ian hacktorp Posted December 20, 2019 #626 Share Posted December 20, 2019 3 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said: Please send me a link to the Constitution or where a precedent has been made that says that. The House impeaches, there is no time limit that's says when the house must send the impeachment documents to the Senate. While there is little that can be done using this type of process the President is impeached. Like i said I doubt he wants this hanging over his head during reelection. In addition I think they are doing it to look fir more problems that they can add to the impeachment documents. I don't agree with it but, the facts are the facts. Impeachment is a process, not a "vote". The Dems have failed to make the very first legal step in the process, which is to transmit their articles to the Senate. I doubt they ever will. The question of whether they can even make the claim that Trump was "impeached" under these bizarre circumstances is one the Supreme Court may end up deciding. Given the grave nature of their claim, I'm pretty sure the SC will tell them to deliver their articles or withdraw the claim. Either of those outcomes will only further humiliate the Dems. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted December 20, 2019 #627 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, Doug1029 said: Wall Street doesn't think this is going to make any difference. Doug I wonder what Wall Street will think of U. S. Steel closing its plants? Doug 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted December 20, 2019 #628 Share Posted December 20, 2019 I think this thread is making a strong case that nobody on it knows anything about US politics. Doug 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian hacktorp Posted December 20, 2019 #629 Share Posted December 20, 2019 25 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said: Please send me a link to the Constitution or where a precedent has been made that says that. You are asking for a precedent where one political party was so stupid and suicidal that they perpetrated a false impeachment hoax on a sitting president in full view of the increasingly skeptical and very pi$$ed-off public? Yeah, sorry...the Dems are breaking new ground here... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #630 Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said: Thanks I needed a laugh this morning, she is not just delaying things. She is not going to send it to the Senate, that way he is impeached, and it is going to suck having that hanging over his head through this reelection campaign. I think she is doing this to strengthen their case, and to look for more issues to add to it, all the way up to the end of the election process. No he isn't impeached. He's not impeached until the articles are delivered to the Senate. Everyone is saying this and will be shocked when they find out. And I don't think they can let this hang in the air until the election. That will really have people upset! You think everyone is going to play a big game with you? Don't make people have to go through all of this all over again. Edited December 20, 2019 by susieice 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #631 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said: Please send me a link to the Constitution or where a precedent has been made that says that. The House impeaches, there is no time limit that's says when the house must send the impeachment documents to the Senate. While there is little that can be done using this type of process the President is impeached. Like i said I doubt he wants this hanging over his head during reelection. In addition I think they are doing it to look fir more problems that they can add to the impeachment documents. I don't agree with it but, the facts are the facts. Go back a few pages. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skliss Posted December 20, 2019 #632 Share Posted December 20, 2019 14 hours ago, Doug1029 said: Trump's televised admission isn't enough? Not to mention his own "transcription" of his "prefect" letter? And the testimony of a bunch of witnesses? I'd hate to be your lawyer. Doug Obviously not or they would have been included...the people putting together the articles of impeachment are 90% or more lawyers...why didn't they do it? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #633 Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said: Please send me a link to the Constitution or where a precedent has been made that says that. The House impeaches, there is no time limit that's says when the house must send the impeachment documents to the Senate. While there is little that can be done using this type of process the President is impeached. Like i said I doubt he wants this hanging over his head during reelection. In addition I think they are doing it to look fir more problems that they can add to the impeachment documents. I don't agree with it but, the facts are the facts. There's no time limit but at some point the articles will be ruled null and void because they were never enacted. Why doesn't she just go to the Senate? She knew she had to do that from the beginning. The House doesn't control the Senate. They have no more vote. Only the Senators do. Edited December 20, 2019 by susieice 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExpandMyMind Posted December 20, 2019 #634 Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) 31 minutes ago, susieice said: Why doesn't she just go to the Senate? Because McConnel has outright stated that there won't be a fair trial and that he won't remain impartial (as have others, such as Graham), which is basically him admitting to breaking the oath he would have to take before he's even took it. I mean those are his actual words, 'I'm not an impartial juror'. Why would she trust an admittedly biased juror, who won't even allow witnesses to be called, to ensure a fair trial? And just to be clear, you actually believe that Trump's actions weren't worthy of Impeachment? You believe that forcing a foreign leader to help you win an election is hunky-dory? It's the precise act that that pretty much all of your founders feared and warned against. You also believe that stopping the House from carrying out its role as part of the checks and balances by ordering witnesses not to testify (which is basically the act of a dictator) is just fine? I'm genuinely curious as to how people can still defend Trump in this. It happened, they admitted to it and it's illegal and clearly impeachable. There is no ambiguity. It's not partisan in the slightest. In fact the only partisan part is the people who still try to defend his actions. Edited December 20, 2019 by ExpandMyMind 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted December 20, 2019 #635 Share Posted December 20, 2019 44 minutes ago, skliss said: Obviously not or they would have been included...the people putting together the articles of impeachment are 90% or more lawyers...why didn't they do it? They are part of the supporting documentation for the Abuse of Authority article. Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz_Light_Year Posted December 20, 2019 #636 Share Posted December 20, 2019 25 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said: Because McConnel has outright stated that there won't be a fair trial and that he won't remain impartial (as have others, such as Graham), which is basically him admitting to breaking the oath he would have to take before he's even took it. I mean those are his actual words, 'I'm not an impartial juror'. Why would she trust an admittedly biased juror, who won't even allow witnesses to be called, to ensure a fair trial? And just to be clear, you actually believe that Trump's actions weren't worthy of Impeachment? You believe that forcing a foreign leader to help you win an election is hunky-dory? It's the precise act that that pretty much all of your founders feared and warned against. You also believe that stopping the House from carrying out its role as part of the checks and balances by ordering witnesses not to testify (which is basically the act of a dictator) is just fine? I'm genuinely curious as to how people can still defend Trump in this. It happened, they admitted to it and it's illegal and clearly impeachable. There is no ambiguity. It's not partisan in the slightest. In fact the only partisan part is the people who still try to defend his actions. Why does the Senate have to call any witnesses? Shouldn't the trial be based on the merits of the House investigation? After all the House said that they had all the evidence needed to invoke an impeachment. If witnesses need to be called then call the same witnesses that testified in the House investigation and cross examine their House testimonies for any first hand knowledge of Trump's alleged wrong doing. When first hand knowledge is lacking then their testimonies should be classified as heresy rendered irrelevant. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #637 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said: Why does the Senate have to call any witnesses? Shouldn't the trial be based on the merits of the House investigation? After all the House said that they had all the evidence needed to invoke an impeachment. If witnesses need to be called then call the same witnesses that testified in the House investigation and cross examine their House testimonies for any first hand knowledge of Trump's alleged wrong doing. When first hand knowledge is lacking then their testimonies should be classified as heresy rendered irrelevant. The Republicans can also call any witnesses they want to. They can have their lawyers present. The House doesn't control the Senate trial. They've done their part, if they deliver the articles of impeachment. This isn't a game. They've chosen to bring serious charges against someone. They knew it would have to go to the Senate. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted December 20, 2019 #638 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said: Why does the Senate have to call any witnesses? Shouldn't the trial be based on the merits of the House investigation? After all the House said that they had all the evidence needed to invoke an impeachment. If witnesses need to be called then call the same witnesses that testified in the House investigation and cross examine their House testimonies for any first hand knowledge of Trump's alleged wrong doing. When first hand knowledge is lacking then their testimonies should be classified as heresy rendered irrelevant. House= Investigators Senate=Trial You call witnesses for the trial to give testimony to jurors- first hand testimony, defendants right to address accusers at trial, etc. You call witness to the investigators to figure out what happened. Imagine if you went to trial for drug dealing. No witnesses are called and the judge says, "All the witnesses testified to the investigators. We don't need them." Do you think that is Constitutional for you? Would it be for Trump if he happens to get removed by the Senate with no witnesses? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #639 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, hacktorp said: You are asking for a precedent where one political party was so stupid and suicidal that they perpetrated a false impeachment hoax on a sitting president in full view of the increasingly skeptical and very pi$$ed-off public? Yeah, sorry...the Dems are breaking new ground here... They are breaking new ground, and while it is wrong it certainly shows that our political system is broken. There has never been another time in the history of America where it has been so broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #640 Share Posted December 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said: They are breaking new ground, and while it is wrong it certainly shows that our political system is broken. There has never been another time in the history of America where it has been so broken. The process of impeachment is nothing new and it's worked for almost 300 years. It's the corruption that's coming into play now. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #641 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 hours ago, hacktorp said: Impeachment is a process, not a "vote". The Dems have failed to make the very first legal step in the process, which is to transmit their articles to the Senate. I doubt they ever will. The question of whether they can even make the claim that Trump was "impeached" under these bizarre circumstances is one the Supreme Court may end up deciding. Given the grave nature of their claim, I'm pretty sure the SC will tell them to deliver their articles or withdraw the claim. Either of those outcomes will only further humiliate the Dems. I agree and in many posts above I have said the same thing. I think this will end up in the Supreme Court, but by the time this is decided and a new Precedent is set, this will have hung over President Trump through the 2020 Presidential campaign. Trump is already lossing his mind over this, now I don't support a Trump or at this any Democrat, however if the President doesn't relax I think he may have serious problems with his health. There are those on this forum calling him the Teflon Don, well that's a poor description comparing him to a Criminal But these are own followers doing it, you may have seen some of the posts. Well currently he is coming apart at the seams, so I think his Teflon has cracked. