GOP Leadership Memo Suggests Senate Cannot Block Trial If House Votes To Impeach Trump

[Crepitus]

There will be no vote to impeach though, so this is just some fairy tale to keep you distracted.


So are ya?

Too soon to know how all the evidence will influence minds. Public perception is critical.

Already shifting towards impeachment in just a couple of days.

A trial you dumbass.

The senate will never convict him.

But if they did, President Pence will be appointing at least 2 justices to the s.c.

I've been saying Moscow Mitch's meatpuppets won't convict him a along dipshit.

I know you're a tRumpling, but at least try to keep up.

 

[hadit]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

By the same token, will Senate democrats do their jobs if the evidence is not sufficient and vote to acquit? If they vote to convict, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

 

[Auld Phart]

There will be no vote to impeach though, so this is just some fairy tale to keep you distracted.


So are ya?

Too soon to know how all the evidence will influence minds. Public perception is critical.

Already shifting towards impeachment in just a couple of days.

A trial you dumbass.

The senate will never convict him.

But if they did, President Pence will be appointing at least 2 justices to the s.c.

I've been saying Moscow Mitch's meatpuppets won't convict him a along dipshit.

I know you're a tRumpling, but at least try to keep up.

I've been saying Moscow Mitch's meatpuppets won't convict him a along dipshit.

Just like the democratic 'meatpuppets' 20 years ago didn't convict Clinton.

 

[hadit]

Pelosi won't make the same mistakes Mueller did with his somewhat intimidating 448-page War and Peace novel. That's why she will likely mainly focus on Ukraine. Speaker Pelosi knows she must educate the public.

What? Don't be silly, Lakhota...

Mueller wasn't supposed to become a tool, a storyteller on behalf of the Democratic efforts to impeach - he was supposed soberly to present his findings of fact and law. It is most assuredly not Mueller's fault that both Democrats and the press were too lame-brained to sit down and create, consistent with Mueller's findings, a more accessible narrative to inform the electorate, and to demonstrate to them the egregiousness of Trump's conduct. That failure - a humiliating one - is the main reason why Mueller's valid effort went nowhere in terms of swaying public opinion, and why they lost the PR war over the Trump campaign's collusion with Putin's election meddling.

But it's sure good to hear "Speaker Pelosi knows she must educate the public." If only she had known this in the weeks and months after the release of the Mueller report.

Too bad the whistleblower didn't write the Mueller report.

Admitting that the report wasn't supposed to be serious, but rather a fiction piece, to be written by an actor?

 

[Nosmo King]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional respon?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

How would acquittal amount to the Senate putting politics before their constitutional responsibilities? Because you have already found the POTUS guilty? Is it not possible they would find the evidence to not amount to high crimes and misdemeanors?

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

Sure sure sure

ad hominems--the last resort of the lazy Leftist. BOORRRING

Does the rule of law apply to Trump? Is he an infallible monarch working for his own personal gain, or does extorting campaign dirt really in the best interest of the American people? Is he a stable genius, or is he making up his own rules without accountability?

 

[Nosmo King]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional respon?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

How would acquittal amount to the Senate putting politics before their constitutional responsibilities? Because you have already found the POTUS guilty? Is it not possible they would find the evidence to not amount to high crimes and misdemeanors?

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

So you suggest the party of open borders, gun-confiscation, abortion, socialism, and impeachment-in-lieu-of-election-victories is a viable option?
And you believe YOU can judge "the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty?"

Keep your sanctimony in your pocket or better yet, shove it where the sun don't shine.

It's time to focus on the problem at hand and not engage in moral relativism. The "whataboutism" defense cannot exonerate Trump.

It's as if a murderer said in his defense, "Ted Bundy ate his victims! Why aren't you outraged about that?"

 

[bripat9643]

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles” of impeachment, states the memo.

The Republican leadership issued a memo Saturday clarifying that the Senate must take action if the House of Representatives approves articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The statement came in response to concerns that the Senate could simply refuse to hold a trial.

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles to the Senate,” stated the memo, which was obtained by HuffPost. “The rules of impeachment are clear on this point.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also said as much in a March interview with NPR: “If it [impeachment] were to happen, the Senate has no choice. If the House were to act, the Senate immediately goes into a trial.”

GOP Leadership Memo Suggests Senate Cannot Block Trial If House Votes To Impeach Trump

Good news! So, now we have that cleared up.

No they can't according to the law, if congress impeaches the senate has to hold a trial.

Nope. The Constitution doesn't say the Senate must hold a hearing. All it says is that the Senate has the power to try impeachments.

6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.​

 

[bripat9643]

How would acquittal amount to the Senate putting politics before their constitutional responsibilities? Because you have already found the POTUS guilty? Is it not possible they would find the evidence to not amount to high crimes and misdemeanors?

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

So you suggest the party of open borders, gun-confiscation, abortion, socialism, and impeachment-in-lieu-of-election-victories is a viable option?
And you believe YOU can judge "the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty?"

