No Senate Impeachment Trial Until Chuck Schumer Gives Nancy Pelosi the Green Light.

Thursday, December 19, 2019

Last night, two articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump were voted on and passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. Not a single Republican voted "yea" for impeaching our President.

After President Bill Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House, just 3 hours later, the Impeachment Articles were transferred to the U.S. Senate for trial preparation in that chamber.

But with President Trump's impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is withholding the articles.

She is Not passing them to the Republican-Controlled Senate, until Senate Democrat demands are agreed to, by Senate leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will only then give Nancy Pelosi the "OK" to release the impeachment articles to the U.S. Senate, for trial preparations.

LOS ANGELES – After the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald Trump, Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday began a game of chicken, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

In a press conference following the historic vote Wednesday night, Pelosi told reporters that she wanted to see how McConnell, R-Ky., would lay out the trial’s rules before she sent over the articles to the Senate.

“We can’t name managers until we see what the process is on the Senate side and I would hope that would be soon. So far, we haven’t seen anything that’s looks fair to us,” Pelosi said.

More at: www.cnbc.com...

The illogical U.S. Media, and House Democrats, think they're intimidating Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) into giving-in to demands for certain Witnesses and other parameters, made by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

In reality, Democrats have the most to lose by delaying the start of a Senate Impeachment Trial.

Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, and Michael Bennet, will be prevented from campaigning during a portion of the election primary season, because it's MANDATORY that they personally attend every Senate Impeachment session.

The longer Nancy Pelosi delays sending the approved articles of impeachment to the Senate, the more angry these Presidential candidates will be at her.

In recent weeks, several impeachment "experts" have come on liberal CNN and MSNBC to express their hope that Nancy Pelosi would delay sending the Articles of Impeachment over to the U.S. Senate until after the November 2020 elections.

Democrats could then use an "Impeached" President Trump in their campaign ads, instead of an "Impeached and Acquitted" President Trump.

It seems that Nancy Pelosi was paying attention to these "experts" and advisers.

-CareWeMust

a reply to: carewemust

If I was the senate, I would subpoena Pelosi for the articles of impeachment. And transcripts of all the closed door secessions.

This is going to be funny. Lets impeach the President but not impeach the President. What kind of election campaign is that? Unfortunately it does makes sense for a bunch of do nothing Democrats.

a reply to: neutronflux

I think the Senate would have to go to a judge and ask him/her to force the House to release the Impeachment articles.

a reply to: kwakakev

Until President Trump is acquitted by the Senate, the only label he'll wear is "INDICTED".

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: neutronflux

I think the Senate would have to go to a judge and ask him/her to force the House to release the Impeachment articles.

I am not disagreeing, but this would be my argument. The three branches are not superior or inferior to each other. So, if you have a law breaking speaker with a majority behind that person. Who would start the articles of impeachment for the speaker of the house. I would think a senate committee could subpoena someone for the articles of impeachment if they are passed.

Who cares? Anyone paying attention knows Lindsey Graham and McConnell don’t want to call witnesses or have a trial. Seems to me they both have something to hide, but to the point if we aren’t calling witnesses or having a trial then the impeachment doesn’t matter anyways. I think this move is to protect both Republicans and Democrats corruption in Ukraine.

a reply to: carewemust

Until President Trump is acquitted by the Senate, the only label he'll wear is "INDICTED".

Indicted for calling out Quid Pro Joe and not going along with the subsequent Shiff Show. The public has about a year to wake up to this one if the delay road is taken.

a reply to: carewemust

Sundance postulates that the sham-peachment 1.0 is just a ploy to argue in the Supreme Court cases the Mueller "obstruction" background surveillance info is required to pursue a Senate trial.

Makes a lot of sense to me.

"Impeachment as a Means to An End, and Not The End Itself…"

theconservativetreehouse.com...

a reply to: carewemust

What's ironic, is that one of the impeachment articles is abuse of power, however it is currently the house democrats that are abusing power. They are trying to make the half of congress that they have a majority in above the other two and a half branches of government.

I expect this to go to SCOTUS very soon.

Even more ironic is that Nancy "we have to pass it to see what's in it" is holding out on the excuse of seeing the senate's rules.

The dems want to drag this investigation out for the entire year. They're are asking for witnesses. Mich, said No and that was the end of it. The Democratic house has stated they done their job. If so then why are they asking for more witnesses. The Senate holds the trial ,and will not start another investigation. It's also spelled out in our Constitution.

So Nancy says she consulted a constitutional expert on withholding the articles. What this says is she decided to sidestep the real constitution itself. Very much like their entire investigation.

OH NO! Not the witnesses!

doob
-|0|-

(surprised Pikachu face)

a reply to: SJE98

No, they want to continue it into Trumps second term. That's the whole reason they are dragging their heels now.

The Senate has the SOLE POWER to try impeachments.

Pelosi can go pound sand.

She can't shake down the senate.

a reply to: neo96

That's why she doesn't want to turn it over to the Senate and is why one of her masters, chucky is telling her to hold off.

a reply to: Chance321

Then shes in contempt of congress.

IE the Senate.

Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment, imprisonment for coercion, or release from the contempt citation).[10]

Inherent Contempt

a reply to: carewemust

You better stop telling democrats what are they doing wrong and advising what to do instead, we'll be screwed if they listen to you.

Of course I'm kidding.

Good for her, republicans already said they won't follow the rules. now Trump will be impeached forever! for evvvv aaar

She can hold them, I mean she cant send them over till she has a few managers to go with them. Can she? And oh, there is just so much to do before they head off for Christmas break... ya, senate, take her to court, stand in line behind us.. I think we still have cases in the court asking for docs and witnesses from the mueller report.

But, the longer she hold onto them the less credible one of their arguments becomes. This is an on going crime, remember? We couldnt waste time messing around with trying to force them to hand over the documents and witnesses we want. Our free and fair elections are at stake!!!
So the senate gets them after Christmas break instead of before.. it wasn't like they were going to do anything with them before the new year anyways.
Here's a question though, if they are never handed over to the senate, is trump impeached? Or is the delivery to the senate a necessary component to it? Is there such a thing as a half impeachment?