Cunning Lawfare Maneuver – House Will Withhold Submission of Articles from Senate…

Seemingly overlooked by most, when the House voted on the ‘rules of impeachment’ they removed the traditional appointment of House Managers to a later date.

Normally the House Managers would be appointed at the same time as the impeachment vote; however, by withholding the appointment House Democrats are indicating they will not immediately send articles of impeachment to the senate but will rather hold the articles as support for pending court cases toward their judicial authority.

A cunning Lawfare ploy.

As interested observers will note the House never voted to authorize the full judicial impeachment process; instead they voted to approve an inquiry into whether an impeachment should take place.  By not voting to authorize articles of impeachment the House never gainedjudicial enforcement authority‘.  The absence of judicial authority is now working its way through the courts in various cases.

It appears the absence of appointing House impeachment managers; and the decision to withhold sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate; is now a specific design.

As the process appears to be unfolding, the Lawfare contracted lawyers representing the House: chief legal counsel Douglas Letter, Barry Berke, Norm Eisen and Daniel Goldman will now argue before the courts that all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for a pending judicial proceeding, a trial in the Senate.

What the house crew have assembled is an interesting back-door attempt to position a valid claim for evidence against the accused without having first gained judicial authority for it.  The Lawfare crew will argue to the lower courts, and to SCOTUS, the blocked evidentiary material is critical evidence in a soon-to-be-held Senate trial.

The material they have been seeking is: (1) Mueller grand jury material; (2) a deposition by former White House counsel Don McGahn; and less importantly (3) Trump financial and tax records.  Each of these issues is currently being argued in appellate courts (6e and McGahn) and the supreme court (financials/taxes).

The House impeachment of President Trump succeeds in applying the label “impeached president” that was their primary political purpose. President Trump is marred with the label of an ‘impeached president’.

Now the delay in sending the articles of impeachment allows the House lawyers to gather additional evidence while the impeachment case sits in limbo.

The House essentially blocks any/all impeachment activity in the Senate by denying the transfer of the articles from the House to the Senate.  Additionally, the House will now impede any other Senate legislative action because the House will hold the Senate captive. Meanwhile the Democrat presidential candidates can run against an impeached President.

Lawfare’s legal svengali Lawrence Tribe recently penned an op-ed with this type of  recommendation; and it appears the community that worships Tribe, including the House lawyers writ large, are following his advice.

While Politico outlines the plan from a position if the scheme as a new idea, the fact the House impeachment rules were changed to drop the appointment of the managers speaks to considerable forethought on this type of plan.

It does not appear this is a new idea; rather it looks like this is a pre-planned procedural process by design:

Washington – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, the second-ranking lawmaker in the House, said Wednesday that Democrats must discuss a last-ditch gambit to delay sending articles of impeachment to the Senate and prevent the Republican-controlled chamber from summarily discarding the case against President Donald Trump.

“Some think it’s a good idea. And we need to talk about it,” Hoyer said just as the House began debating articles of impeachment that charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

In recent weeks, some legal scholars have suggested Speaker Nancy Pelosi could consider refusing to transmit articles of impeachment — likely to pass the House Wednesday evening — to the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has declared he is coordinating trial strategy with the White House.

[…] Notably, House Judiciary Committee Democrats huddled with Tribe earlier this month as they practiced behind closed doors for their series of impeachment hearings.

[…] the House could use the delay to continue to build on its evidence for impeachment, and possibly to score additional legal victories that could unlock troves of new evidence and witness testimony that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. Some of those court cases could be decided within weeks. (read more)

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Supreme Court, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

751 Responses to Cunning Lawfare Maneuver – House Will Withhold Submission of Articles from Senate…

  1. Petri Volk says:

    Another reason Pelosi might not want to send the articles to Senate is that once the charges are dismissed then, for practical purposes, the Democrats lose impeachment as a weapon against the President. They could return with ‘more impeachment’ but that doesn’t really fly politically because voters will not want a congress continually running to yet another impeachment process. Holding up the trial, at least keeps the leverage with the House, and I presume they might be able to add articles if they can find or manufacture additional charges.

    By contrast, a failed impeachment bid frees Trump up politically. Much more so, if he wins a second term in the face of this impeachment vote, which will mean Congress’s ability for oversight will be greatly diminished. This weak case, made badly in the most partisan way, that has not brought the country along, with a real prospect of re-election of the President, is thus massively dangerous for Congress.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. MarkJ says:

    Cute tactic, but it ain’t gonna work. In the event withholding happens, Trump can rightfully and convincingly state, “If the House Democrats don’t have the courage to pass their articles on to the Senate, then a) that tells you how weak their case is and, in turn, b) that I must be presumed innocent.”

