What If Democrats Withhold Articles Of Impeachment After Yes Vote From The House?

Is this even possible? I'm no legal scholar on House rules by any means, so I'm not sure. However, I just read an article that suggests this could happen, based on a tweet the other day from law professor, Laurence Tribe:



Many polls show that many Americans are not receptive to this impeachment trial. Many believe it's nothing more than a partisan attempt to bolster the odds of a Democratic Candidate beating Trump in the 2020 elections.

Democrats are now worried that a Senate trial will be "illegitimate," based on what Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham have publicly stated about how they will work with the White House to exonerate the President. One Democrat, even mentioned that McConnell and Graham “pla n to rig the trial.”

On a recent thread that I posted, I mentioned how the Democrat's were embarking on a new strategy, by ridiculing Republicans who defended President Trump and also by discrediting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Democrats know that their goal to impeach President Trump comes to an end once it reaches the Senate. So, what strategy do they now embark on?

Five days before the House vote on impeachment, they ridicule Republicans, by describing their support for President Trump as being "shameful" and then attempt to discredit Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Last Thursday, Adam Schiff ripped Republicans for defending President Donald Trump on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” and yesterday, Representative Karen Bass (D-CA) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), accused Mitch McConnell of "undermining the credibility of the Senate."

Sen. Chuck Schumer is already playing this "illegitimate" hand, by releasing a letter that demands Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell allow Democrats to call multiple witnesses at the Senate trial. This is crazy considering how the House investigation attempted to block Republicans from doing anything.

So, what if the Senate ignores the "provisions" that Schumer writes about in his letter, such as calling up Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton, among others, to testify at the Senate impeachment trial? Could the Democrats actually withhold the articles of impeachment?

What Schumer is clearly trying to do is lay the groundwork for declaring President Trump’s acquittal to be illegitimate (this has become a preferred Democrat strategy whenever they can’t get their way).

The idea is that the House will vote on Articles of Impeachment. But rather than sending those Articles to the Senate, Nancy Pelosi will stuff them on a Mason jar and bury them in her backyard. That way she can tell her base that she voted to impeach but the Senate will not treat the Articles seriously and therefore, rather than have them voted on, she’s just going to do nothing.

I suspect the calculus here is that Democrats can then run in 2020 based on the theme that they need a Democrat Senate in order to act on the impeachment while mollifying the drooling Democrat base with the shiny object of impeachment.

The only saving grace in this strategy is that it keeps the Democrats from being humiliated in a Senate trial, keeps impeachment alive, and lets Nancy Pelosi try to change the subject for her vulnerable House members.

www.redstate.com...

Thoughts?

I've posted about this possibility a few times. Dems want to run against an "impeached Trump".

The House can't hold the articles forever, but Nov 15, 2020 might be when they finally pass them over to the Senate.

I think Trump should declare a travel advisory against entering the US as it is about to get hot in here.

They won't.

Read this bull crap.

Full steam ahead.

All aboard the nazi train.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

And this is how the dims will hound President Trump through his second term. . . That is unless we get a clean sweep of the house and replace most of the dems with Republicans and keep control of the Senate.

originally posted by: Chance321
a reply to: shawmanfromny

And this is how the dims will hound President Trump through his second term. . . That is unless we get a clean sweep of the house and replace most of the dems with Republicans and keep control of the Senate.

which is more likely than not, based on why the last election went like it did. They had an investigation complete with needed leaks to the media to drive public opinion. This time, they have exhausted their abuse of power, and are running out of stupid to go around.

It sure looks like most of this is about preventing any investigation of Ukraine, as the catch might not fit in the net, with Biden and his boy being just the bait. This has been so one sided for so long, when it comes back around, it's going to snap pencil necks like.....pencils.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

I'm surprised that the Democrats aren't chriping to just get rid of the Senate, just like the Electoral College.

The longer this drags out, the less the Public cares.

Dems should be focusing on keeping members in their party and making sure they have enough House votes to even succeed.

Schummer should ask Rep. Nunes and Collins about how the minority gets listened too.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

So withhold the articles because of a violation of an oath that hasn't happened yet.

Pretty much fits with the way everything has been conducted for 3 years.

Spy on him illegally based on crimes he hasn't committed yet and charge him for obstructing some BS investigation that wasn't valid.

Maybe we should bury them all before we try them for treason and hang them.

a reply to: pavil

McConnel should use the House rules, and forget Schumer.

originally posted by: neo96
They won't.

Read this bull crap.

Full steam ahead.

All aboard the nazi train.

That report is stunningly inadequate to impeach a President.
Not just inadequate but in complete isolation to the facts or the Constitution.
If they present that to the Senate, I'd expect a 1 day review and acquittal - save for any political game playing.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: pavil

McConnel should use the House rules, and forget Schumer.

Agree, he should not invite him to hearings and run the proceedings in the basement in secret.
He can give the cherry picked highlights to the Dems.

The head of the Ukranian anti-corruption unit, who was installed as part of Obama's and Biden's efforts in Ukraine has been fired - for corruption.

This is the same guy who is caught on tape admitting the Ukraine were trying to help Hillary win in 2016.

Just more indication that investigation into Ukraine's dealings in 2016 shoudl be investigated.

Wow.
The best defense lawyers will use any tactic to delay a court trial .
Why ?
The prosecution's case will most times get weaker.
Seems as if the Democratic leadership is going about this bass-ackwards.

They a shootin themselves in the foot again ?
Or a sign they have no case ?

originally posted by: UKTruth
The head of the Ukranian anti-corruption unit, who was installed as part of Obama's and Biden's efforts in Ukraine has been fired - for corruption.

This is the same guy who is caught on tape admitting the Ukraine were trying to help Hillary win in 2016.

Just more indication that investigation into Ukraine's dealings in 2016 shoudl be investigated.

A Soros Sponsored and Backed anti corruption office at that.

What a shock.

House Dems should be charged with election tampering for 2020 for this ridiculous impeachment farce.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: pavil

McConnel should use the House rules, and forget Schumer.

the senate should use all the restraint the house did........
treatment in kind is in order in this event

play a stupid game
win a stupid prize

a reply to: shooterbrody

The biggest reason they won't do this?

Sixth amendment violation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions,the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

If they are this stupid to epically violate the 6th. It'd make Trumps case more clear it's hoax.

a reply to: neo96
oh no
no no no no no
impeachment is a political event not criminal
as it is left to congress, as we were told about the house process, the senate can make up whatever rules it likes
this is in no way a criminal or civil "trial"

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
Sen. Chuck Schumer is already playing this "illegitimate" hand, by releasing a letter that demands Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell allow Democrats to call multiple witnesses at the Senate trial. This is crazy considering how the House investigation attempted to block Republicans from doing anything.

So, what if the Senate ignores the "provisions" that Schumer writes about in his letter, such as calling up Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton, among others, to testify at the Senate impeachment trial? Could the Democrats actually withhold the articles of impeachment?

-snip-

Thoughts?

Let them call whatever witnesses they want.

We call the whistle-leaker, Vindman, the second whistle-leaker, Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, etc.

Game over.

Easy: The Senate can issues subpoenas to Schumer, Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler, to compel testimony on what the hell they think Trump did that justifies impeachment.

...And anything else the Republicans in the Senate think it is appropriate to ask them about.