Senate. Some modest delay is not inconsistent with the Constitution, or how both chambers usually work.
But an indefinite delay would pose a serious problem. Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”
Noah Feldman is a Democrat professor of law at Harvard University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter. His books include “The Three Lives of James Madison: Genius, Partisan, President.”
Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate
According to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote.
By Noah Feldman
“Now that the House of Representatives has voted to impeach President Donald Trump, what is the constitutional status of the two articles of impeachment? Must they be transmitted to the Senate to trigger a trial, or could they be held by the House until the Senate decides what the trial will look like, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has hinted?
The Constitution doesn’t say how fast the articles must go to the Senate. Some modest delay is not inconsistent with the Constitution, or how both chambers usually work.
But an indefinite delay would pose a serious problem. Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”
Noah Feldman is a Democrat professor of law at Harvard University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter. His books include “The Three Lives of James Madison: Genius, Partisan, President.”
Or PLEAD THE FIFTH...just as good.
Into the Night
Verified User
Trump isn't strangling anybody.
Into the Night
Verified User
What iffy wheeling and dealing?
Into the Night
Verified User
Not yet. The articles of impeachment have not yet been delivered to the Senate.
Yes it does.
I see you have real faith in Queen Nancy.
Guess what? She's not the Queen. She doesn't control the Senate or the President. She can barely seem to handle the House.
Saved.
Into the Night
Verified User
The Senate need not hold a trial at all. They can simply vote to dismiss the articles outright.
But you are correct that there is no impeachment until the articles are delivered to the Senate to consider.
Into the Night
Verified User
Won't do him any good. There seems to be plenty of other witnesses to stand up against Biden that describe that what Biden did is exactly like Biden boasted.
He has been impeached. That ship has sailed.
No...it does not.
I think Nancy Pelosi has been an excellent Speaker.
She definitely is not a Queen...or the Queen. She does not control the Senate; it controls itself. She does not control the President; he is not in control.
Don't you wish!