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #642 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Manwon Lender said: I agree and in many posts above I have said the same thing. I think this will end up in the Supreme Court, but by the time this is decided and a new Precedent is set, this will have hung over President Trump through the 2020 Presidential campaign. Trump is already lossing his mind over this, now I don't support a Trump or at this any Democrat, however if the President doesn't relax I think he may have serious problems with his health. There are those on this forum calling him the Teflon Don, well that's a poor description comparing him to a Criminal But these are own followers doing it, you may have seen some of the posts. Well currently he is coming apart at the seams, so I think his Teflon has cracked. Peace. I don't think he's as upset as you think he is for the reasons you say. He's upset with McConnell because he wants a trial. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #643 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Just now, susieice said: The process of impeachment is nothing new and it's worked for almost 300 years. It's the corruption that's coming into play now. While I agree with you that it is not new, it has only been done or attempted 3 times in the history of this country. So with that said the Constitution doesn't cover this situation and there is no Precedent that outlines exactly how it should be done. I think this going to be very a very interesting New Year. I don't know about you but. I am stocking up on popcorn, because this is going to be interesting to watch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #644 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Just now, Manwon Lender said: While I agree with you that it is not new, it has only been done or attempted 3 times in the history of this country. So with that said the Constitution doesn't cover this situation and there is no Precedent that outlines exactly how it should be done. I think this going to be very a very interesting New Year. I don't know about you but. I am stocking up on popcorn, because this is going to be interesting to watch. Only presidential. There have been judges who were under impeachment. I'm not sure about members of congress, but they can be impeached too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #645 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 minute ago, susieice said: I don't think he's as upset as you think he is for the reasons you say. He's upset with McConnell because he wants a trial. No, I have to disagree with you on this. He is upset because he is use to having everything his way. This situation caught him and the Republican Party off guard. No one imagined this would happen, Because it's never been before, and he doesn't what to do or how to change it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #646 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Here you go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States Formal federal impeachment investigations and results See also: U.S. presidential impeachment The House of Representatives has initiated impeachment proceedings 62 times since 1789.[citation needed] The House has impeached 20 federal officers. Of these: 15 were federal judges: thirteen district court judges, one court of appeals judge (who also sat on the Commerce Court), and one Supreme Court Associate Justice. three were Presidents: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were later acquitted by the Senate,[38] and Donald Trump, who is awaiting trial.[39] one was a Cabinet secretary one was a U.S. Senator. Of the 20 impeachments by the House, two cases did not come to trial because the individuals had left office, seven were acquitted, and eight officials were convicted, all of whom were judges.[40][41] One, former judge Alcee Hastings, was elected as a member of the United States House of Representatives after being removed from office. Additionally, an impeachment process against Richard Nixon was commenced, but not completed, as he resigned from office before the full House voted on the articles of impeachment.[35] To date, no president or vice president has been removed from office by impeachment and conviction. The following table lists federal officials for whom impeachment proceedings were instituted and referred to a committee of the House of Representatives. Numberedlines of the table reflect officials impeached by a majority vote of the House. Unnumbered lines are those officials for whom an impeachment proceeding was formally instituted, but ended when (a) the Committee did not vote to recommend impeachment, (b) the Committee recommended impeachment but the vote in the full House failed, or (c) the official resigned or died before the full House vote. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #647 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Just now, Manwon Lender said: No, I have to disagree with you on this. He is upset because he is use to having everything his way. This situation caught him and the Republican Party off guard. No one imagined this would happen, Because it's never been before, and he doesn't what to do or how to change it. I have to disagree also. This was no surprise to anyone. The house has been talking about it almost since the last election. The American people are not at all surprised by this unless they really pay no attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted December 20, 2019 #648 Share Posted December 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said: there is no Precedent that outlines exactly how it should be done. I just noticed this. There are precise guidelines as to how exactly it should be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #649 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, susieice said: Go back a few pages. That doesn't apply, there is nothing The Senate can do, this is going to have to go to the Supreme Court and that can take a great deal of time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper 6 Posted December 20, 2019 #650 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, susieice said: I just noticed this. There are precise guidelines as to how exactly it should be done. Well please send me a link that says they can't do what they are doing, I will bet you can't find one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now