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

Oh, sorry. You wanted to "see" a partisan Dem who has already decided that Trump should be out. Here's what "one" looks like.

 

In the name of impartiality, any Dem senator running for President should recuse themselves from any impeachment-related votes in the Senate.

 

Can and did... move on already...

 

I wanted to see a quote... I know what she looks like, ***********

I guess that answers that however.

 

You know this is not true.
Disagree? Cite the post and quote the text.

 

~ Yes indeed we certainly get a lot of "facade" in politics. They say Capitol Hill is "the greatest show on earth". I just wish everyone was better looking ...

 

She doesn't look very Native American Indian. Not even 1/1024. Maybe it's the make up.

 

Yeah, I don't usually make stuff up. Here is Warren (agreeing with most Republicans) that there is plenty of evidence on the table to make a 'yes' or 'no' decision.

All they need to do is try the articles of impeachment and take a vote.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/01/05/sotu-warren-convict.cnn

 

Post 98... addressed right to you... It makes things go faster if you read the responses to your posts...

On Trump being impeached?? That's common knowledge where I live (USA), but in case it hasn't filtered down

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/18/trump-has-been-impeached-by-the-house-heres-what-happens-next.html

 

Lizzie is probably wrong to say that, but she didn't say she was going to be an impartial juror...

And she's talking primarily about Article 2 in that interview... That's a clear conviction because there is no political defense possible.

 

It makes things go faster if you read the responses to your posts...
... to wit, post #100, my response, addressed right to you:

It takes 51 votes to change the rules, which the senate can do any time it chooses.
Thus:
Once the President is impeached, the Senate, who must try all impeachments, can start the trial any time it chooses.
The house cannot in any way limit the Senate in doing so.

And so:
- If Trump has been impeached, the Senate can hold a trial whenever it wants.
- If the Senate cannot hold a trial, then Trump has not been impeached.
Pick one.

 

LOL, we don need no stinkin evidence. The dems mantra.

 

Self incrimination is not dozen of aids and staff members, self incrimination is trump himself.

 

You mean impeaching Trump for following the Constitution? The dems were too lazy to follow through with the process which makes article 2 a joke.

 

Lizzie is running for President - her involvement in an impeachment trial is a conflict of interest, and she should recuse herself.
Bernie, too.

Article II 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 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/

 

Impeachment has an extremely low bar — which is why is needs only 1/2 of members. It is where the articles are transmitted from that have been found to need an investigation and a trial.
Removal has an extremely high bar — which is why is needs 2/3 of members. It is a trial, with a judge and a jury.

 

So, yes, because they felt like it.

 

Except for...all the evidence that you continue to ignore (and will continue to ignore).

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your next response (i'm gonna go with either 'dem circus', or perhaps 'nothingburger'? Or are we just going to go with the standard 'heresay' bs?)

 

If there's enough evidence to convict, why are the Democrats whining about the need for more witnesses?

 

Actually the charges HAVE been filed and agreed upon. The HoR held the vote and impeached Trump. That is a part of Congressional Record. And filing a motion to dismiss happens all the time in courts when a DA does not pursue the charges in a timely manner. Since every Democrat that I have seen admits that the Senate is a "trial" then the motion to dismiss for failure to charge (ie: bring it before the court: IE: Senate) would be a valid motion. I doubt that it will pass, but it is a valid motion.

And before anyone tries to make a claim about "I thought Trumpers didn't believe that Trump was actually impeached?!?!" or some variation thereof....He HAS been impeached and I for one have never said otherwise. So that type of comment won't work with me. So skip it.

 

Because they went from 'we have more then a reasonable belief that the POTUS did these things based on testimony from those in the know' to 'We have unredacted emails that categorically show the POTUS did this thing'.

The first will get you through a reasonable and unbiased trial and Jury. The Reps have already stated that this is not a reasonable trial with an unbiased Jury, but a completely one sided affair with the supposed 'unbiased Jury' saying out loud that they are coordinating with the defense. The second part is that which would overcome such a situation if forced onto the public record and to be responded to under oath by witnesses.

The House was the Grand Jury, the senate is the actual trial. If you've ever watched an Episode of Law and Order, then you'd realize why the GJ isn't the Trial, and why the Trial is an important step to evaluate and either credit or discredit the Evidence so as to find guilt or innocence.

 

So, you agree - the house impeached trump without -proof- he committed the acts he is accused of.
Thank you.

You say that like the Senate Democrats are unbiased...

Impeachment is a political, not a legal, process - any attempted analogy to a legal process fails on that point.

 

Sorry, your ‘belief’ in the dem clown show narrative is not evidence of proof.

 

Read yours... changes nothing... it's a hypothetical...

If the Senate changes the rules, then we can readdress..

As of today, in reality-land, the Senate cannot start the trial

If Dems had all 100 Senate seats, Trump would already have been removed.

See? Easy Peasy...

 

So wrong... but to quote my man, Steve Perry, Don't Stop Believin'