_mpaul said:
What happens if the House never sends the Articles? Will the public lose interest (more than they already have) and this fades away? How will the public respond to the Dems campaigning on this for the next 11 months? Will the public be turned off by the apparent lack of fairness? What if the Articles have not been sent by the end of this Congress? Do they expire?
Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
Great question. I can't imagine it survives past the end of this Congress, much like a bill sent to the Senate from the House but then not acted on.AustinAg2K said:Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
thirdcoast said:
We will see. I think the media landscape has changed a lot and the GOP did a good job of helping public understand this is a sham. In reality the Dems are just drawing out an inevitable loss, but the narrative that will gain full steam will be the GOP preventing the Dems from getting a fair trial. There are plenty of GOP sound bites to spoon feed that narrative to public.
GOP should completely ignore impeachment discussion and talk about trade, prescriptions, judges, etc.
If so, that is futile. It is very difficult to see an election where Trump does win re-election and the GOP loses the Senate.AustinAg2K said:Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
thirdcoast said:
We will see. I think the media landscape has changed a lot and the GOP did a good job of helping public understand this is a sham. In reality the Dems are just drawing out an inevitable loss, but the narrative that will gain full steam will be the GOP preventing the Dems from getting a fair trial. There are plenty of GOP sound bites to spoon feed that narrative to public.
GOP should completely ignore impeachment discussion and talk about trade, prescriptions, judges, etc.
Leftist Thinking - Use deceit to get what you want by breaking the rules and hope no one says you're cheating. Helps to have people in place that agree with your motives in position of oversight. If caught trying to game the system, claim that the oversight is being unfair by doing exactly what you did and cheat some more until you get what you want. Simple.Tibbers said:
Sounds like they are waiting on the court cases to resolve so they can get more evidence. After hearing them ***** and moan about a "clear and present danger" and how they debated that they acted so swiftly because they wanted him removed quickly, how will they justify this action
Botox.agent-maroon said:
Nancy Pelosi worrying about political "fairness". How do these politicos manage to keep a straight face when they say this kind of crap?
You want to begin a trial without the defendant being told the actual charges?Cassius said:
Where does it say in the Constitution that she has to physically send them over for the trial to begin?
Democrats are dumb as fck and evil as Satan.
The rules for the impeachment and for the trial may not come under the jurisdiction of any Federal court, but I don't see how that would apply to this.captkirk said:
How is that a power play? Its a no power play
That's not the case at all. Impeachments survive the end of one Congress and into the next Congress._mpaul said:Great question. I can't imagine it survives past the end of this Congress, much like a bill sent to the Senate from the House but then not acted on.AustinAg2K said:Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
Do you really want the Senate to do an end run around the Constitution?BuddysBud said:
Can the Senate just make up rules that are obviously biased, and vote that if the House doesn't bring the case within a certain time (say 3 days), the trial is over?
It's not like the House impeachment process was an open, unbiased investigation with due process and both parties were allowed equal opportunities to present evidence.
Not disputing your Gallup poll numbers but, I believe they are an average. Below is a link to a Pew Research study that came out last week breaking down who makes up these numbers. Shockingly, conservatives have less trust than liberals in the media and it goes further into by sex, race, economic standing, etc. Pretty interesting and when you look the perspectives and how people vote I'm not so sure the majority see MSM as partisan hacks.AG 2000' said:thirdcoast said:
We will see. I think the media landscape has changed a lot and the GOP did a good job of helping public understand this is a sham. In reality the Dems are just drawing out an inevitable loss, but the narrative that will gain full steam will be the GOP preventing the Dems from getting a fair trial. There are plenty of GOP sound bites to spoon feed that narrative to public.
GOP should completely ignore impeachment discussion and talk about trade, prescriptions, judges, etc.
What makes you think they aren't?
While Nancy and Schiff were giving each other reach arounds today, McConnell pushed through 13 federal judge appointments. And the guy will continue to do that every single day while Nancy tries to keep her dentures in her mouth crying about process.
And Trump and co. are going to hammer them about what a sham this all is if they don't have the guts to send it to the Senate. And Trump will do it every single day, taunting Nancy and Schiff all the way (if you watched his rally in Michigan tonight, you got a taste).
The blinders are off for most Americans - the latest Gallup polls have American trust in media in the low to mid 30s percentage wise.
Libs can keep the rah rah crap up, but the majority of Americans see the MSM for the partisan hacks they are these days.
eric76 said:That's not the case at all. Impeachments survive the end of one Congress and into the next Congress._mpaul said:Great question. I can't imagine it survives past the end of this Congress, much like a bill sent to the Senate from the House but then not acted on.AustinAg2K said:Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
What would change is that if the trial was going on at the end of one Congress and into the next Congress, any House managers who were no longer in office would have to be replaced. Also, if the Republicans took the House, then they would surely replace the House managers with Republicans.
eric76 said:Do you really want the Senate to do an end run around the Constitution?BuddysBud said:
Can the Senate just make up rules that are obviously biased, and vote that if the House doesn't bring the case within a certain time (say 3 days), the trial is over?
It's not like the House impeachment process was an open, unbiased investigation with due process and both parties were allowed equal opportunities to present evidence.
The House impeachment process was screwed up, but not for the reason you think. Do you really believe that someone is denied due process if they are not permitted to be a part of the investigation against them? Let's empty out the prisons if that is true.
And don't forget that the House Judiciary Committee extended an offer to Trump to be represented in their hearings and Trump turned them down. That should pretty much end any nonsense about due process violations.
Threadbare said:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is already floating the implied suggestion that some of the senate Republicans should recuse themselves because they are not impartial.
You can't make this stuff up...
eric76 said:Do you really want the Senate to do an end run around the Constitution?BuddysBud said:
Can the Senate just make up rules that are obviously biased, and vote that if the House doesn't bring the case within a certain time (say 3 days), the trial is over?
It's not like the House impeachment process was an open, unbiased investigation with due process and both parties were allowed equal opportunities to present evidence.
The House impeachment process was screwed up, but not for the reason you think. Do you really believe that someone is denied due process if they are not permitted to be a part of the investigation against them? Let's empty out the prisons if that is true.
And don't forget that the House Judiciary Committee extended an offer to Trump to be represented in their hearings and Trump turned them down. That should pretty much end any nonsense about due process violations.
eric76 said:You want to begin a trial without the defendant being told the actual charges?Cassius said:
Where does it say in the Constitution that she has to physically send them over for the trial to begin?
Democrats are dumb as fck and evil as Satan.
Is your real name Kafka by chance?
nortex97 said:
McConnell needs to have a press conference (or at least a release) this am before they do vote to 'set aside' their articles in the House. Something to the effect that he is moving forward with setting dates and doesn't need the papers transmitted, it's been logged and voted on in a formal house resolution, his turn.
eric76 said:You want to begin a trial without the defendant being told the actual charges?Cassius said:
Where does it say in the Constitution that she has to physically send them over for the trial to begin?
Democrats are dumb as fck and evil as Satan.
Is your real name Kafka by chance?
