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.

 

Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate

page: 8
55
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
I love how all the Dems suddenly think this guy doesn't know what he's talking about.


Actually, if you read the article, Feldman takes it to the extreme, citing "if the House NEVER sends the articles to the House".

Pelosi never intimated that she would never send the articles over. What I get, is that she's waiting for the Senate to signal some kind of attempt of at least an appearance of fairness while the Senate decides on the rules. This process could take a quite a while, since any Senator can object to a rule provision and propose an amendment and then the body must vote on each and every offer.

Since the Senate is recessing for the holiday's, there probably won't be any movement until they return.

Remember, the articles were just passed Wednesday night, it's only Friday morning. I think things need to settle in a little bit. America needs to have a holiday break and then return to the dirty business of an impeachment trial.




posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

I am pretty sure I heard Nancy Pelosi say these articles are adopted.

He is impeached.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: dawnstar

I am pretty sure I heard Nancy Pelosi say these articles are adopted.

He is impeached.


No.....he actually isn't.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   
The House has NO RIGHT to dictate terms to the Senate.

And since this snip even began anyone talking about fairness now needs to get their heads out of Pelosi's you know what.
edit on 20-12-2019 by neo96 because: Feelingz



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   
What are you talking about he was impeached and already removed. I saw it on Twitter.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Secret bunker depos.

Republicans weren't even invited to partcipate.

Republicans were denied calling witness.

Republicans minority day was denied.

Schiff himself flat out LIED about what Trump said.

Nadler flat out lied too.

Team LEFT railroaded Trump.

And tried to impeach Trump 4 times previously.

So Stop parroting crap.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
"originally posted by: carewemust
Personally, I would like the Senate trial to be used to illustrate how the last President abused his power and obstructed Congress (fast-n-furious) (Threatening Ukraine). If one is guilty, both are guilty...and the converse is true."

Arguing that both Trump and Obama are guilty is the best way to exonerate Trump?

That would be silly (pun intended)...

Since Obama is actually guilty, and Trump isn't, that isn't what is being argued.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: dawnstar

I am pretty sure I heard Nancy Pelosi say these articles are adopted.

He is impeached.


As long as morons believe that then the Dems have done their job.

That's how highly they think of you. They know the Left aren't smart enough to know they didn't do # except waste time and tax payer money.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   
This is an enlightening REAd.

February of 2017 until now



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I kind of agree with you, but then I read a bunch of articles, written by those who sounded smarter than me that says it's the actual vote that makes it an impeachment.
Either way, I think it would be acceptable to think of an impeachment in the same manner of an indictment. Only this is one very public indictment. To indict anyone so publicly and then just sit on it would be rather damaging to the person and it seems it would be denying the person the right to a speedy trial. So, for those who are suggesting that they just hold it through the election, take CV your pick. Either he really isnt impeached and you'd be guilty of slander or he is and you'd be guilty of denying him his constitutional rights for your own benefit.
Better to just hand over the articles in a timely manner or backtrack and say forget it.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Sookiechacha


Since Chuck Schumer and Mitch Mc Connell already has their first Senate rules meeting, I'm thinking that things work a little differently than you expected.

Then you're thinking wrong. I expected the Senate to start working on the rules because no one expected Nervous Nancy to suddenly change her mind again. I do not expect them to continue to work on rules until she decides to follow through on the impeachment... as I said, no sense wasting time on something that may not even happen. They have Federal judges to confirm! So far they've put about 180 conservative judges in the courts... and there's more to come!



(We call that "winning.")

TheRedneck


I can't link it, but in one her of interviews, I heard Pelosi tell a reporter that the Senate had been properly notified of the passage of the articles of impeachment. Articles are officially presented to the Senate by the House appointed managers, which have not yet been appointed.

I really think people are making much too much about Pelosi waiting until Mitch, Lindsey and Don settle down a little and the Senate body lets the reality sink in. Ultimately, it's the entire Senate body that votes on the rules, not Lindsey Graham and Mitch Mc Connell, under the watchful eye of the Chief Justice.

The holiday break will give Senators the ability to go home and talk with their constituents, and chat with other Senators about their rule wishes and how best to proceed next year.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: dawnstar

I am pretty sure I heard Nancy Pelosi say these articles are adopted.

He is impeached.


Hmmm...when was Clinton impeached? Let's look at history.

On December 19, 1998, Clinton became the second American president to be impeached (the first being Andrew Johnson, who was impeached in 1868) when the House formally adopted articles of impeachment and forwarded them to the United States Senate for adjudication.


