1. Welcome to Georgia Tech Swarm! JOIN US and be a part of the SWARM! GO JACKETS! THWg!

Trump impeachment proceedings

Discussion in 'The Swarm Lounge' started by yrp, Sep 24, 2019.

  1. LibertyTurns

    LibertyTurns Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,789
    If you got caught lying in the military as much as Schiff, you certainly wouldn’t be permitted to have anything to do with sensitive intelligence much less anything else of importance before we ran your *** off.
     
  2. Supersizethatorder-mutt

    Supersizethatorder-mutt Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,363
    But at least it will come to a vote in the Senate (IF it gets that far). Nancy won't even let it come to any proposal to censure or remove Schiff come to a vote. Vote on it and accept the results, whichever way they may go, but VOTE ON IT !!!
     
    bwelbo likes this.
  3. Supersizethatorder-mutt

    Supersizethatorder-mutt Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,363
  4. takethepoints

    takethepoints Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,743
    If the House impeaches - and it probably will - then the matter has to come up for trial in the Senate. The constitution requires that; see Art. 1, secs. 1 and 2. The timing of such a trial isn't specified, but all existing precedent for impeachments of all kinds has been for a trial to be done asap. McConnell has said that he would follow this and move immediately to trial.

    I think that the Democrats, despite protestations to the contrary, will impeach Trump (it only requires a simple majority) sometime early to the middle of next year. First, the Republicans and the administration will get their wish and there will be open hearings. That's why the hearings are closed now; the committees want witnesses on the record before they go public. (Btw, this is how the Watergate hearings worked; it constrains all witnesses to the record and documentary evidence.) That'll take awhile, though once they get started the Republicans will try to speed them up. Then there will be a debate and a final vote on impeachment. Obviously, what both sides are hoping for is that there will be mass demonstrations for/against impeachment, a la recent events in Spain and Iceland. That's unlikely, but it is very likely that the president's position will deteriorate further. Most people don't like him in the first place and an impeachment inquiry will not help that.

    The worse it gets in terms of public disapproval, the more likely that a vote on party lines to acquit Trump will be ammunition for the 2020 election. And a party line vote to acquit is what I expect when the Senate hears the matter. If the evidence is strong enough and the final grounds for impeachment broad enough (and they will be), then a vote to acquit will be used against those who voted against Trump. As in:

    upload_2019-10-20_16-16-18.png
     
  5. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    13,240
    Trying to impeach someone and then remove them from office a few months before an election. Seems about right.
     
  6. takethepoints

    takethepoints Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,743
    Yes. But Trump made the phone call and, as usual, went off script. The timing is his worry, not the people who are investigating the matter.

    Not, mind, that they are too upset about it
     
  7. GT_EE78

    GT_EE78 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,532
    Although your mcConnell quote is accurate and this may be what actually occurs. You are wrong about the constitution. The constitution is silent as to whether or not the senate must hold a trial if impeachment occurs. The senate’s self imposed rule requires a trial. that senate rule usually requires 2/3 to change but McConnell could follow the nuclear option to change it with 51 votes. (Like He and Reid both have for judges) He could just get 51 senators to sign a pledge to alter senate rule and dismiss this farce without the trial. I don’t know if McConell would be willing? his statement indicates otherwise but this nonsense can just be dismissed.
     
  8. LibertyTurns

    LibertyTurns Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,789
    The longer the Democrats stretch this out, the better the Maniac’s re-election chances. The country is weary of the constant allegations with no substance. It’s like we’re replaying the ‘Where’s the beef?” Ads.

    On the other hand, the mealy mouthed spineless Pubs will be in trouble. Nobody likes Pub politicians playing fraidy cat. They had better man up before they get run out.
     
  9. takethepoints

    takethepoints Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,743
    Read Art. 1, secs 1 and 2 again. If the House impeaches, the Senate must try the matter. It is not a criminal proceeding, but the same logic applies. If a person is indicted for a criminal offense, then she must be tried. The time to dismiss or nol prosse is before any move to indict is made.
     
