Impeachment Bitch Says She Might Play More Games With the Constitution

[JoeMoma]

If Nancy doesn't send the Articles to the senate they are meaningless. The next congress can simply repeal them.

Would the next congress have to re-vote on them before sending them? In other words, isn't it defacto repealed if they sit on it until the next congress?

 

[sparky]

ignorant fuckheads

hater of the Constitution

Impeachment Bitch

the worst sonofabitches

~S~

 

[kyzr]

Nancy “Impeachment Bitch” Pelosi and the Democratic Party still want to play juvenile games with the Constitution and the free and fair electoral process that we have in the United States. Never seen a lower act than I just witnessed with impeachment vote. I’m a former Democrat. Unbelievable how low Democrats have become.
Pelosi suggests she may wait to send impeachment articles to Senate: 'We'll make a decision ... as we go along'

Its really unbelievable how low the republican's are going. Not unless they call witnesses, that tramp refused to allow in the House investigation.

The senate will vote on the same "evidence" that the House voted on. Unless Nancy doesn't send the articles over.

 

[kyzr]

If Nancy doesn't send the Articles to the senate they are meaningless. The next congress can simply repeal them.

Would the next congress have to re-vote on them before sending them? In other words, isn't it defacto repealed if they sit on it until the next congress?

I believe that's called a "pocket veto". If it doesn't pass in one session of congress it dies.
So Nancy has about 400 Bills that passed the House, but will die if Mitch or Trump don't both sign them.

 

[CWayne]

Nancy “Impeachment Bitch” Pelosi and the Democratic Party still want to play juvenile games with the Constitution and the free and fair electoral process that we have in the United States. Never seen a lower act than I just witnessed with impeachment vote. I’m a former Democrat. Unbelievable how low Democrats have become.
Pelosi suggests she may wait to send impeachment articles to Senate: 'We'll make a decision ... as we go along'

Let her wait. When she gets around to it, Mitch can just say, "No thanks, that was last year's business. We have real business to attend to." and then just do a Harry Reid and put it in the trash can.

 

[NoVote]

You’re a fake patriot. All who still support Trump and think he should be re-elected are fake patriots.

That is how you will be viewed by your descendants. That ship has sailed.

We know who the fakes are.

 

[Camp]

Kind of stupid for Republicans to boast and brag about already deciding on an acquittal pr even finding of innocence before hearing the case. If this were a court case they would be kicked off the jury and might even see some jail time.

 

[Lysistrata]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

I can assure you that Pelosi doesn't want a "fair" trial in the Senate. That would mean that many Democrats would be called to the stand, exposing their lies. Schiff would NOT want to testify, for example.

Which Democrats would have first-hand knowledge of trump & co.'s dealings with the Ukrainians or their refusal of subpoenas? What would they be lying about? Why would Schiff be called to testify? What about? He's not associated with either count against trump.

The people in trump's inner circle at the time of his offenses still have not testified under oath, and trump himself certainly has not. These are the people we need to hear from.

 

[kyzr]

Kind of stupid for Republicans to boast and brag about already deciding on an acquittal pr even finding of innocence before hearing the case. If this were a court case they would be kicked off the jury and might even see some jail time.

Kind of stupid to pass a partisan impeachment via an unfair process and expect the GOP senate to play along.

 

[Dekster]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

Well Mitch said he is working with the White House to make this as favourable as possible for them. Nancy should just sit on it until she gets a fair trial... No point sending it down to carpet bagger Mitch to say nothing to see and rubber stamp it closed...

Keeping it gives the Democrats options... Smart Nancy beats them again... If Trump won re-election and Dems get Senate then they could have it in Feb '21..

She is holding them at least until after the Senate takes up the bill to avoid the shutdown and to give herself a few days to select the managers. That is hardly a beat down. The house doesn't get to set the Senate rules. If she unnecessarily holds them to even attempt to dictate anything to the Senate, she and the dems will get smacked down. The Senate could just pass a rule that any article of impeachment must be sent within X number of days of the vote else they shall be deemed null and void and that would be that unless Nancy held the vote for impeachment yet again.

 

[Auld Phart]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

Why should they be any less partisan than the House?

 

[JusticeHammer]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

No, were upset that a bunch of pussy demoncraps still butthurt their hag Hillary didn't get elected manipulated a sham impeachment. You idiots are stupid.

 

[The Purge]

Her lips are moving.......

 

[JusticeHammer]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

I’m upset for my country because I am a patriotic American.

You’re a fake patriot. All who still support Trump and think he should be re-elected are fake patriots.

That is how you will be viewed by your descendants. That ship has sailed.

You commie dimwits are the fake Patriots, hell most of you idiots can't even hide it anymore.

 

[Camp]

Pelosi should reconvene the House Judicial Committee and subpoena the fact witnesses with a full vote of the House of Representatives, Let Supreme Court decide if the witnesses must testify or, not.
The onus will be on Republicans for any delay on sending the impeachment articles to the Senate.

 

[Auld Phart]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

Loaded question on a poll. You know nothing about this. Of course Americans believe in fairness. The Senate is under no obligation to even consider this motion by the “Impeachment Bitch” and the House after the con job they pulled with rules and procedures.

Yes. Yes they are. The senate is absolutely obligated to consider this motion.

If a handful of GOP senators decides to take their oath seriously, a real trial will ensue. You won’t enjoy that very much.

If a handful of GOP senators decides to take their oath seriously,

If a handful of House Democrats had taken their oath seriously, Trump wouldn't have been impeached

 

[candycorn]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

It does highlight the need to update the Constitution and add voice where it is silent. The loophole that someone squeaks through today is the same one someone else drives a truck through tomorrow. The Senate refusal to hold confirmation hearings is another example.

it all sucks

 

[candycorn]

Pelosi should reconvene the House Judicial Committee and subpoena the fact witnesses with a full vote of the House of Representatives, Let Supreme Court decide if the witnesses must testify or, not.

I agree. Just so we get an answer to the question. I think she’ll lose with this court but at least the next committee hearing will know their subpoena is meaningless

 

[LoneLaugher]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

It does highlight the need to update the Constitution and add voice where it is silent. The loophole that someone squeaks through today is the same one someone else drives a truck through tomorrow. The Senate refusal to hold confirmation hearings is another example.

it all sucks

Yes. McConnell, of all people, is upset at the “breaking of precedent” that he perceived took place in the house.

Absolute lack of self awareness.

 

[candycorn]

Awww. You’re upset because she’s got to put a check on the GOP led Senate because it’s leader and a bunch of his pals have already told us that they will not be impartial jurors, which the constitution requires.

The American people favor a fair trial in the Senate and want to hear from fact witnesses. It likely won’t happen that way, but an effort must be made nonetheless.

It does highlight the need to update the Constitution and add voice where it is silent. The loophole that someone squeaks through today is the same one someone else drives a truck through tomorrow. The Senate refusal to hold confirmation hearings is another example.

it all sucks

Yes. McConnell, of all people, is upset at the “breaking of precedent” that he perceived took place in the house.

Absolute lack of self awareness.

Harry Reid pocket vetoing all bills from the House is another example.

the point is to remove the ability of political appointees to derail the processes