The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on June 08, 2019, 12:28:34 PM
-
kentuck (91,670 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212172654
Would an impeachment trial in the Senate be presided over by Mitch McConnell or the Chief Justice?
If presided over by the Chief Justice, could Mitch McConnell shut it down?
I have heard different scenarios, such as, Mitch McConnell could shut it down and not even have a trial?
Is that possible?
Because if there is one more serious charge made against Donald Trump, I do not think Nancy Pelosi can hold back the forces. I think the majority would impeach. But they are waiting on one more piece of evidence to buttress the Mueller investigation and what is already known. One witness is all they need. Or it could be in the Flynn tape that has been hidden by the Justice Dept?
Donald Trump's possible impeachment is hanging by a thread, in my opinion.
:whatever:
Star Member Lochloosa (12,589 posts)
2. The turtle said he would just call a vote and be done with it.
No trail.
MOST DANGEROUS PERSON IN AMERICA.
:whatever:
Buckeyeblue (1,191 posts)
6. I would think even if he called a vote there would have to be debate
Senate Democrats could use that time to make the case for impeachment. And I'm sure all the networks would cover it.
Fiendish Thingy (2,160 posts)
8. Chief Justice would preside- Mitch's only power would be to vote to change Senate rules
Current Senate rules state if House approves articles of impeachment, the Senate must hold a trial, over which Mitch has no power- he could not force a quick up or down vote with no arguments.
What Mitch could do is hold a vote to change the Senate rules to allow the Senate to decline to hold a trial- a cowardly move that IMO would work in the Dems favor. Imagine, after in depth hearings into Trump's corruption and criminality, the house votes to impeach (or is on the brink of voting), and Mitch suddenly holds a vote to change the Senate rules- the GOP would be on the hook for denying Justice, or in Trump's view, denying him "total exoneration". The impeachment would just hang there in the air, unresolved, through the election, with each GOP senator's vote to not even hold a trial on display for all to see...
:yawn:
-
first off, you mutts still need to name a high crime and misdemeanor that President Trump has committed that warrants impeachment in the first place.
Ball's in your court.
-
first off, you mutts still need to name a high crime and misdemeanor that President Trump has committed that warrants impeachment in the first place.
Ball's in your court.
Nothing prevents the House from impeaching Trump for his orange complexion. So the House can throw together whatever gobbledygoo they want. Then the Senate will be presided over by the Chief Justice, but can proceed as they choose. So McConnell could possibly bring it to a vote more or less immediately, since no actual crimes and evidence could be presented - none were committed, therefore no evidence to present.
This is why Pelosi is trying to keep Dems whipped up, but keep them short of the stupidity of a vote on impeachment.
-
first off, you mutts still need to name a high crime and misdemeanor that President Trump has committed that warrants impeachment in the first place.
Ball's in your court.
His high crime and misdemeanor is he beat felonia von pantsuit. That's it.
-
It’s not Mitch they have to worry about. It’s Schmucky Schumer they have to watch. He knows that impeachment is a fool’s errand that will cost Dems for years.
-
It’s not Mitch they have to worry about. It’s Schmucky Schumer they have to watch. He knows that impeachment is a fool’s errand that will cost Dems for years.
I heard today that they're trying to get AOC to primary him.
Now, THAT would be priceless.