Why does Speaker Pelosi need to know how McConnell will conduct the Senate impeachment trial?

[Jackson]

Just sit on the impeachment until Trump is done with his next four years.

 

[eagle7_31]

Anyone who says Speaker Pelosi has no role in how McConnell conducts the Senate impeachment trial doesn't understand how the system works. She has a major role - since her appointed managers will be presenting and prosecuting the case before the Senate.

She can appoint whomever she wants....the senate runs the trial not the House.

Did she ask Mitch what witness to call?

Pelosi has no say in the administration of the a trial in the senate.

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

 

[Lakhota]

Just sit on the impeachment until Trump is done with his next four years.

Possibly, but I seriously doubt that Trump* will make it past the election.

 

[WillowTree]

She thinks she is Queen of Congress and should be able to dictate how both houses operate.

She is a wanna be, will never be President.

 

[Lakhota]

Anyone who says Speaker Pelosi has no role in how McConnell conducts the Senate impeachment trial doesn't understand how the system works. She has a major role - since her appointed managers will be presenting and prosecuting the case before the Senate.

She can appoint whomever she wants....the senate runs the trial not the House.

Did she ask Mitch what witness to call?

Pelosi has no say in the administration of the a trial in the senate.

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

 

[eagle7_31]

She can appoint whomever she wants....the senate runs the trial not the House.

Did she ask Mitch what witness to call?

Pelosi has no say in the administration of the a trial in the senate.

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

 

[Lakhota]

Did she ask Mitch what witness to call?

Pelosi has no say in the administration of the a trial in the senate.

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".

Read the Articles of Impeachment Against President Trump

 

[JGalt]

Pelosi has no say in the administration of the a trial in the senate.

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".

There was no "bribery." Ukraine got their weapons and no investigation took place. Even so, many Presidents have placed stipulations on foreign aid.

 

[MAGAman]

The answer is very simple: Speaker Pelosi will need to appoint House managers with the appropriate skill-sets to serve as prosecutors to present evidence in the case before the Senate. That is another reason why she needs to know if witnesses will be allowed - and which witnesses. Different scenarios would require House managers/prosecutors with different skill-sets.

• Members of the House serve as “managers” in the Senate trial. Managers serve a similar role as prosecutors do in a criminal trial, they present evidence during the procedure.

How does impeachment work? Here is the step-by-step process

She doesn't. It's none of her business.

 

[eagle7_31]

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".

There was no "bribery." Ukraine got their weapons and no investigation took place.

Not to mention the one and only DIRECT witness said there was NO PRID OUO Pro. End of story.

 

[Lakhota]

Speaker Pelosi has a MAJOR role! Especially since McConnell and Graham said they are not impartial jurors.

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".

There was no "bribery." Ukraine got their weapons and no investigation took place. Even so, many Presidents have placed stipulations on foreign aid.

Only because Trump* got caught - thanks to the whistleblower. Anyway, that's irrelevant in the commission of a crime.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The answer is very simple: Speaker Pelosi will need to appoint House managers with the appropriate skill-sets to serve as prosecutors to present evidence in the case before the Senate. That is another reason why she needs to know if witnesses will be allowed - and which witnesses. Different scenarios would require House managers/prosecutors with different skill-sets.

• Members of the House serve as “managers” in the Senate trial. Managers serve a similar role as prosecutors do in a criminal trial, they present evidence during the procedure.

How does impeachment work? Here is the step-by-step process

She doesn't. She has no say in the Senate process.

 

[WillowTree]

The House has the Sole responsibility of impeachment. The Senate has the sole responsibility to try the impeached individual. Guess what? Pelosi don’t work in the Senate. If the dumbass can’t figure out her managers then perhaps she should not be speaker!

 

[eagle7_31]

Dream on genius. Once the House passes impeachment articles its in the hands of the senate. Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants as prosecutors, but that is the extent. And your BS about McConnell and Graham is funny particularly since the dems in 1998 were not impartial either. You left wing clowns wanted this....so eat it.

Blowjobs and election bribery/extortion are two completely different things.

What bribery?? Other than left wing wet dreams.

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".

There was no "bribery." Ukraine got their weapons and no investigation took place. Even so, many Presidents have placed stipulations on foreign aid.

Only because Trump* got caught - thanks to the whistleblower. Anyway, that's irrelevant in the commission of a crime.

Trump got caught at NOTHING. Left wing insanity non withstanding.

 

[Lakhota]

The answer is very simple: Speaker Pelosi will need to appoint House managers with the appropriate skill-sets to serve as prosecutors to present evidence in the case before the Senate. That is another reason why she needs to know if witnesses will be allowed - and which witnesses. Different scenarios would require House managers/prosecutors with different skill-sets.

• Members of the House serve as “managers” in the Senate trial. Managers serve a similar role as prosecutors do in a criminal trial, they present evidence during the procedure.

How does impeachment work? Here is the step-by-step process

She doesn't. She has no say in the Senate process.

Maybe not directly - but she has a lot of indirect say.

 

[MAGAman]

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".
Read the Articles of Impeachment Against President Trump

BS

The articles don't mention bribery.

Because no bribery took place.

That's why there was no evidence or testimony of bribery.

But you knew that before you lied.

 

[Lakhota]

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".
Read the Articles of Impeachment Against President Trump

BS

The articles don't mention bribery.

Because no bribery took place.

That's why there was no evidence or testimony of bribery.

But you knew that before you lied.

They used "Abuse of Power" to cover all Trump's* crimes.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The answer is very simple: Speaker Pelosi will need to appoint House managers with the appropriate skill-sets to serve as prosecutors to present evidence in the case before the Senate. That is another reason why she needs to know if witnesses will be allowed - and which witnesses. Different scenarios would require House managers/prosecutors with different skill-sets.

• Members of the House serve as “managers” in the Senate trial. Managers serve a similar role as prosecutors do in a criminal trial, they present evidence during the procedure.

How does impeachment work? Here is the step-by-step process

She doesn't. She has no say in the Senate process.

Maybe not directly - but she has a lot of indirect say.

Nope. No say whatsoever.

 

[Lakhota]

The answer is very simple: Speaker Pelosi will need to appoint House managers with the appropriate skill-sets to serve as prosecutors to present evidence in the case before the Senate. That is another reason why she needs to know if witnesses will be allowed - and which witnesses. Different scenarios would require House managers/prosecutors with different skill-sets.

• Members of the House serve as “managers” in the Senate trial. Managers serve a similar role as prosecutors do in a criminal trial, they present evidence during the procedure.

How does impeachment work? Here is the step-by-step process

She doesn't. She has no say in the Senate process.

Maybe not directly - but she has a lot of indirect say.

Nope. No say whatsoever.

That's funny - especially since she is still holding the articles of impeachment.

 

[JGalt]

The bribery that was proven in the House impeachment. It falls under "abuse of power".
Read the Articles of Impeachment Against President Trump

BS

The articles don't mention bribery.

Because no bribery took place.

That's why there was no evidence or testimony of bribery.

But you knew that before you lied.

They used "Abuse of Power" to cover all Trump's* crimes.

Does "Abuse of Power" also include "He made me sad"?