Pelosi Doesn't Want To Send Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.

So here we are. After all the claims by Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, AOC, etc, that they would do a fair impeachment we can see first hand that they all keep on lying.

Pelosi does not want to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate because she knows they have no evidence of wrongdoing by President Trump.

Instead she seems to think that the majority of Americans are stupid enough to think that Trump was impeached when he hasn't been impeached.

Even the Democrat's own "Constitutional scholar" Noah Feldman has stated that President Trump is not impeached until Pelosi sends the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

Here is what Feldman himself stated:

...
Feldman noted that “according to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote,” and that while a modest delay would not pose a problem, a lengthy delay would be a “serious problem.”

“Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial,” Feldman wrote. “Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”
...

Democrats’ Top Impeachment Witness: Democrats Have Not Impeached Trump

It's obvious Pelosi, Schiff, et al simply don't want a fair trial of the President because there is no evidence of ANY wrongdoing by the POTUS.

When a journalist asked her about it she emphatically lashed at the reporter...

Pelosi lashes out at reporter amid delays in Senate impeachment trial

But since Pelosi, Schiff, et al know that Republicans won't pass her articles of impeachment, because there is no evidence whatsoever that President Trump committed any crimes, Pelosi wants to keep impeachment in limbo.

To me it seems she wants to wait and see if Democrats can win the Senate to then pass their articles of impeachment to the Senate. But it is unlikely this will happen. Not to mention the FACT that this latest stunt by Pelosi, and the socialists/democrats, shows that this sham of an impeachment is only a partisan attempt by the socialists/democrats to stop Trump from becoming POTUS for a second term.

Even 2 Democrats voted no in one article of impeachment, and 3 voted no on the second article. The only bipartisan agreement on this sham is against impeachment. So what happened to the socialist/democrat claims made by Pelosi, and others, that "they would only impeach if there is bipartisan support"?...

It's ironic how socialists/democrats have kept claiming "fairness in the impeachment process will come later" when at no time have socialists/democrats made any efforts of giving due process and fairness to this whole sham.

At no time have socialists/democrats allowed Republicans to bring their own witnesses. At no time have socialists/democrats allowed President Trump or his counsel to cross-examine ANY of the democrat witnesses, and Schiff even went so far as to order socialist/democrat's own witnesses not to respond to certain questions made by Republicans.

Now Pelosi, et al, want to force the Senate to continue with this impeachment sham. Pelosi thinks she has control over the Senate, which she does not. However, the latest stunt by socialists/democrats is more evidence of how partisan and unfair the whole impeachment sham has been.

Schumer went so far as to demand more socialist/democrat witnesses for the Senate trial, but at the same time Schumer, Pelosi, et al do not want ANY Republican witnesses to appear at all even for the Senate trial.

So how has this whole sham been fair? How have socialists/democrats given due process to President Trump and Republicans when throughout this whole sham they have denied all requests for witnesses from President Trump and Republicans?

I have some questions for the socialists/communists/democrats in the forums whom are to this day "anti-Trump."

Is your hatred of President Trump enough proof for you all to keep denying any fairness in this sham of an impeachment process?

I do hope none of you, whom seethe with hatred towards President Trump, ever find yourselves being accused of a crime you did not commit and you find yourselves being denied any fairness, and your rights are trampled by your prosecutor simply out of "hatred."

Is your hatred towards the best POTUS we have had for a long time the only evidence you all need to ruin and destroy innocent people?

You all stood by while innocent people in the Republican party have been ruined, including their careers, by RUSSIAN LIES and you all celebrated meanwhile all of this was happening right in front of your eyes.

Do you all really want to live with such hatred of your "political opposition" and the POTUS in your lives simply because the media and socialist/democrat leaders keep lying to you and telling you to hate us?

I feel sad for you all, and at the same time disgusted by how "hatred" seems to be all you, the never Trump crowd, need to impeach a POTUS and allow innocent people to be ruined and even sent to jail.

May you all, the never Trump crowd, find some measure of happiness in your lives even when all you have for "your political opposition" is nothing but contempt and hatred...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

So how has this whole sham been fair? How have socialists/democrats given due process to President Trump and Republicans when throughout this whole sham they have denied all requests for witnesses from President Trump and Republicans?

As someone who voted for him, dislikes him, but still thinks he's not bad in contrast as a president to those before him (low bar). I'm confused by both sides.

The left thinks they've won while ironically stacking the deck in their opponents favor... And the right is butt hurt and salty after being handed a win (if they handle it correctly).

Logically (overstatement considering it's coming from yours truly) I have to wonder if this is part of some grand game.

