***DONALD J TRUMP HAS OFFICIALLY BEEN IMPEACHED***

1396397399401402511

Comments

  • mcgruff10
    mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 29,130
    mickeyrat said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    RYME said:
    The articles haven't been sent over to the Senate yet because they do not want a trial there because the senate trial will call up whoever they want under oath.  That would be devastating.  The Dems know they can't remove him, so
    They just wanted the label tagged on Trump.
    (Trump Impeached)  (impeached doesn't mean removed) they hope that we the people don't know the difference.  No president has ever been removed. Nixon got the closest but resigned ahead of the Senate vote, so technically he wasn't removed either.
     They don't want the label (Trump Impeached but Acquitted)  and they don't want to have to answer those nasty questions under oath that they would get.
    This is fact not opinion.  The dems are in a box.  They are stalling trying to by time & figure out a way to wiggle out of the bind that they are in.
    That is the problem.  All of this distraction during an election year?  How is the Dem candidate going to get his or her message out?
    Bottom line you're still trying to undo 2016.
    Good luck.

    Johnson acquitted in Senate trial STILL IMPEACHED.

    Nixon rendered moot after resignation. STILL IMPEACHED

    Clinton  aquitted in Senate STILL IMPEACHED

    Trump IMPEACHED Senate trial pending

    STILL IMPEACHED.....

    btw, this is about his preformance AS president. Not a 3 yr old election......
    Almost positive Nixon was not impeached.  Only three presidents were ever impeached: Johnson, Clinton and trump.  
    yeah, you are right. the committee approved 3 rejected 2 articles. It hadnt gone to a full house vote  yet.

    McTeach for the win......

    Nixon was definitely on his way to being impeached.  I wonder how much it burns Trump knowing he is on this very short list. 

    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • darwinstheory
    darwinstheory LaPorte, IN Posts: 7,378
    2019
    mcgruff10 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    RYME said:
    The articles haven't been sent over to the Senate yet because they do not want a trial there because the senate trial will call up whoever they want under oath.  That would be devastating.  The Dems know they can't remove him, so
    They just wanted the label tagged on Trump.
    (Trump Impeached)  (impeached doesn't mean removed) they hope that we the people don't know the difference.  No president has ever been removed. Nixon got the closest but resigned ahead of the Senate vote, so technically he wasn't removed either.
     They don't want the label (Trump Impeached but Acquitted)  and they don't want to have to answer those nasty questions under oath that they would get.
    This is fact not opinion.  The dems are in a box.  They are stalling trying to by time & figure out a way to wiggle out of the bind that they are in.
    That is the problem.  All of this distraction during an election year?  How is the Dem candidate going to get his or her message out?
    Bottom line you're still trying to undo 2016.
    Good luck.

    Johnson acquitted in Senate trial STILL IMPEACHED.

    Nixon rendered moot after resignation. STILL IMPEACHED

    Clinton  aquitted in Senate STILL IMPEACHED

    Trump IMPEACHED Senate trial pending

    STILL IMPEACHED.....

    btw, this is about his preformance AS president. Not a 3 yr old election......
    Almost positive Nixon was not impeached.  Only three presidents were ever impeached: Johnson, Clinton and trump.  
    yeah, you are right. the committee approved 3 rejected 2 articles. It hadnt gone to a full house vote  yet.

    McTeach for the win......

    Nixon was definitely on his way to being impeached.  I wonder how much it burns Trump knowing he is on this very short list. 

    I hope he hasn't had a solid nights sleep since....or in the weeks that led up to it. He certainly acts delirious enough for this to be the case. But, then again, that's been the case for over 3 years, sooooo....
    "A smart monkey doesn't monkey around with another monkey's monkey" - Darwin's Theory
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,884
    Listen to the Tribe. Not Terry Francona,nor the mistake by the lake or TRRHOF.
    All the little kids growing up on the skids say Cleveland Rocks,  Cleveland Rocks...
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    2019
    RYME said:
    Impeachment isn't official until the articles of impeachment are sent over to the Senate.  So Donald Trump has not officially been impeached yet.  It has been voted on by the House yes!  But it hasn't been sent over to the Senate yet, so nothing's official yet.
    If they don't send the Articles over to the Senate, it will be rendered null and void.  If they do send it over to the Senate, they will have their Senate trial and he will be acquitted.
    So pick your poison.
    Ryme's triggered.
    www.myspace.com
  • Kat
    Kat Posts: 4,967
    edited December 2019
    Stop with the name-calling, everyone. It's never ok. Just discuss the topic and do not get personal with each other.