  10. Supersizethatorder-mutt

    Supersizethatorder-mutt Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,363
    I was referring to Nancy refusing to bring the censure or dismissal of Adam Schiff before the House, but the points you made about impeachment hold true too. She doesn't want a full House discussion on impeachment, because that will mean an end to secrecy. Yes, the Senate votes to "convict" based on impeachment, but the House itself first has to name and vote on the Articles of Impeachment, and to do that require OPEN hearings with the Republicans able to subpoena witnesses of their own, allow the witnesses to have legal council, and allow the President to offer a defense of his own just to the Articles of Impeachment. Even in Watergate, there were no CLOSED hearings in the House. Everything they did is on public record, as it should be now. What they have been doing, in having CLOSED hearings in some secret room in the bowels of the Capitol are the same as the British Star Chambers in the late 15th century to the mid-17th century. Originally established to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against socially and politically prominent people so powerful that ordinary courts would probably hesitate to convict them of their crimes. they became synonymous with social and political oppression through the arbitrary use and abuse of the power they wielded. That is what we are seeing today with Schiff's hearings. Have we sunk so low??? Nancy also does not want YET an open house hearing and vote on impeachment, because she knows even with all the DIMs in the House, it would fail, mainly because there are so many DIMs elected to the House from Trump districts. She and Schiff are hoping the nefarious closed hearings by Schiff, with NO TRANSCRIPTS of the proceedings, only selected information from them that they are willing to release, will convince those DIMs to agree, and also to fool the public. Such actions are NOT American.
     
  11. Supersizethatorder-mutt

    Supersizethatorder-mutt Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,363
    What phone call? The one with the Ukrainian president? There is a transcript of that recording that he had released even before the "whistle blower" produced his written complaint, a report obviously written by lawyers recommended to him by Adam Schiff. Looks to me like he timed it pretty well; the people "investigating" it are the ones who screwed up the time line and went off script, by making up their own version of the truth, relying on a former CIA investigator and ally of Joe Biden to shape their tale.
     
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.
  12. GT_EE78

    GT_EE78 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,532
    Show me, Here's what i found.
    Impeachment Clauses

    [​IMG]


    Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5

    The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

    Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

    The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

    Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.

    Article 2, Section 4

    The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
     
  13. takethepoints

    takethepoints Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,743
    You have the answer right in front of you. The House impeaches someone and the Senate tries it. If the Senate tied to ignore an impeachment it would be directly challenging the constitution placing the power to impeach in the hands of the House. Their sole role is to try the impeachment; they have no explicit power to do anything else. Remember, the constitution doesn't create implicit powers for anything but the Congressional powers in Art. 8. Everything else is pretty much black letter law in the original document. If the Senate tried to delay proceedings, the House would go to court and win in nothing flat.

    But your premise is that the Senate can ignore an impeachment from the House. They can't. Period.
     
  14. takethepoints

    takethepoints Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,743
    Nope. In any congressional investigation, the first questions are almost always asked in private, either by investigating agencies - and you had better believe the FBI is involved in this - or by congressional committees. The witnesses are deposed and then questioned. In this instance, the witnesses all had security clearances and the matters they are testifying about could involve classified matters in addition to other matters. They'll do closed hearings until everyone they can get to testify has and all the documents are in. Then they'll go to open hearings with the ground evidence in place and no room for shenanigans on either side. All this is as American as apple pie.

    Btw, obviously the president does not get to testify at any hearing involving a presidential impeachment. The dangers of self-incrimination with a witness like Trump - why do you think his lawyers blew Mueller off? - are also substantial.
     
  15. GT_EE78

    GT_EE78 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,532
    You're Wrong again. (The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.) is not a requirement that they hold a trial. Yes they can ignore it. (they wouldn't due to media sh*tstorm. They would just convene to dismiss it without a trial if they choose to. Now you think the House can sue the Senate . Funny
     
  16. Supersizethatorder-mutt

    Supersizethatorder-mutt Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,363
    In ALL impeachment investigations in the past, there was a special, supposedly neutral, impeachment counsel who convened the hearings and subpoenaed the witnesses. It has never been left up to partisan committee chairmen to do that. In the case of the Clinton impeachment investigation, Ken Starr was the special counsel. Why won't the DIMs do that now?
     
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.
  17. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    13,240
    Just thinking about that - those 2 idiots have been neck deep in corruption going back almost 40 years.
     
  18. MWBATL

    MWBATL Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,603
    Sorry, there are so many idiots in DC I am confused as to which specific two you are referring to here...Can you clarify?
     
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.
  19. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    13,240
    Hillary and Bill.
     
  20. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    13,240

Share This Page