GOP Senator Puts Nancy Pelosi on Notice; No Articles by Monday, He Will Introduce Measure to Dismiss

I have read the Senate has the votes.

 

~ Bottom line : Nancy P screwed up and does not know what to do next - or why. She sold out to the AOC squad and is now just a silly spectacle. She should save face by stepping down and announce her entrance for 2020 presidential candidate .

 

So you can prove Trump prevented those aids and staff members, presumably at gunpoint, no to comply with subpoena?

 

Projection. The dem clown show withdrew their own subpoenas’s. The courts decide if the congress can breech the separation of powers. I guess only those not familiar with the Constitution believes what you believe.

 

Only if you believe their publicly made statements... which I know you guys refuse to do if you don't like what they say...

 

"Just a city boy, born and raised with 200K a year from dad beginning at age of 3, in South Queens"
"He took the midnight train to Impeachment-ville"

 

LOL, when faced with the truth, your absurdity comes out.

 

Kinda like "We have to pass the bill to see what's in it "?

I honestly don't understand making such a case. It just proves how fake this exercise is.

 

They have been ordered to, are you really saying they haven’t been?
If I show evidence of this will you denounce trump and agree he is hiding something? I don’t want to waste my time otherwise — but it does exist

 

It’s how impeachment works and has always worked.

 

The 2nd article of impeachment is invalid - as the executive branch has no legal duty to answer a congressional subpoena until compelled to by a court, the refusal by the executive branch to address said subpoenas, absent said judicial compulsion, cannot be an obstruction of congress.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...i-contempt-of-congress-invalid-charge.565829/

 

Here is the verbiage of the Resolution to add a rule that if Articles are not filed with the Senate 25 days after the impeachment vote, any Senator may call for a vote to dismiss the impeachment charges.


"I. Whensoever the Senate shall receive notice from the House of Representatives that managers are appointed on their part to conduct an impeachment against any person and are directed to carry articles of impeachment to the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate shall immediately inform the House of Representatives that the Senate is ready to receive the managers for the purpose of exhibiting such articles of impeachment, agreeably to such notice.

If, following adoption of such articles, the House of Representatives does not so notify the Senate or otherwise provide for such articles to be exhibited to the Senate within 25 calendar days from the date of adoption of such articles, as recorded in the Journal of the House of Representatives, such articles shall be deemed exhibited before the Senate and it shall be in order for any Senator to offer a motion to dismiss such articles with prejudice for failure by the House of Representatives to prosecute such articles. Such motion shall be adopted by an affirmative vote of a majority of the Senators, duly chosen and sworn, without debate by the yeas and nays, which shall be entered on the record.".

Sponsor: Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas);
Co-Sponsors: Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), David Perdue (R-Ga.), and Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)

 

I never said that so please don't put words in my mouth. My post was stating that while it's good to have a lot of legitimate indirect evidence, but it's best to have direct evidence.

Again with the words in my mouth. best to just use what I say vs your interpretation of what I'm saying. They are biased, but in this instance, they are right.

Not at all. The process has no equivalent so the closest approximation is necessary. This has been a perfectly fine thing to do up until it was used on Trump.

Never claimed it was. What is it with that? Use the words I say, vs your interpretation of them. The evidence that has been put forward is evidence of proof. You just choose to ignore it. (also, 10 points to Slytherin for 'Dem Clown Show')

 

So on Monday, 1/13/20, the impeachment will be dismissed with prejudice?

Sweet.

 

The House of Representatives disagrees

 

Ah. The house had no direct evidence - and impeached anyway. Got it.

And because you think they are right, you are OK that they are biased. Got it.

Invalid analogy is invalid, regardless of how "close" you think it is.

 

Tough, the Senate has the SOLE power to run an impeachment trial, according to the Constitution.

 

The Democrats in the house can also vote that the sun rises in the west and sets in the east - it doesn't change the fact their charge is invalid, for the reasons I gave and you failed to address.

 

No. The Hawley Resolution was submitted yesterday. Resolutions either get referred to a committee or placed directly on the Senate calendar for a vote. I expect that McConnell decides which ones make the calendar and what priority.

 

Executive privilege isn't hiding and has been used repeatedly in the modern era. Without it a President couldn't even have real conversations about anything.

 

More importantly - executive privilege isn't an impeachable offense.

 

The only one that I was around for was Clinton's.

It didn't work that way then. There were actual known and proven crimes before it went to the Senate. They didn't impeach him to look for evidence.

 

Because the Republicans weren't driven by blind, hyper-partisan bigotry and hatred.

 

doesn't matter what her voters want she is too dangerous we have to remove her from office against her voters will

 

Sorry, hearsay and presumption are not evidence. You must not have watched all the testimony. Not one witness witnessed anything.