Keep your sanctimony in your pocket or better yet, shove it where the sun don't shine.

It's time to focus on the problem at hand and not engage in moral relativism. The "whataboutism" defense cannot exonerate Trump.

It's as if a murderer said in his defense, "Ted Bundy ate his victims! Why aren't you outraged about that?"

When someone uses the term "whataboutism" they are announcing that they are proud to be a hypocrite.

 

[Lakhota]

The House will impeach. Will the Senate convict?

 

[SAYIT]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

By the same token, will Senate democrats do their jobs if the evidence is not sufficient and vote to acquit? If they vote to convict, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

All the House Democrats these days are using the exact same language to address that issue. They all wrap themselves in our flag and declare their impeachment of the POTUS is not political but rather their constitutional duty. That is, they believe it their duty to impeach because 'Trump is a poopyhead.'

Capiche?

 

[Nosmo King]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

By the same token, will Senate democrats do their jobs if the evidence is not sufficient and vote to acquit? If they vote to convict, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

All the House Democrats these days are using the exact same language to address that issue. They all wrap themselves in our flag and declare their impeachment of the POTUS is not political but rather their constitutional duty. That is, they believe it their duty to impeach because 'Trump is a poopyhead.'

Capiche?

Nobody, not even Trump, can be impeached for comportment.

He must be impeached based on evidence and criminality.

Why is your thinking somcompartmentalized?

 

[SAYIT]

How would acquittal amount to the Senate putting politics before their constitutional responsibilities? Because you have already found the POTUS guilty? Is it not possible they would find the evidence to not amount to high crimes and misdemeanors?

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

Sure sure sure

ad hominems--the last resort of the lazy Leftist. BOORRRING

Does the rule of law apply to Trump? Is he an infallible monarch working for his own personal gain, or does extorting campaign dirt really in the best interest of the American people? Is he a stable genius, or is he making up his own rules without accountability?

Of course, Trump did not extort campaign dirt and he enjoys the same due process rights and presumption of innocence as any other American. Somehow those details invariably escape your highly predictable rush to guilty judgement.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles” of impeachment, states the memo.

The Republican leadership issued a memo Saturday clarifying that the Senate must take action if the House of Representatives approves articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The statement came in response to concerns that the Senate could simply refuse to hold a trial.

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles to the Senate,” stated the memo, which was obtained by HuffPost. “The rules of impeachment are clear on this point.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also said as much in a March interview with NPR: “If it [impeachment] were to happen, the Senate has no choice. If the House were to act, the Senate immediately goes into a trial.”

McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing.

GOP Leadership Memo Suggests Senate Cannot Block Trial If House Votes To Impeach Trump

Sounds good - but apparently "McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing." I don't trust any of them!

Mitch will call for a vote to have a trail and the senate should reject the witch hunt to save tax payers dollars.
But I also wouldn't count on an impeachment making it through congress, quite a few democrats in red states

 

[hadit]

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

Sure sure sure

ad hominems--the last resort of the lazy Leftist. BOORRRING

Does the rule of law apply to Trump? Is he an infallible monarch working for his own personal gain, or does extorting campaign dirt really in the best interest of the American people? Is he a stable genius, or is he making up his own rules without accountability?

Of course, Trump did not extort campaign dirt and he enjoys the same due process rights and presumption of innocence as any other American. Somehow those details invariably escape your highly predictable rush to guilty judgement.

The haters have it backwards. They've determined guilt and now are looking for evidence to support it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I could see Moscow Mitch just ignoring it and not allowing a vote

From the OP:

McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing.

When there is no wrongdoing that's when you acquit

 

[SAYIT]

How would acquittal amount to the Senate putting politics before their constitutional responsibilities? Because you have already found the POTUS guilty? Is it not possible they would find the evidence to not amount to high crimes and misdemeanors?

Trump has provided the smoking gun with the transcript or memo as well as the whistleblowers complaint. Once his taxes and emoluments clause violations come to light, how could anyone merely dismiss the evidence? The articles of impeachment will be rock solid and air tight, to everyone but the most rabid Trump supporter.

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

So you suggest the party of open borders, gun-confiscation, abortion, socialism, and impeachment-in-lieu-of-election-victories is a viable option?
And you believe YOU can judge "the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty?"

Keep your sanctimony in your pocket or better yet, shove it where the sun don't shine.

It's time to focus on the problem at hand and not engage in moral relativism. The "whataboutism" defense cannot exonerate Trump.

It's as if a murderer said in his defense, "Ted Bundy ate his victims! Why aren't you outraged about that?"

The problems at hand are clearly Hysterical House Dems who see their party's 2020 hopes slipping away, a MSM desperately in need of viewers, readers, and clicks to improve their sliding ad rev situations, and unhinged leftards whose butts still hurt nearly 3 full years after Trump publicly schlonged Shrillary.

It's one thing to lose an election you were certain would be a victory and quite another to be so petulant, bitter, and enraged that you hope for this country to crash & burn.