    Advantage Trump.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. The HJC refused to follow House Rules and allow the Minority a day to call witnesses of their choosing. Why can’t MAGA Lawfare lawyers sue the House to declare the impeachment invalid, or stay the impeachment declaration?

    Where are our pit bull creative lawyers?

    Liked by 6 people

  4. spinoneone says:

    It only takes one member of Congress to ask for a vote on sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate. It is likely to pass since many Dems want action now and the Republicans would likely support it. Pelosi can take her time on appointing managers, if she wants. The Articles can be forwarded, and, in fact, would have to be forwarded immediately if a vote to do so were passed.

    Liked by 2 people

    • DoggyDaddy says:

      Why is it necessary to “forward” the articles to the Senate? The House formally voted on each of the articles, they are in print and a matter of public record. The House has fulfilled its role by voting on impeachment. Since the Senate has the sole power to try impeachment, why can’t the Senate take that public record of the articles that were just voted on and a part of the official congressional record and set a trial date? At that time the House would have to either put up or shut up. I mean, if the House can manipulate process, why can’t the Senate?

      Liked by 1 person

  5. OldSaltUSNR says:

    Careful, even just saying that is a Federal crime. Don’t make that mistake.

    Don’t tip your hand. For example, if your conscience in supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States, and this democratic republic, from lawless Democrats leads you to act, to use their own words, “… by any means necessary”, for heaven’s sake, don’t talk about it in advance. Whether it’s a protest, a letter to a newspaper, a trip to the ice creme shop, a counter demonstration at an “ANTIFA” event, or some other event in D.C., don’t broadcast your plans.

    Just do what you’re going to do.

    Like

  6. 21leelee says:

    If there is no urgency to remove the President from office, then there is no reason to target him.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Frank says:

    At this point there is a part of me that suspects the globalist party wants to incite a civil war. If they can infuriate enough people to spark a war, they can then call for aid from communist China.

    Like

    • sDee says:

      What the globalists want is to rule us. A civil war does not serve that purpose. They have brought their will upon Americans with complete cooperation from with both Parties and without protest from us citizens.

      Was the Boehner/Ryan/McConnell Congress and Roberts Court not enough to proof that elections will not stop there design. They plan to wait out President Trump and reengage their machine, which still runs deep. Despite being fully exposed in this coup, it operates unimpeded.

      The globalists are running a century long plan. They have built this government with our consent, and set it upon us. It has robbed us of our wealth, our property and our liberty. It has been a hundred years and we have not even managed protest or civil disobedience, let alone civil war.

      Liked by 6 people

      • old white guy says:

        Correct.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Pale rider says:

        I agree with all except no civil war Dee. Either way they would win because with a civil war it opens us to a full U.N. takeover. And by the way, just like you eluded to, its all by consent. At any given junction we can stop this.
        We are riding a very fine line right now, the stakes are raised every day. At this point its Pelosi or Trump. My money is on Trump. Trump shows no weakness, Pelosi is coming apart right before our eyes just like Hillary did.

        Like

      • TroubleTrouble says:

        Civil war allows for them to call on the UN to remove the president through force due to civil unrest.

        Like

      • LarryG says:

        I certainly agree with you on the intent of globalists, Dee, but what will the outcome of all the devious manuevoring and power grabbing ultimately be? Up to this point, the “100-year plan” has developed largely in the shadows–at least as far as the majority of citizens are concerned. President Trump has done one thing better than anyone I can think of could have; he has brought light to their plan and their intent…and set them to scrambling to recover to such an extent, they are alienating a lot of citizens in the process.

        They can do their vote gathering, their court packing, their redistricting, their rule changing and and other manipulations of our system, but they can no longer do it in the shadows….and those elected persons STILL serve according to the will of the people. And the people are waking up to the fact that very little that the left or globalists are working toward ultimately has anything to do with the welfare of the citizens…and that is where their weakness lies.

        The response we’re seeing in VA. is, I believe, a good example of how we will stand when we reach the limits of our patience. They may have the governorship, they may control the legislature and they obviously have support in the urban areas, but they can’t suppress our love of freedom and self-determination, and there is always going to a significant portion of our population that will resist unconstitutional, unlawful efforts to do so.