    Reality check. He's impeached. period. It's not an opinion. It's a reality.
    I hope everyone is enjoying the holiday season. Try to take a break from this stuff, if possible. Enjoy your families, if possible, lol. Cheers to everyone.


    Post edited by Kat on
    Falling down,...not staying down
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,546
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,884
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    They'll say impeached.  He has been charged officially with high crimes and misdemeanors.  He hasn't been convicted.  It's pretty straightforward
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    2019
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    Whole thing is moo anyway. Does anyone think Pelosi is never going to send them over? Ha. She wants a fair trial. Not too much to ask.
    www.myspace.com
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,315
    Certainly no one involved with this is looking for a fair trial.  Politicians only move forward if the odds (public or legal) are stacked in their favor.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,546
    mrussel1 said:
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    They'll say impeached.  He has been charged officially with high crimes and misdemeanors.  He hasn't been convicted.  It's pretty straightforward
    The guy who made the argument, Noah Feldman, was a Democrat witness in the hearings. He's not some hack from OANN. It's an interesting argument if you care enough to indulge it. It's definitely not worth pounding your fist on the table over, though.
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,546
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    Whole thing is moo anyway. Does anyone think Pelosi is never going to send them over? Ha. She wants a fair trial. Not too much to ask.
    I don't understand what Pelosi's leverage is. McConnell agrees to certain terms or else what?

    And to be clear, I think it's insane that we're even discussing whether or not the Senate will have a good faith trial.
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    "THE FIELD"
    pjl44 said:
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    Whole thing is moo anyway. Does anyone think Pelosi is never going to send them over? Ha. She wants a fair trial. Not too much to ask.
    I don't understand what Pelosi's leverage is. McConnell agrees to certain terms or else what?

    And to be clear, I think it's insane that we're even discussing whether or not the Senate will have a good faith trial.

    She has no leverage.  When Mitch says he’s going to transparently do what is best for the Red Team, he means it.  And I think we have learned that the res of the GOP will go along with it.  They are going to clear him. And quickly.

     I do love the irony of Republicans bitching about her slowing the process down #merrickgarland.
    1995 Milwaukee     1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine     
    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin
    2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • Ledbetterman10
    Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,994
    edited December 2019
    pjl44 said:
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    Whole thing is moo anyway. Does anyone think Pelosi is never going to send them over? Ha. She wants a fair trial. Not too much to ask.
    I don't understand what Pelosi's leverage is. McConnell agrees to certain terms or else what?

    And to be clear, I think it's insane that we're even discussing whether or not the Senate will have a good faith trial.
    I've wondered about what exactly her leverage is as well. Here's what I've come up with: By not sending over the articles, she's implying "We'll have a fair trial, or no trial at all." That might sound like a win for Trump at first, to not have to go to trial. But I think being acquitted in a Senate trial (which will happen) is way more of a win for him. So putting that off might be her play. 

    Also, I don't know how long she can drag this out (not sending over the articles), but hypothetically, I wonder if she can wait as long as she wants. Like, when there's a Democrat-controlled Senate. Not that I see that happening any time soon though. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,546
    pjl44 said:
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    Whole thing is moo anyway. Does anyone think Pelosi is never going to send them over? Ha. She wants a fair trial. Not too much to ask.
    I don't understand what Pelosi's leverage is. McConnell agrees to certain terms or else what?

    And to be clear, I think it's insane that we're even discussing whether or not the Senate will have a good faith trial.
    I've wondered about what exactly her leverage is as well. Here's what I've come up with: By not sending over the articles, she's implying "We'll have a fair trial, or no trial at all." That might sound like a win for Trump at first, to not have to go to trial. But I think being acquitted in a Senate trial (which will happen) is way more of a win for him. So putting that off might be her play. 

    Also, I don't know how long she can drag this out (not sending over the articles), but hypothetically, I wonder if she can wait as long as she wants. Like, when there's a Democrat-controlled Senate. Not that I see that happening any time soon though. 
    If he's gonna "win" either way, I'm less concerned with degrees than putting every Senator on the record. Romney, Collins, et al. get off pretty easy if there's no vote. Depending on how the GOP winds are blowing say 5 years from now, they can make all sorts of claims about what they "would have done." All the more reason I think they should have seen through trying to get testimony from Bolton, Mulvaney, etc.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Thanks for good answers to my questions, all.  And thanks Kat for the reminder to take a break from this stuff.  Like  (no doubt) others here, I find myself a bit obsessed  with all of this, just hoping and hoping we will only have to endure the current POTUS (I don't even like mentioning his name anymore) for much longer.

