It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The impeachment process drones on . But there’s light at the end of the tunnel

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 02:36 PM
Here’s what will probably happen next with the impeachment dud.

Pelosi did not give a concrete day or time as to when this would happen. The speaker just said she will talk to Democrats at the weekly caucus meeting Tuesday “on how we proceed further.” The expectation on Capitol Hill is that the House will vote to send the articles of impeachment across the Capitol on Tuesday or Wednesday.

What I wouldn’t give to be a fly on the wall for that .

I’m sure it will mainly be groans, face palm’s, accompanied with the deer in the headlight look. Followed by “dear Lord what did we do”?🤭

Proceed? Hell they should be looking for a way out. If I had my druthers they would add Adam Schiff to the trail of fall guys they’ve strung out over the last 40 years.

But Tuesday is the first opportunity for the hag that’s been left holding the bag. To lay out the Democrats plan.

It’s almost like they are sharing the faux impeachment burden. The House Democrats get the pin and Nancy gets the hand grenade.

So I guess we’re just gonna have to wait and see.

The rest of the article laid out procedural rules we’ve already discussed.


But there is one thing I’d like to point out.

Robert Byrd submitted a motion to dismiss during the Clinton trial.

Democrats need only six Republicans to win a simple-majority vote on the dismissal motion or to defeat the motion to call witnesses.

Dismissal or Block witnesses. they both come after rule six

VI. The Senate shall have power to compel the attend- ance of witnesses, to enforce obedience to its orders, man- dates, writs, precepts, and judgments, to preserve order, and to punish in a summary way contempts of, and disobe- dience to, its authority, orders, mandates, writs, precepts, or judgments, and to make all lawful orders, rules, and regulations which it may deem essential or conducive to the ends of justice. And the Sergeant at Arms, under the direction of the Senate, may employ such aid and assist- ance as may be necessary to enforce, execute, and carry into effect the lawful orders, mandates, writs, and precepts of the Senate.

“ compel the attendance of witnesses”

VII. The Presiding Officer of the Senate shall direct all necessary preparations in the Senate Chamber, and the Presiding Officer on the trial shall direct all the forms of proceedings while the Senate is sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment, and all forms during the trial not otherwise specially provided for. And the Presiding Officer on the trial may rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate, unless some Member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote

Byrds motion to dismiss was on the grounds that there would never be a 2/3 majority for conviction. He was right but he didn’t have the majority.

The other motion was to block witnesses.

Byrd had to file the motion to block witnesses after witnesses could be compelled under rule six.

Which would mean he filed the motion under rule seven.

The only other time that I see motions being excepted is under rule 16. But that’s after the trial has started and the witnesses are called.

XVI. All motions, objections, requests, or applications 185 whether relating to the procedure of the Senate or relating immediately to the trial (including questions with respect
to admission of evidence or other questions arising during
the trial
made by the parties or their counsel shall be addressed to the Presiding Officer only, and if he, or any Senator, shall require it, they shall be committed to writ- ing, and read at the Secretary’s table.

Byrd’s positions are included at this link .

Most boring thing I’ve read in my entire life.

So the Republicans can submit a motion to dismiss at rule seven when evidentiary decisions are made. Just like the KKK leader Robert Byrd.

Take it to trial Mitch

Byrd motion 1999

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 02:46 PM
They are already crying cover-up because they don't get to call the shots.

Someone, somewhere needs to figure out how to remove them from service for completely disregarding their oath of office, and for continued lies/slander/tampering with the next election.

Best part is, they haven't even started their own culling of the herd for whose going to run for their party.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 02:58 PM
a reply to: Fallingdown

I'm starting to wonder if the whole thing is going to be dragged out in the senate so Bernie can't campaign.

That way, the dems can't get blamed for hedging him out..... Again.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 03:02 PM
a reply to: Notoneofyou

It can be done. Total and complete removal. However for various reasons it would be better to vote out enough that a removal of the House can be done by internal procedure rather than outside influence.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 03:15 PM
a reply to: Notoneofyou

In Nixon vs the United States Justices White, Blackmun, Souter and Stevens all leave a avenue for intervention . Which is exactly the way things playing out .

White and Blackmun

The Court is of the view that the Constitution forbids us even to consider his contention. I find no such prohibition and would therefore reach the merits of the claim.


One can, nevertheless, envision different and unusual circumstances that might justify a more searching review of impeachment proceedings. If the Senate were to act in a manner seriously threatening the integrity of its results, convicting, say, upon a coin-toss, or upon a summary determination that an officer of the United States was simply " 'a bad guy,'

That sounds familiar . 🤔

Justice Stevens......