        An all out civil war would require two armed parties. St the moment, I am aware of one beavily-armed side and one very arrogant, stupid side which overestimates the extent of.political power and thinks it can gain complete control by steamrolling and manipulating everything our country stands for. I don’t believe they understand the depth nor the danger for them in the cold anger that has been building.

        Like

      • map says:

        Meh…if any of that were true, then the Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, British Empire, The Hapsburgs, Bourbons, The French Aristocracy, and the Austro-Hungarian Empire…would still be with us.
        Yet, they are all dust.
        These increasingly desperate acts will not work, ultimately.

        Like

  8. Don L says:

    Seems that the real issue here is that the head of the House–by setting conditions on the Senate–has overstepped her authority and…is guilty of “obstructing of the Senate”.
    Mitch might call for all concerned Americans to arrive in DC to watch the article’s burning event whenever they might arrive.

    Like

  9. Peter Westberg says:

    I’ve read, and reread the relevant clauses in the Constitution and *no where* does it say anything about the House having to give/transmit/send the Senate any papers, *no where* does it mention “managers”, all it says is the House has the sole power to Impeach, and the Senate has the sole power to Try. That’s IT. The other stuff is mere tradition, and if the House doesn’t want to follow the tradition, by withholding their extra Constitutional “Articles”, then fine, the Senate should just move forward on it and do their duty and hold a Trial.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Tracy Bovee says:

      Exactly. Indeed, I seem to recall having heard that there is some thought the Senate may take up the question – will Nan, nil Nan – and try it anyway in ‘absentia’ if you will. That, to me, would be a fitting resolution to this insanity.

      Liked by 3 people

  10. zekness says:

    some basic information that need to be highlighted here in the interest of process.

    “If the House votes to impeach, managers (typically referred to as “House managers”, with a “lead House manager”) are selected to present the case to the Senate. ”

    for those calling for the senate to act now, I refer you to the rules and the precedence for guidance.

    plainly speaking: the house has voted on rules…the house has voted on articles of impeachment. the house has NOT voted on naming Impeachment Managers. the house has not referred impeachment articles per process to the senate.

    thus, the senate may not act at this time.

    there are two things left for the house to complete before the senate can hear this trial. They are:

    house must name the impeachment managers. (think of prosecutors…that’s basically what managers are…the dems have not named them in the resolution ..so there are no managers to present the case before the senate and try the case before the trial!)

    house must officially refer the impeachment articles AND name the managers …this has not been complete.

    IF (big if, I am skeptical the dems have any goals at all to send this to the senate), the house does name managers, then and only then can the senate commence a impeachment trial.

    this is how it has worked historically and within the impeachment process..ever…single time..

    scenario: if the senate were to proceed right now, without managers named, would be inviting a greater risk to the merits of any decision it makes ultimately either way. A legal challenge would be made and easily won on behalf of dems, that the majority senate is not following due process.

    be clear in this matter of due process..the majority senate does not want to screw this up by adopting dubious methods to overcome the shortfalls of the house.

    demand the house name the managers…and wait for it to happen…put the pressure on them in the press and call it out for what it really is:

    a trick and corrupt act to continue to dance around with nothing more than an insinuation of impeachment articles, but failing to actually put any will and power behind it.

    force the corrupt dems and push their faces in the dung they have created.

    when a puppy craps on your carpet…you take it to the dump and scold it…that’s how it learns and how you discipline a dog..it works….dogs are not stupid.

    the RIGHT needs to demonstrate mastery over dog training 101..and when it refuses…kick it to the lawn ….some dogs, you can’t traing…these dogs don’t deserve to be in the house.

    voters take notes.

    Liked by 2 people

    • sDee says:

      “the RIGHT needs to demonstrate mastery over dog training 101..and when it refuses…kick it to the lawn ….some dogs, you can’t traing…these dogs don’t deserve to be in the house.
      voters take notes.”

      We’ve taken notes. We have given them the majorities. We have also noticed the new dogs just lift their leg over the same spot on the carpet. The GOP is has perfected its breed.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The problem is that the very vehicle of getting the truth of this to the American voters is an arm of the corruption that created this mess.