Bill Maher doesn't even try to hide his disdain & disloyalty. Like many on the left he doesn't care who gets hurt as long as his mindless hatred is served:

Liberal Media Scream: Bill Maher cheers economic collapse if it dooms Trump
“I’ve been hoping for a recession — people hate me for it — but it would get rid of Trump, so you shouldn’t hate me for it.”
To which, Barro noted: “Recessions are really bad. People lose their jobs and their homes.”
Maher doubled down: “I know. It’s worth it.”

Traitors … every stinkin' one of 'em.

 

[SAYIT]

Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is not removal from office.

A senate trial is required for removal, once the evidence shows irrefutable proof of the charges.

Will Senate Republicans take their responsibility seriously? Will they hold their oaths sacred?

If they acquit, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

Moscow Mitch McConnell! Will you write your own chapter of Profiles of Courage, or will you continue to be a toady for a politically dead man walking?

By the same token, will Senate democrats do their jobs if the evidence is not sufficient and vote to acquit? If they vote to convict, will they put politics before their constitutional responsibilities?

All the House Democrats these days are using the exact same language to address that issue. They all wrap themselves in our flag and declare their impeachment of the POTUS is not political but rather their constitutional duty. That is, they believe it their duty to impeach because 'Trump is a poopyhead.'

Capiche?

Nobody, not even Trump, can be impeached for comportment.

He must be impeached based on evidence and criminality.

Why is your thinking somcompartmentalized?

That you couldn't see the sarcasm dripping from my words says all one need know about your mental and emotional state. You clearly require way more therapy and neither impeachment nor the 2020 general election are gonna provide you with any relief. I suggest you stock up on tissues and Valium ... there will likely be shortages of both.


DNC Chief: ‘Our nominee won't stand a chance against Trump’

 

[SAYIT]

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles” of impeachment, states the memo.

The Republican leadership issued a memo Saturday clarifying that the Senate must take action if the House of Representatives approves articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The statement came in response to concerns that the Senate could simply refuse to hold a trial.

“There is no way we could somehow bar the doors and prevent the managers from presenting the articles to the Senate,” stated the memo, which was obtained by HuffPost. “The rules of impeachment are clear on this point.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also said as much in a March interview with NPR: “If it [impeachment] were to happen, the Senate has no choice. If the House were to act, the Senate immediately goes into a trial.”

McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing.

GOP Leadership Memo Suggests Senate Cannot Block Trial If House Votes To Impeach Trump

Sounds good - but apparently "McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing." I don't trust any of them!

Mitch will call for a vote to have a trail and the senate should reject the witch hunt to save tax payers dollars.
But I also wouldn't count on an impeachment making it through congress, quite a few democrats in red states

And despite all the sudden House Dem's recognition of our constitution, the impeachment process - as conducted by our majority Dem House - is a strictly political one. It is the Senate which actually tries the case enumerated by the articles. They conveniently forget the constitution specifically includes due process and presumption of innocence for all Americans.

The Dem's would have us believe the Senate's failure to convict would cost the Repubs votes when actually it is the House Dem's hysteria that will lose them everything next year.

Centrist Democrats urge caution over impeachment inquiry - 9/24/19
"I don't believe it's good for the country. I don't think it's good for us as it relates to our international affairs and makes us look weaker," said freshman Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D-N.J.), who represents a district Trump won by 4.6 points in 2016.

"I don't think it's good that the cost is involved with all this. So there are really and truly a lot of negatives. It also splits the country apart," said Drew, adding he believes there are a number of factors the party should take into consideration before moving forward.

 

[SAYIT]

Right. IOW "trump won and it hurt my feelings and we will use ANYthing, ANYthing to bring him down"

Like we can't see through that hahahahahahah

Your argument is one made by those who do not understand the difference between right and wrong, ethical and crooked, clean and dirty.

Your blind obedience to Trump for winning the election and restoring a "Repubican" to the White House has erased any real love for the constitution you may have once had.

Sure sure sure

ad hominems--the last resort of the lazy Leftist. BOORRRING

Does the rule of law apply to Trump? Is he an infallible monarch working for his own personal gain, or does extorting campaign dirt really in the best interest of the American people? Is he a stable genius, or is he making up his own rules without accountability?

Of course, Trump did not extort campaign dirt and he enjoys the same due process rights and presumption of innocence as any other American. Somehow those details invariably escape your highly predictable rush to guilty judgement.

The haters have it backwards. They've determined guilt and now are looking for evidence to support it.

That has been the case for nearly 3 full years. They have the "perp" and will dig for a crime until we vote the suckers out of office next year which, BTW, is how our democracy is supposed to work.

 

[SAYIT]

From the OP: McConnell could call a vote on a motion to dismiss, which would effectively amount to a vote to acquit Trump of wrongdoing.

When there is no wrongdoing that's when you acquit.

Indeed, and on the grounds that the articles would be frivolous, baseless, and an obvious abuse of congress's authority.

When there is no crime acquittal is unnecessary.