Government forecloses any assumption that improbable hypotheticals like those mentioned by Justice WHITE and Justice SOUTER will ever occur.

All four justices improbable hypotheticals are occurring as we speak .

SCOTUS can be called upon to knock heads together and put the house on a short leash . But they can’t charge anybody .

But I’d be willing to bet the articles of impeachment include lies and misrepresentations.

That’s called perjury.

There’s a lot more on my first thread .

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 03:37 PM
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I honestly think they realize that they will be submitting forged instruments . Which could make them subject to charges . Adam Schiff most of all .

You saw my position on subornation of perjury didn’t you?

Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

By US code that’s five years every time any perjury occurs.

That’s what Adam gets for running the whole Schiff show . Every time someone lies it all falls back on him .

US code

Unless they get some assurances they won’t be charged . Which could very well happen in dirty DC.

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Nancy keeps acting like she believes in the constitution. So she can’t say they won’t submit the articles for the good of the nation . 🤮

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 03:42 PM
Does anyone else here think that Pelosi is loosing it and needs to retire before everyone thinks she is a fool? She may at one time have been a good congresswoman, but not any more, she is ruining her reputation and making it look bad for women in politics.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 03:55 PM
Another thing that needs mentioned is Alcee L. Hastings vs the United States .

Hastings was tried and acquitted in a criminal court for bribery .

Congress carried on with his impeachment trial anyway .

He was impeached and removed from office despite the fact that he was found not guilty under criminal law . Double Jeopardy was irrelevant and his impeachment was upheld.

That would mean that if any of the House Democrats fell under the allegation of perjury.

Their asses can be impeached after the 2020 general election when we have the numbers back .

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 05:32 PM
a reply to: rickymouse

Not to mention greatly ignoring her constituency.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 05:33 PM
It hasn't even been 30 days since Trump was impeached. My God, have things changed since I was young, when you waited 12 to 16 weeks just to get a record album you ordered on TV.

Impeachment "drones on". Hardly.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 05:46 PM
a reply to: MiddleInsite

The Senate Trial started 17 days after the House Impeached Clinton. Pelosi is the hold up on this Impeachment.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 05:49 PM
Need to impeach the entire collective gov for their BS impeachment fake news while they screw us more show.
Get back to work you lying, theiving rats.
Sick of the intentional misdirection.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 06:02 PM

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
They are already crying cover-up because they don't get to call the shots.

Crocodile tears, Pelosi was gloating today at the prospect of "staining" President Trump's record with impeachment.
What Pelosi is doing should be considered criminal.
edit on 13-1-2020 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 06:11 PM
a reply to: rickymouse

I trust even a passel of Democrats in the middle, and almost
all of the independent voters have given up on Nancy, Ricky.
Her tortilla started curling a month after Schiff started his
stand-up (wait. sit-down) parody of the phone call.

There are indeed unweighted, somewhat clean polls out there
that gauge public opinion... but you almost never hear of them
in the media.
The gruesome truth for the Democrat establishment is they
should have quit digging after the Mueller investigation tanked.
I mean, when the guy RUNNING that doesn't even know WHO the
principal fact witness IS--- much less subpoena him? SaFiH[er],
and it is conveniently a gender nonspecific malediction.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 06:45 PM
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

In my opinion, it is criminal.

She's not acting in behalf of americans, she's acting on behalf of covering up the backlog of a bunch of criminals.

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 07:06 PM
a reply to: CriticalStinker

he will get to go to the one tomorrow, but then the next debates are all in feb i think on the 7th 19th and 25th so he very well could miss all of those as supposedly pelosi is only sending one article of impeachment to senate and going back for more show trials for the other charges if the senate does not do what she demands (i really really hate her)

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 07:10 PM
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Crocodile tears


A good example was when Nancy said she prays for Trump .

There ain’t one damn person in the country that believed her including all Democrats .

But they’ll pretend that they did .

Because fantasy is the new reality for the left .

posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 07:50 PM
In my opinion , the impeachment will not be turned over.
Their process to oust Trump via usurping the 2020 election is in place .
They need Biden to be elected to continue on .
If they proceed with the impeachment they realize some of their political careers are done and over.
So , they have to do as much damage as possible before then.
Like several have said (I haven't till now)

Will their nefarious plan to elect Biden work ?
Only the "swing vote" from the real Democrats can prevent it.

top topics


log in