      Like

    • OldParatrooper says:

      The “house must officially refer the impeachment articles AND name the managers …this has not been complete”

      Sorry, the Constitution doesn’t say that. It also provides that each House makes its own rules. Nothing in the Constitution that says the House Rules override the Senate Rules. Nothing to prevent Sen McConnell from taking up the Articles and initiating the trial in the Senate.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Tracy Bovee says:

        Well, there *is* precedent and history that says the House does certain things as mentioned, before the Senate takes it up … but:

        1) Absolutely correct about what the Constitution does and does not say about it.

        2) The Donks have already burned down precedent and history with this idiocy, and cra##ed on the remains.

        Therefore, the Senate has zero reason to respect any of it. Leader McConnell can basically do what he wants here, and Nan and Co. can go hang. I rather hope he will, and screw those Lawfare blankety-blanks.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Craig Furlong says:

      Here’s a better idea. The Senate and President together immediately file suit with SCOTUS to resolve any holdup so the Senate can begin trial now.

      America wants this business put to bed now.

      Like

    • Ted A Oplinger says:

      Quote: “there are two things left for the house to complete before the senate can hear this trial. They are:

      house must name the impeachment managers. (think of prosecutors…that’s basically what managers are…the dems have not named them in the resolution ..so there are no managers to present the case before the senate and try the case before the trial!)

      house must officially refer the impeachment articles AND name the managers …this has not been complete.” End quote.

      Absolutely not.

      The Senate is where the Constitution has stated the trial takes place.

      If a trial begins, and the prosecution does not have its case forwarded to the defense, and does not have its representing lawyers present – the defense can move immediately for acquittal or dismissal of charges, regardless.

      In most court cases, the judge simply plays the lawfare game by granting delay motions (many times, a prosecutorial move). However, if a judge does not want to play that game, then the trial goes forward, regardless of whether the prosecution is ready or not.

      The Senate Majority Leader sets the rules and the timetable of how the trial will proceed. The House must necessarily play the Senate’s game now – if the Senate wants to play.

      Like

    • map says:

      Nobody knows or cares about civil procedure or the traditional procedures of the House. What people know is the rhetoric of the House Dems: Trump is a dire threat and must be tried immediately and removed. If he is such a threat, then why the delay over picking prosecutors? If there is additional information and evidence about Trump, then why did they not wait for that evidence? Furthermore, demanding the Senate conform to their rules means they are effectively trying to rig the trial.
      None of this looks good if the agenda is to move the popular needle against Trump.
      Besides, you can’t continually violate basic norms of legal proceedings as people understand them and then expect procedure to be followed elsewhere.

      Like

    • The SCOTUS has precedent saying they cannot say whether or not a proper impeachment trial was conducted by congress.

      (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._United_States)

      So, “a legal challenge would be made and easily won on behalf of dems, that the majority senate is not following due process” is not plausible, unless there is some non- U.S. court where one could make a “judicial challenge.”

      The other bit is, none of those procedural things are in the constitution, and therefore it is questionable whether they could be deemed constitutional, or not.

      Like

  11. billsv says:

    Who says the Senate needs to have the articles of impeachment to hold a trial and Aquitaine the President?

    Like

  12. billsv says:

    Who says the Senate needs to have the articles of impeachment to hold a trial and Aquitaine the President?

    Like

  13. Chilidog says:

    This move seems flimsy. Don’t know what to make of it yet. Perhaps leadership on both sides are trying to end this process as soon as possible while saving face.

    Like

  14. scottmc37 says:

    Its all about getting power and the Dems will do anything and everything to get and hold power. Rigging elections etc etc etc, the current impeachment is no different than the Russian hoax. Hopefully most people will understand, but I doubt it, look how many cities the dems have controlled for decades, and the condition those cities are in….

    Like

    • R. Doc Zortman says:

      Without a crime and an intended outcome to remove a duly-elected president without following the Constitution and due-process, this is definitely an attempted coup – to which the charge is treason – clearly stated in the Constitution of execution as the sentence… Great way for the globalists to start their plan to depopulate this planet

      Like

  15. Coast says:

    What’s really important is for the voter to do the right thing. We know by default that the democrats won’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. StanH says:

    “Laws are for the other people.” The Constitution is a prop for these criminals to used when it behooves them.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. RLA Bruce says:

    Dems don’t want the Senate’s final ruling, and this is how they prevent it; without the Articles, the Senate can’t exonerate Trump. This lets the Dems strut around, saying he’s been impeached without an acquittal.

