flyangler

Pelosi and House Dems to Hold Articles of Impeachment Hostage

Rate this topic

86 posts in this topic

So how does this play out? Pelosi and her henchmen are hinting that they will hold off passing the articles to the Senate as they seek more evidence. What does this mean?
 

Will the House Dems try to go to court to enforce subpoenas? Are they less concerned about an adverse judge decision now that Trump has been impeached?  
 

Radical Leftie writing at the DailyKos, and yes, he did start that article with "Because": 


 

8B2F9FEA-E359-4433-A1D0-B7F8465DE4EB.jpeg.4855af7222fe7565824516e26b6af75d.jpeg

 

Because Sen. Mitch McConnell and his allies have been blunt in their public announcements that they will dispense with a Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump "quickly" and without testimony, there have been increasing calls for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to thwart Republican plans to "fix" Trump's impeachment by delaying the official delivery of the House-approved Articles of Impeachment, putting off that trial while the House continues to gather the evidence that Sen. Moscow has already promised his Senate wouldn't be going after.

 

 

That suggestion is apparently now being taken seriously, by House leadership: House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said today that "it's a good idea, and we need to talk about it."

 

As Politico points out, there is no requirement that House Democrats appoint impeachment managers on any particular timeline; delaying thateffectively delays the Senate trial as long as House leadership wants. Most significantly, Rep. Earl Blumenauer told Politico that Speaker Pelosi "indicated she was interested and considering" the delay.

 

The move would prevent the currently telegraphed plan by McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and other Trump-loyal Republican senators to immediately proclaim Trump's innocence, sans-evidence, and demand the nation move on. Thwarting that itself-corrupt move now seems a necessity; it would allow the House to build on the collected evidence before a Senate trial rather than after, forcing the Senate to eventually confront that evidence regardless of current Senate and White House plans.

 

In particular, it is almost certain that top Trump officials currently hiding behind fraudulent "absolute immunity" claims will at some point be compelled by the courts to appear before Congress; delaying the Senate trial might also light a hotter fire under appeals courts and the Supreme Court itself to resolve those claims with appropriate urgency.

Edited by tomkaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they get to impeach, AND they get to prevent Senate dismissal of their idiocy.

 

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make noise?

 

If impeachment articles are voted up, and they are not then passed to the Senate, is the President actually really impeached?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 mins ago, hamlet said:

So they get to impeach, AND they get to prevent Senate dismissal of their idiocy.

 

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make noise?

 

If impeachment articles are voted up, and they are not then passed to the Senate, is the President actually really impeached?

So what is to stop Lindsey Graham from starting to hold hearings related to witnesses never heard from in the House? 
 

Nothing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny watching these clowns spend 6 hours saying "the evidence is indisputable", then they actually have the vote take place..and THEN cry they need to hear from more witnesses. 

Its a mental disorder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I also wonder whether this has anything to do with Pelosi's new gambit? 
 

COCAINE MITCH DON’T MESS AROUND:  McConnell fires back: Let’s adopt the 1999 rules — with the option for dismissal. “Remember when the Senate could come to a unanimous, bipartisan approach to rules governing an impeachment trial? Good times, good times. In fact, those were such good times that Mitch McConnell wants to bring them back. Rather than keep having his counterpart Chuck Schumer negotiate via MSNBC, the Senate Majority Leader announced that he’ll simply reinstate the rules package that governed Bill Clinton’s impeachment twenty years ago. By the way, that also includes a dismissal option.”


Plus: “It’s not just Schumer who will be stuck in a vise. Voters will likely see this re-use of previously unanimous rules as a reasonable and fair approach. Any Democrats who vote against this set of rules will have to explain why they suited Bill Clinton’s impeachment but aren’t sufficient for Donald Trump’s. The only substantial difference between them is that Clinton’s impeachment clearly established a statutory crime (perjury), while House Democrats have established nothing of the sort, and are relying solely on hearsay and conjecture for both articles of impeachment.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Embarrassing and shameful.

Idiotic behavior.

 

And the backdrop for it ALL

is this question... from Hillary

 

"do you promise here, now, they you WILL ACCEPT the outcome of this election??"

 

What total shameless and despicable hypocrites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Flybyme said:

I thought our National Security was at risk.

precisely... the Don is far too dangerous to "our democracy" to be allowed to remain in office.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "free and independent" press should also be reminding Pelosi of her (now seen as a lie) statement that impeachment was serious and could only go forward on a bi-partisan basis.

 

Oops.

 

I think she meant on a totally partisan political attack basis, it seems.

Mis-spoke.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.