Senate can acquit even if House withholds Articles of Impeachment

[TalkRadio_]

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.”

Source

 

[Rightguide]

Source

Democrats don't care what the Constitution says. They've made it a life long mission to destroy it, the present process, and lack of constitutional process, is just another way for them to weaken it further by misrepresenting its meaning and process to the American people.

 

[Conager]

They have already transmitted the articles of impeachment over the airwaves.

 

[bellisarius]

I hope they do try that tactic, there are so many interesting scenario's that could evolve from it. None of which will enure to the democrats benefit.

For example, McConnell proceeds with the trial without ever having received the articles. What is the house to do? Run to SOCTUS to prevent the senate from acting on the articles that they passed?

Or possibly wait for the senate to acquit and then run to SCOTUS to overturn the acquittal?

I do enjoy the particular notion that they could withhold the articles to gain leverage over Trump and/or pending legislation. Exactly how does that work besides putting them in the position of engaging in a form of extortion. Isn't that what they're accusing Trump of doing?

 

[Conager]

That, after they engaged in an investigation trying to influence the outcome of the 2020 election. Isn't that what they accuse Trump of doing?

 

[bellisarius]

The more they flounder around the more it becomes apparent that they aren't engaging in reasoned political maneuvering, they're acting out of desperation. Twitter driven politics at it's finest.

 

[Adre]

That, after they engaged in an investigation trying to influence the outcome of the 2020 election. Isn't that what they accuse Trump of doing?

Political partiesalways try to influence elections, moron. They just don’t ask foreign governments to help.

 

[Adre]

The more they flounder around the more it becomes apparent that they aren't engaging in reasoned political maneuvering, they're acting out of desperation. Twitter driven politics at it's finest.

Desperate because they just impeached a President? I doubt that very much.

 

[Fart_knocker]

Political partiesalways try to influence elections, moron. They just don’t ask foreign governments to help.

*chuckles*

Have a little compassion for the little skirt wearing freak, it's going to be a tough week for the little guy.

 

[verybusy]

Political partiesalways try to influence elections, moron. They just don’t ask foreign governments to help.

how did Trump ask foreign governments for help?

 

[von_Bismarck]

Political partiesalways try to influence elections, moron. They just don’t ask foreign governments to help.

Sometimes, lil Quenager doesn't think things through very well.

 

[Rightguide]

Political partiesalways try to influence elections, moron. They just don’t ask foreign governments to help.

Neither did Trump when he asked to have the criminal interference in his 2016 campaign investigated.

 

[Adre]

Sometimes, lil Quenager doesn't think things through very well.

Which is surprising given that he’s the smartest guy in the world.

 

[Adre]

Neither did Trump when he asked to have the criminal interference in his 2016 campaign investigated.

And yet the Biden name kept coming up.

 

[verybusy]

how did Trump ask foreign governments for help?

 

[cowslinger64]

Surely, totally unrelated.


Putin denounced the impeachment of U.S. President Donald Trump as “spurious” but said it won’t lead to conviction in the Senate.Putin questioned the causes of climate change, but said not doing anything about global warming isn’t an option.The Russian leader said he was “alarmed” by recent suggestions from Ukraine that the Minsk agreements on the conflict in the Donbas region should be changed, but said he’s hopeful a deal on gas trade can be reached.In a break from tradition, Putin launched straight into a Q&A with journalists instead of delivering his usual opening remarks about the Russian economy.

And more news today:


The Trump administration reportedly wants to throw the so-called "sanctions from hell" back where they came from, The Daily Beast reports.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who — despite generally aligning with President Trump on domestic matters — has been known to stray when it comes to foreign policy, introduced legislation earlier this year that would place new, heavier sanctions on Russian individuals and companies as punishment for Moscow targeting Ukraine, attacking dissidents, and interfering in the 2016 U.S. election, as well its activities in Syria. But the White House has joined various business groups in arguing the proposal goes too far.

 

[Rightguide]

And yet the Biden name kept coming up.

If the Bidens committed crimes in Ukraine, like the Ukrainians have alleged, why shouldn't their names come up? Bidens contemplation of running for the presidency doesn't indemnify him from investigation or prosecution for past crimes if evidence suggest a probable cause. Does he have different rights than Manafort? Nobody knows at this stage who will be nominated by the DNC.

 

[cowslinger64]

If the Bidens committed crimes in Ukraine, like the Ukrainians have alleged, why shouldn't their names come up? Bidens contemplation of running for the presidency doesn't indemnify him from investigation or prosecution for past crimes if evidence suggest a probable cause. Does he have different rights than Manafort? Nobody knows at this stage who will be nominated by the DNC.

You're drowning yourself in the kool-aid, vette. It's disturbing...and so sad.

You've even sold yourself out to the gop, never call yourself someone that believes in the Constitution again.. You seemed to have forgotten impeachment is right there in it..

 

[Ramone45]

What a clusterfuck for the Democrats. I almost feel sorry for them, but I don't.

 

[heathergives]

https://www.mememaker.net/api/bucket?path=static/img/memes/full/2017/Mar/24/21/you-have-to-hear-me-speak-first-so-you-can-know-that-i-am-an-absolute-idiot.jpg

 

[Aglaopheme]

Seven in 10 Americans in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll say President Donald Trump should allow his top aides to testify in a Senate trial on the impeachment charges against him, and six in 10 expect a fair trial in the Senate, two points of majority agreement -- across party lines -- in the otherwise divisive impeachment saga.

More than half, 55%, also say Trump was treated fairly in the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee hearings that led to the articles of impeachment against him. But partisan divisions on this question are vast, as they are on most other impeachment issues.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exp...oll/story?id=67761813&cid=social_twitter_abcn

 

[verybusy]

how did Trump ask foreign governments for help?

 

[Rightguide]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exp...oll/story?id=67761813&cid=social_twitter_abcn

The investigation is over. The facts will be tried in the Senate on their merit. The Senate will decide how to proceed. There will be no investigation that helps the House clean up their shit. Their shit will be tried as is. The Senate will either entertain a motion to dismiss or put on a presidential defense and and vote. The Senate isn't run by Schiff, Pelosi, or Shumer.

 

[Adre]

I hope the Senate runs a biased sham. 2020 will be that much more satisfying.

 

[Rightguide]

I hope the Senate runs a biased sham. 2020 will be that much more satisfying.

It would be a fitting answer to the biased sham you just pulled off.