    What Dems don’t understand is that their maneuverings won’t help them politically. They already have committed political suicide with their transparent shenanigans. No one is fooled and will STRONGLY retaliate at the ballot box no matter what they do.

    This is as if Dems are delaying the end of a poker game by refusing to take their turn and put their losing hand on the table, then scream that they haven’t lost yet because the game isn’t over.

    Liked by 5 people

  18. vetmike says:

    This is why we cannot trust Congress or the Federal Government in anything. They create obscure rules designed to hide their activities under the guise of ‘impartiality’ and ‘decorum’ when, in fact, they really want to hide their nefarious schemes. Maybe Brooks had the right idea when he caned Sumner in the House.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. tacocat43 says:

    Perhaps the Senate can and will proceed. The only thing the Constitution says about proceeding: Article I, Section 3 says: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” The Democrats have thrown all precedent out concerning Impeachment customs and precedents. What’s to say the GOP cannot do the same?

    Like

  20. Bulldog84 says:

    There won’t be a trial in the Senate.

    Like

    • Craig Furlong says:

      Maybe yes, maybe no on whether a trial will be held in the Senate…
      But what is for sure, the Senate should act and display its power now!

      America has waited far to long…time to put-it-to-bed!

      Like

  21. wildsailor2018 says:

    You don’t suppose that the Demonrats are just planning such a massive voter fraud for the 2020 election that they will ‘miraculously’ win a bigger majority in the House, win the Senate, and the Presidency by millions of votes… The Demonrat activist lawyers are busy filing lawsuits in every State to tear down the processes and procedures the clerks use to validate voters and validate votes. To me the message is clear…they will pull out every trick to win what they desperately need to reset their agenda for progressivism. In the meantime they are willing to burn it all to the ground.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Broc says:

    It is time for these traitors to be collected up, every root and branch, and summarily despised of.

    Like

  23. Paint Chip says:

    If the purpose of holding the articles is to gain advantage over the rulings on lawsuits filed on access to Muller report info/tax returns/McGahn/etc. in the coming court cases under the guise of needing the evidence for the Senate trial, wouldn’t the need for any of that be moot if McConnell set the rules for trial ahead of the rulings and declared no new evidence will be allowed? Republican lawyers could then realistically argue their lawsuit is moot and should be dismissed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • zekness says:

      pelosi is waiting for the senate to set the rules “to understand the environment”..

      this explains why they have not voted in the resolution to name managers.

      the dems are trying to “game” the impeachment process and force the senate to take a pre-emptive unforced error in establishing senate rules.

      mcconnel is no dummy.

      he understands what is going on.

      he also understands the real agenda here: the senate has taken these actions, namely the two specific articles as a means to an end which SD has properly assessed and described. The senate plans to seek grand jury material based on a flimsy argument that proper due process requires the house managers (yet unnamed) to be prepared with the materials to properly represent the case before the senate.

      this is a very dubious backdoor (and clever legal gimic/gambit)…

      what this supposes is that grand jury material is available from an investigation that is closed and of which no formal charges were ever filed…

      in the world of real courts of law, this would not fly…grand jury material is out of bounds..if I have that right.

      in the world of schifffty, lalapelosi and no-nads, I am not perfectly confident a judge would restrict such material…I think it really depends on the judge, and it would be challenged on appeal by the GOP lawyers out right.

      there is another aspect to this also: should the grand jury material get exposed…there is a very real risk the FBI and the DOJ faces considering the predicate issue and the bias issues are now going to roost. I dare say, that grand jury materials may very well contain additional corrupt schemes by the mueller crew..so, there may be other forces that the dems are going to encounter in getting access…would not surprise me if DOJ asserts some serious challenge to that material ever seeing the light of day…sadly, the effects of the left steering for it, may wind up making it impossible to know (at least right now) what it really contains ….considering it likely has a gross amount of misconduct and overreach at a minimum….we’ve seen the trend already…17 serious breaches of law and regulation….

