It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pelosi may withhold impeachment articles until quid pro quo

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I think the Supreme court head justice can set a deadline for Pelosi to send the articles. If she doesn't he can throw the whole thing out as if it never happened.

Maybe Nancy knows this...




posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96


Pelosi really didn’t want to talk about impeachment this morning, only taking a couple of questions on it before interrupting a Fox News reporter and telling them she wasn’t going to answer any more questions on impeachment:


I guess impeachment isn't an important issue

Pelosi and her party are a JOKE.


She knows she can't explain to her dumb lemmings she is not going to continue the impeachment process - because in their fantasies a trial will certainly result in Trump being gone.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Couldn't McConnel just "take it to court" and have Justice Roberts order the documents?

If Pelosi didn't comply, then she'd be in. . .wait for it. . . "contempt of congress"?



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I am not sure.

This is such shaky ground i'd say anything that happens will still be unprecedented.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Will somebody tell me why polls are showing Trump behind, with all these lies and proof the dems are crooks how is it possible his numbers are not better.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Because they oversample democrats.

Instead of taking a even sampling of Democrats,republicans,independents.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Infoshill

What is going to stop McConnell from just starting a trial on the impeachment? I am pretty sure nothing can.

Since the result of the vote will change nothing - and only the technicality of the paperwork not being turned over is stopping them - how could that be stopped by the courts?


edit on 19-12-2019 by proximo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan




Its not like the Senate can violate the constitution by moving forward without the procedural stuff (managers presenting charges, etc).


They do have the sole power of impeachment, and get to write their own rules.

And can be used to draw from what's already in the congressional record, and appoint their own managers.




posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
Will somebody tell me why polls are showing Trump behind, with all these lies and proof the dems are crooks how is it possible his numbers are not better.


Add 3 to 4 points to the republican side for every poll you see. That will give you a far more accurate result - that is why Rasmussen is almost always the most accurate - and is 3 to 4 points different than other polls.

If you see a poll that really seems far out, look at who was polled - you will almost always see something like 40% dems surveyed, 20% Republican. They don't even hide it, because they know very very few look at the fine print.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Trial of Impeachment

A supreme court justice during impeachment is more like window dressing.

And really depends on the specific congress.



The second question is the extent of the Chief Justice's authority as presiding officer to render unilateral rulings. In the first presidential impeachment trial in 1868, Chief Justice Salmon Chase claimed the authority to decide certain procedural questions on his own, but the Senate challenged several of his rulings and overruled him at least twice. In President Clinton's impeachment trial in 1999, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist ruled on some procedural questions, but the Senate never challenged, much less overruled, any of these rulings.

edit on 19-12-2019 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I hope she celebrates tonight and has an extra bottle to herself.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Doesn't Article 2 section 3.

Give Trump the power to make the House send them over?


Not explicitly IMO.
But it DOES give him the power to send them home on Adjournment. Both Houses.
Also makes them liable for arrest since Congress isn't in session when adjourned.
But if their wanting to stain Trump's historical legacy with "Impeachment" they're going to have to send it to the Senate.
Otherwise their Impeachment gets the Stain: pseudo, ersatz, fake, partial - it will not age well.

ganjoa
edit on 2019-12-19 by ganjoa because: DO OD



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: proximo


alrighty thanks guys



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Trial of Impeachment


One day after the House impeached Senator William Blount, the Senate expelled him by a vote of 25–1. Blount claimed the Senate lacked authority to try him because Senators were not impeachable and, in any event, he no longer occupied an office from which he could be removed. The Senate voted to dismiss the impeachment resolution against the expelled Blount for lack of jurisdiction. Subsequently, many Senators have construed this vote as supporting their authority to dismiss an impeachment without a full-scale


Pay attention to this since some people are citing saying congressman can't be impeached.

He was expelled before they impeached.

They got it backasswards. Senators and such have misconstrued that vote.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

To be fair the way I understand "high crimes and misdomeaners" would allow for her to be impeached over her conduct as well as many others in this whole debacle.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

He's been an unpopular president since before he was elected.

He lost the popular vote on election day (the only poll that matters), he had a net favorable average for the first two weeks of his presidency but has been hovering around 40% approval since early 2018. His poll numbers have gone way up since the impeachment hearings began though. He's somewhere around 43%, which is his highest approval rating since his first two months in office.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com...



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

According to your graph he is actually becoming more popular as time goes on, roflmao.



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Lysergic

I literally said that: "His poll numbers have gone way up since the impeachment hearings began though."



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

Sorry was having fun playing w the graph.
^_^



posted on Dec, 19 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Couldn't McConnel just "take it to court" and have Justice Roberts order the documents?

If Pelosi didn't comply, then she'd be in. . .wait for it. . . "contempt of congress"?


Actually, the Senate majority leader can just grab a SC Justice, convene and then dismiss the Articles with a simple majority vote.

It just wouldn't look good politically for him.





top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join