Some House Democrats push Pelosi to withhold impeachment articles

[rogue06]

Never thought it was possible to aim a missile at your foot and yell, “FIRE!!!!” But here we are...

Some folks put a foot into their mouth.

Some folks shoot themself in the foot.

The Democrats appear to be grimly determined to do both simultaneously. They're trying to shoot themselves in the foot while their foot is firmly embedded in their mouth.

[Teallaura]

Some folks put a foot into their mouth.

Some folks shoot themself in the foot.

The Democrats appear to be grimly determined to do both simultaneously. They're trying to shoot themselves in the foot while their foot is firmly embedded in their mouth.

Yeah, but you gotta admit, doing it with an 18 inch gun from a battleship is impressive...

[Teallaura]

Anyone actually hear Pelosi say 'hold my beer'?

[Mountain Man]

As noted by Jay Sekulow, the House portion of the impeachment effort is finished. The constitution does not outline rules, managers, and delivery methods. Once the House votes to impeach, they are finished. The Senate has full control now.

The Senate can begin their trial phase at any time and call for presentation of articles by the House. If no-one shows up, case dismissed. Pelosi/House has no role in next phase.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...lying-monkeys/

[JimL]

It is well outside the boundaries of the House's authority to try to force a rules change on the Senate (talk about an abuse of power!). And besides, there's nothing in the Constitution that says that the Senate can't take immediate action once the House has voted to impeach regardless of whether or not the articles have been formally delivered.

Wrong again, Ollie. The House has to formally name impeachment managers prior to the Senate beginning the trial.

[Cow Poke]

Wrong again, Ollie. The House has to formally name impeachment managers prior to the Senate beginning the trial.

Cite, please. Cause you are almost always wrong when you make such a declaration.

[JimL]

This is absolutely hilarious...

WASHINGTON — The future of the House’s impeachment case against President Trump hung in doubt on Thursday, after the third-ranking House Democrat raised the possibility that the chamber could permanently withhold the articles from the Senate if it did not get assurances of a fair trial.

The morning after the House impeached Mr. Trump nearly along party lines, Representative James E. Clyburn, Democrat of South Carolina, said he was willing to wait “as long as it takes” to transmit the two impeachment articles approved Wednesday night. The House charged Mr. Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to his campaign to pressure Ukraine to smear Democratic rivals.

“Until we can get some assurances from the majority leader that he is going to allow for a fair and impartial trial to take place, we would be crazy to walk in there knowing he has set up a kangaroo court,” Mr. Clyburn said Thursday morning on CNN, referring to Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader.

Yes, we already know your hoping for a kangaroo court, CP. Can't handle the truth!

[Cow Poke]

Yes, we already know your hoping for a kangaroo court, CP. Can't handle the truth!

First of all, who is "we"?
Second - You're doing that thing again where you have nothing to say, so you're just showing what a classless jerk you can be.

[Mountain Man]

Wrong again, Ollie. The House has to formally name impeachment managers prior to the Senate beginning the trial.

Where does it say that in the Constitution?

[JimL]

There are several possible reasons for refusing to send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate including

• They want more time to gather evidence -- but then why did they rush the impeachment through in the first place?
• They want to allow Senate Democrats campaigning for their party's presidential nomination to be able to campaign rather than be stuck in Washington.
• They realized that they laid an egg and are getting cold feet about sending it over to the Senate where their inept incompetence can be highlighted over and over.
• They want to deny Trump an acquittal so unlike the two other presidents impeached by the House Trump will be impeached but not acquitted.

But whatever the motives one thing is clear, these actions demonstrate beyond any doubt that their oft repeated claim that they needed to rush this impeachment through posthaste because Trump is such an existential threat, an immediate, clear and present danger that he urgently needed to be impeached ASAP, was nothing but yet another lie.

Remember, the need to rush this through was the excuse they offered for not going to the courts to adjudicate whether Trump's claims of Executive Privilege to their subpoena had any merit. It was just too durn important to wait for that.

But now we see that there is no rush, or else they would be sending the articles of impeachment would have been sent to the Senate as quickly as is possible. It was all a lie.

Had they waited to go through the courts it could have gone on for years, certainly beyond the 2020 election which was the White House plan. Pelosi knows Trumps history so she didn't fall for that trap.

[Cow Poke]

Where does it say that in the Constitution?

You're not actually expecting a real answer to that, are you?

[Cow Poke]

Had they waited to go through the courts it could have gone on for years, certainly beyond the 2020 election which was the White House plan. Pelosi knows Trumps history so she didn't fall for that trap.

Latest talking points, Jim? Or, maybe she called you and told you that.

[JimL]

Where does it say that in the Constitution?

They don't have to appear in the Constitution, they are Congressional rules of impeachment. The House names impeachment managers and the manager then presents the Articles to the Senate at which point the trial can begin.

[JimL]

First of all, who is "we"?

All those of us who know your hope is for a kangaroo court that aquits your dear leader because you fear that a fair trial will expose him for the lawless autocrat that he is and convict him.

Second - You're doing that thing again where you have nothing to say, so you're just showing what a classless jerk you can be.

Mirror, mirror, CP.

[Mountain Man]

They don't have to appear in the Constitution, they are Congressional rules of impeachment. The House names impeachment managers and the manager then presents the Articles to the Senate at which point the trial can begin.

So what I said was accurate, that "there's nothing in the Constitution that says that the Senate can't take immediate action once the House has voted to impeach regardless of whether or not the articles have been formally delivered." The House makes the rules for impeachment, and the Senate makes the rules for the trial. As Jay Sekulow said recently, now that the House has done their part, the Senate can declare the trial in session and invite the House to present its case. If nobody shows up with impeachment articles in hand, then dismiss the charges. Pelosi has zero leverage here.