      Which makes me wonder, what exactly the dems are trying to accomplish here.

      seems to me the are risking burning the entire house down..

      but then, I am reminded..this is a corrupt bunch….incompetence comes with the territory

      Like

  24. What it’s all saying is:
    We don’t have a case but we want to hold this over his head to make him look bad while we all go on a MAJOR Fishing Expedition, wishing, & hoping, & praying we can find a REAL Crime to charge him with

    Like

  25. Zippy says:

    The great YouTube video creator and truthsayer, Paul Joseph Watson, quotes CTH:

    Why Pelosi Plans to Delay Sending Impeachment Articles to the Senate
    A “cunning Lawfare ploy” to keep Trump on the back foot.

    https://summit.news/2019/12/19/why-pelosi-plans-to-delay-sending-impeachment-articles-to-the-senate/

    Liked by 2 people

  26. txfella says:

    The chinanerous strategies of Larry Tribe et al don’t amount to a hill of beans because Larry Tribe isn’t the majority leader of the Senate. The house democrats have shot their wad. Their part in this treasonous charade is over .It’s done. Finished. It’s in Cocaine Mitch’s hands now. You really think he’s going to except further “material” now? Y’all have another thing coming…………..

    Like

  27. mbabbitt says:

    It actually undermines their argument that they must impeach quickly because the president represents such a threat. If they wait, they disprove their case.

    Like

  28. Don Anastas says:

    The Constitution is absolutely clear about the Senate’s authority. Article I, Section 3 says: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”

    McConnell can convene the Senate anyway, summon the Chief Justice, and swear in the Senators as jurors. Democrats can boycott, but they can’t stop the trial.

    McConnell can then propose to dismiss the charges or even hold a vote to acquit the president.

    Pelosi can hide the articles of impeachment in Adam Schiff’s basement forever, and it won’t make a bit of difference.

    Case closed!

    Like

  29. minnesotamike55 says:

    As I suspected, more deviousness from Lawfare and the house lackeys. As I see it now, this is all about regaining control of the Senate. They can’t get back to their destroy America agenda without it.

    It appears there are several strategies here that McConnell needs to navigate.

    If they simply dismiss and hold no trial, dems run on partisan unfairness.

    If they hold a quick trial it will also be painted as unamerican.

    If it’s a full trial with no new dem witnesses but new Trump facts, same derogatory strategy.

    Nancy holds back the articles and it will be because the senate is unfair, partisan, blah blah, and he doesn’t get to crow about winning and they get to continually say impeached.

    What Nancy is counting on is that the American public did not pay attention to the house run communist fake investigation or the timing, or lack of republican witnesses, and when they say unfair, the uninformed will believe it and the mainstream media will hammer it home.

    Again all strategies to take back the Senate. They don’t care if they lose the house and know they can’t win presidency so this is their Hail Mary. By the way, all the founding fathers talk by democrats is negated by the candidates calling for getting rid of electoral college and 2nd amendment eh?

    Like

  30. Mr e-man says:

    So we couldn’t stop an illegal, unconstitutional impeachment, and now we can’t stop an illegal, unconstitutional process to send to the Senate. Nanzi the hatemonger can just hold the entire nation hostage using her lawfare tactics and the citizens have no legal recourse?

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Ted A Oplinger says:

    Nancy wants to delay until there can be a “fair hearing”.

    Fair for who? Fair for the accused? or fair for the Accuser?

    Our justice system operates in a blatantly unfair manner toward the accuser, who must necessarily prove their case in a speedy and expeditious manner (theoretically speaking; Mike Flynn isn’t available for comment on this point).

    When we set the precedence that the Accused has NO RIGHT to defend against legal action, and our political processes leave out fair consideration and representation, then we have descended into tyranny,plain and simple.

    Like

  32. rickb928 says:

    that all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for a pending judicial proceeding, a trial in the Senate.

    Might the Senate somehow appear before any court so engaged and either reject the argument, or perhaps demand that the House actually engage? Speaker Nancy should tread lightly when offending the Majority Leader of the Senate. Not a fight she can win. Not now, not in 2021, not ever.

    Like

  33. flatlandgoober says:

    In a criminal court, this would be equivalent to the prosecutor winning the preliminary hearing (probably cause) and then informing the court that he didn’t want to proceed to a trial yet and he didn’t know when he’d be willing to try it. A credible judge would dismiss that case in a heartbeat.

    Like

  34. map says:

    Nancy Pelosi supports a system where a prosecutor can have you under a permanent indictment, prevent a trial, and comb through your life looking for the evidence that would allow them to win at trial.
    You have to be stupid and desperate to make such a move.

    Like

  35. aztommycat says:

    There is no constitutional requirement that the House has Managers. If the Senate decides RIGHT NOW to try the case on a specific date, it would be like the Prosecution not showing up with their paperwork in order. The judge could dismiss the case outright because the Prosecution has refused to show up on the court date at the proscribed time…

    Like

  36. Laramie Evan says:

    This may present a further issue: Assuming the effort all along has been simply to “impeach” Trump, thereby branding him with a Scarlet Letter I, then what happens if the House never forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate and there is a new election putting control of the House back in the hands of Republicans?