    Cheer y'all!
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,833
    He’s officially impeached but since Pelosi has not sent the articles to the Senate, it’s tantamount to someone being charged with or indicted on a crime, but are out on bail with their court date pending. 
    I would agree he is impeached. But I don’t agree with this analogy and is why I don’t think it is far-fetched for those who claim he hasn’t been impeached yet. There is no pending trial.
    Its more like being out on bail but the prosecutor refuses to set a trial date so they can hang the label of being charged over your head indefinitely. At some point a judge is going to say Move forward with a trial or drop the charges.
    I think in 75 years when anyone who can remember this is dead or senile history will remember this as an impeachment with all democratic votes who decided they didn’t have enough for trial.
  • Kat
    Kat Posts: 4,967
    brianlux said:
    Thanks for good answers to my questions, all.  And thanks Kat for the reminder to take a break from this stuff.  Like  (no doubt) others here, I find myself a bit obsessed  with all of this, just hoping and hoping we will only have to endure the current POTUS (I don't even like mentioning his name anymore) for much longer.

    Cheer y'all!
    After soul-eater is gone, and I hope it's soon, we'll all still be here and we'll have families to celebrate holidays with. He'll, hopefully, just be a bad memory.
    And a few other thoughts based on the discussions, I feel that Speaker Pelosi is giving time for people to think and do the right thing. She's patient and after the holidays, hopefully, I seem to be saying hopefully a lot, the people in power will have time to plan on an honest trial with witnesses and lots of testimony. Also, citizens have this time to contact their Senators and express how they'd like to be represented. I don't want my Senators to be a part of a rigged trial with no witness testimony. That would be fake and wrong and corrupt. I will express that to my Senators.

    Falling down,...not staying down
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Kat said:
    brianlux said:
    Thanks for good answers to my questions, all.  And thanks Kat for the reminder to take a break from this stuff.  Like  (no doubt) others here, I find myself a bit obsessed  with all of this, just hoping and hoping we will only have to endure the current POTUS (I don't even like mentioning his name anymore) for much longer.

    Cheer y'all!
    After soul-eater is gone, and I hope it's soon, we'll all still be here and we'll have families to celebrate holidays with. He'll, hopefully, just be a bad memory.
    And a few other thoughts based on the discussions, I feel that Speaker Pelosi is giving time for people to think and do the right thing. She's patient and after the holidays, hopefully, I seem to be saying hopefully a lot, the people in power will have time to plan on an honest trial with witnesses and lots of testimony. Also, citizens have this time to contact their Senators and express how they'd like to be represented. I don't want my Senators to be a part of a rigged trial with no witness testimony. That would be fake and wrong and corrupt. I will express that to my Senators.

    In bold, hugely good idea!  I will do just that!

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • Kat
    Kat Posts: 4,967
    And to help anyone else who wishes to contact their Senators.


    Falling down,...not staying down
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,884
    pjl44 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Even the lawyers can't seem to agree on this.  Is there anyone here qualified to really know what is what here?  I know I'm not!


    The White House is considering making the case that Mr. Trump has not been impeached based on an opinion piece by Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman on Bloomberg's opinion page Thursday. Feldman was one of the legal experts called by Democrats to testify before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month and has advocated for Mr. Trump's impeachment and removal from office.

    "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 in Bloomberg. "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."

    "If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn't actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all," Feldman wrote.

    However, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe wrote on Twitter that he disagreed with Feldman's analysis, saying that "under Art. I, Sec. 2, Clause 5, he was impeached on Dec 18, 2019. He will forever remain impeached. Period." That portion of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."




    It doesn't really matter. It's basically Constitutional lawyers arguing over what the history books would say if a meteor hit DC tomorrow. 
    They'll say impeached.  He has been charged officially with high crimes and misdemeanors.  He hasn't been convicted.  It's pretty straightforward
    The guy who made the argument, Noah Feldman, was a Democrat witness in the hearings. He's not some hack from OANN. It's an interesting argument if you care enough to indulge it. It's definitely not worth pounding your fist on the table over, though.
    It doesn't make a difference to me who is making the argument.  It's specious because there's nothing in the Constitution that says it's some continuous process and if part two isn't completed, then it's "null and void" which is what the Trump team is trying to argue.  Each chamber has their role.  Once the House votes, he's impeached.  And then the trial starts.  Even when acquitted, he's impeached, just like Johnson and Clinton.