At this point though, I only care enough to comment. Obviously it interests me, but I can't change any of it... So I'm left with not my monkey, not my circus.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I was going to post thoughts along your lines but...

Here is what the Senate has to do now.



Not sure if they are just going to summarily dismiss it because "RRHHeee" or make political hay with it.

I'm good either way.

Sad that a meme sums it up and the left can't understand it.

S&F.

a reply to: Lumenari

Soon enough Pelosi, Schiff, et al, and the "never Trump crowd" will protest to add in the Constitution "hatred" as a reason to impeach...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Lumenari

Soon enough Pelosi, Schiff, et al, and the "never Trump crowd" will protest to add in the Constitution "hatred" as a reason to impeach...

They already have.

He's currently being impeached for pursuing a foreign policy they didn't agree with.

Because it makes them look bad if it works and Orange Man Bad..

Question. Is Pelosi violating Trump's constitutional rights by not allowing him a speedy trial? The House finished their investigation and held a vote. The Constitution says that the accused is required to get a speedy trial. Is Pelosi violating the constitution by not allowing due process?

They should not be able to get away with this , there must be something that can be done.

originally posted by: feldercarb
Question. Is Pelosi violating Trump's constitutional rights by not allowing him a speedy trial? The House finished their investigation and held a vote. The Constitution says that the accused is required to get a speedy trial. Is Pelosi violating the constitution by not allowing due process?

She has to be how can a president have less rights?

Waiting on 2020 election is ridiculously long time, however let me throw these out,

1. They are attempting to flip enough senators via cunning, lies, bribery or Epstein like files to achieve conviction on
bogus charges.

2. They are faking, gathering or convincing other fake witnesses and evidence to come forward in endless impeachment
charges and votes
.
3. Going after Pence in gambit to install Pelosi when dust settles.

4. They are in stalemate as Trump holds cards and has back channeled this to democrat leadership.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The impeachment doesnt matter if it doesnt make the list of items to carry over to the new session of congress before this session ends on January 3rd. Congress left for the holiday. If i recall correctly the issue will be dead and they will need to re-impeach him in the house. Get your clown goggles ready for the next show.

a reply to: feldercarb

Pelosi says she won't release the Impeachment Articles to the Senate until she knows that it will be a "FAIR" trial.

In other words, Democrats get their witnesses, but no Schiff, Whistleblower (Ciaramella), Sondland, Vindmann, or anyone connected to Ukraine's corruption with the prior Ukrainian administration. (i.e., No Joe/Hunter Biden, the DNC, Fusion GPS owners, or Crowdstrike)

In the meantime, the Supreme Court will determine if the Impeachment Articles passed by the House are legally valid.

Liberal Democrats and the Liberal Media are labeling Nancy Pelosi as "Smart and Wise". Since their track record is abysmal, the opposite must be true.

a reply to: Phoenix

Pelosi can not become President in this fashion.

Impeach Trump? His VP Pence takes over, and that same day appoints a VP. Impeach Pence? That VP steps in, and he, or she, appoints his/her own VP.

Pelosi becomes President only if both are incapacitated in some fashion at the same time. Or so my understanding goes. I might be wrong, but I don't think so.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It's absolutely brilliant political move. This way the Democrats get all the benefits of impeachment without any of the negatives!

What's wrong Nancy, your victory taste like ashes in your mouth...?

I just had a thought. Could it be ol' Nancy has resigned herself to believe that Trump will win re-election and she is holding out hoping for Democrats to gain control of the Senate during election? Maybe putting all of their eggs into the Senate races instead of the presidency? And "if" they win control of the Senate, then drop the impeachment on the Democratic Senate. IMO this has nothing to do with any "crimes" but just that they hate Trump and want him out any way they can do it.

a reply to: orion40m

That's an excellent theory. A Democrat Senate Majority on 1/1/2021 would also prevent the appointment of a Conservative Justice to replace Ruth Ginsburg. Ginsburg has said she will not VOLUNTARILY retire until age 90, but I think she'd do so sooner, if the Senate becomes Majority Democrat on 1/1/2021. (She's 86 now. DOB 3.15.1933.)

a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Maybe Nancy is scard that the Senate with a majority of Repubs will pull the same tactic she pulled. Did anyone else notice the votes were stacked 21 to 17 in the hearing?

The Supreme court will need to get involved soon. They see what is going on. They are not stupid. Im sure they have been watching this closely

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

This is basically what they've done.

Democrats will continue to waste time and distract people with insanity until they can get what they want.

I used to think it was about getting rid of Trump. I'm starting to think this is really about getting rid of people like me.