Take note of that small conjunction word 'and' within the process. The House has only formally adopted articles of impeachment. Trump will not be considered officially impeached until those are forwarded to the Senate.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   
the 2 'articles of impeachment' translate to: 2 Accusations of political misdeeds

to my mind.... Impeachment is just a Political Badge-of-Disgrace...it is not a criminal nor an civil infraction...

William J Clinton is doing well with the Impeachment label he earned, but he is far from being disgraced or hindered in his post presidential life with any Law credentials/practice as a result of impeachment guilt



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: rickymouse

The dems would not be in trouble in any event since this is not an improper impeachment.


As usual, what you think and reality are polar opposites. Swing state polling shows impeachment is hurting Democrats. You're gonna lose in 2020 because you ignore reality in swing states, which is why you lost 2016.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

The only reason they are propping up Biden is to prevent him from being investigated. That much is obvious. 4 days after Zelensky got elected, Biden announced his candidacy with the words, "I have to run."

Yeah, he has to run, and he has to stay in the lead. Otherwise, no one has any reason to complain about Trump investigating him. The DNC is counting on short memories. Once he's in office, he can bow out due to health issues and whoever his running mate is (can anyone say Kamala Harris?) becomes President.

That's also why Nervous Nancy is holding back the impeachment. If there is an actual trial with witnesses, those witnesses could implicate Hunter Biden and create enough reasonable cause in the minds of the public for a full, official investigation... which I believe would lead right to her, Clinton, Schiff, Nadler, and a whole range of others. Mostly Democrats but some Republicans also.

The "Master Legislator" is damned if she does and damned if she don't... and that alcohol-addled sack of stunned neurons between her ears is just now figuring that out.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: proximo




You think anyone really cares?


Many do.


Everybody knows it’s fake charges.


Saying it doesn't make it true.

Washington Times: Trump impeachment: Undisputed evidence that he abused his power
...and posting opinion pieces by Anti Trumper Napolitano doesn't make it any more true either, lol, are you even trying tonight???

Course I know, you did a quick Google search, picked the third article and hoped the context would jive lol


My bad. Only if the opinion pieces are what you want to hear are they valid. lol

Actually, I read that article earlier today and bookmarked it. Since he is a Fox contributor and Republican. But anyone not licking Trumps asshole is automatically suspect to you guys.
Oh, triggered at the fact that your opinions pieces do you no justice and the fact that impeachment is literally meaningless in this event 😌

I look forward to your post the day Trump is acquitted 🤗


Trump is impeached. Deal with it.

As stated more than once, I am sure he will be acquitted. But he will forever be IMPEACHED. But nice try.


Johnson was also impeached, and in the history books, it is regarded as one of the worst abuses of Congressional power ever documented, biased in every political sense of the word and deemed as something that should never have happened and a mistake in American political history. It wasn't a "stain" on Johnson, it was a stain on the party that impeached him when he was vindicated by the Senate.

Your vitriol for our President is disgusting. Your support for your party, and not for your country, will be remembered in the same vein as the violin players on the sinking Titanic. It is amazing to me how little you and others understand about the laws of this land and are blinded not by patriotism and support for your duly elected President, but for your PARTY.

I watched every minute of the entire impeachment process, and I happen to know a thing or two about law and the Founders, and this was the most grossly misrepresented interpretation of impeachment that has ever occurred in American history, so you can wear that stain with pride while the rest of us watch what remains of the integrity of the Constitution being upheld by the Senate.

~Namaste
edit on 20-12-2019 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck
you definitely have it figured out!



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: dawnstar

I am pretty sure I heard Nancy Pelosi say these articles are adopted.

He is impeached.


Hmmm...when was Clinton impeached? Let's look at history.

On December 19, 1998, Clinton became the second American president to be impeached (the first being Andrew Johnson, who was impeached in 1868) when the House formally adopted articles of impeachment and forwarded them to the United States Senate for adjudication.


Take note of that small conjunction word 'and' within the process. The House has only formally adopted articles of impeachment. Trump will not be considered officially impeached until those are forwarded to the Senate.


You're talking way above their heads. You might as well show them Electoral College math.



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Beware of others' opinions... reason things out for yourself.


Either way, I think it would be acceptable to think of an impeachment in the same manner of an indictment. Only this is one very public indictment. To indict anyone so publicly and then just sit on it would be rather damaging to the person and it seems it would be denying the person the right to a speedy trial.

For once, we are on the same page. An impeachment is a type of indictment.



TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 20 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

Blinded by a party that doesn't give a # about them and thinks of them as nothing more than useful idiots.



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join