    Stated differently: Could a House of Representatives controlled by Republicans vote to rescind the articles of impeachment, thereby eliminating the Scarlet Letter I that this Congress seeks to pin on Trump? I don’t see why not. If proposed legislation hasn’t become law, a new congress can withdraw the vote of an earlier House. Same goes here — rescind the earlier impeachment vote and take a new vote. Reject it and move on.

    Like

  37. AntB says:

    Impeachment is not official until the Articles of Impeachment are sent to the senate.

    Nancy needs to “paint or get off the ladder”.

    Like

  38. MSG Grumpy says:

    I have a question…

    The House (Nancy and the boys) have decided to try to strong arm the Senate into doing what She wants.
    What stops the Senate from simply saying:
    “You will not threaten this house for ANY reason”

    Then tell the leaders of this active coup that the Senate will simply stop ALL legislation until the articles of Sham-Peach-Ment are formally transmitted to the Senate for consideration.

    If I am not mistaken there is a funding bill that has not been passed yet.

    The demoncrats are always happy to blame Republicans whenever there is a government shutdown, but with this one action, it will be the demoncrats shutting government down.

    Let them explain to the country why they get to shut the government down so that they can strong arm the Senate in support of their coup.

    MSG Grumpy

    Like

  39. srmikeinohio says:

    This need to be kept front and center!! Once again Sundance is light years ahead of everybody with his reporting. None of the talking heads on FOX have even considered this tactic by the crooked Dems.

    No way in Hell did Nancy go through this whole impeachment sham to just flip it to the Senate and have POTUS cleared. The Dems being the disgusting,conniving pieces of shit that they are, are playing the long game and Turtle better get his head out of his shell.

    Like

  40. Chris Dickensheets says:

    I say it is time to switch things up a bit: Why can’t the AG and/or President Trump enlist the US Marshals to arrest and apprehend the Democrats leadership (and some RINO’s) and supporting cast and bring them to trial for at least perjury, if not Sedition and/or Treason.
    The United States Marshals Service (USMS) is a federal law enforcement agency within the U.S. Department of Justice (28 U.S.C. § 561). It is one of the oldest U.S. federal law enforcement agencies and was created by the Judiciary Act of 1789 during the presidency of George Washington as the Office of the United States Marshal.[3] The USMS as it stands today was established in 1969 to provide guidance and assistance to marshals throughout the federal judicial districts. USMS is an agency of the United States executive branch reporting to the United States Attorney General, but serves as the enforcement arm of the United States federal courts to ensure the effective operation of the judiciary and integrity of the Constitution.

    The Marshals Service is the primary agency for fugitive operations, the protection of officers of the federal judiciary, the management of criminal assets, the operation of the United States Federal Witness Protection Program and the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System, the execution of federal arrest warrants, and the protection of senior government officials through the Office of Protective Operations. Throughout its history the Marshals have also provided unique security and enforcement services including protecting African-American students enrolling in the South during the civil rights movement, escort security for United States Air Force LGM-30 Minuteman missile convoys, law enforcement for the United States Antarctic Program, and protection of the Strategic National Stockpile.

    While perjury is not sexy it does have teeth and can bring a halt to the illegal and unprecedented abuse of power and activities. At such time additional charges may brought forward once we have the time and resources to look into and document their actions to date. Kinda hard to continue to abuse their powers when they are fighting to stay out of jail or prison. We all know they are not above throwing their co-conspirators under the bus for additional traction.

    To me this looks like a no brainier and may very well be the what the founding fathers intended when one side does not play by the rules and ignores hundreds of years of precedent in Congress.
    Just because this has never been tried (as far as I know) it doesn’t mean it can’t work and we remain committed to doing things fairly, legally and as per the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We should not stoop to their level, but use the tools afforded to us by the Founding Fathers.

    Is there something I am missing that would not, could not prevent this response from working?

    Like

  41. Susan says:

    At 73 years old, I’m ashamed of our government more than at any other time in my life. The Democrats appear to be heading toward more disgusting behaviors than I would have ever given them credit for. They should remember that the people voted them into office, and we can vote them out, too. They have become so slimey that they disgrace our country.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s