Hubris – Nancy Pelosi Declares: “the senate rules are unfair” – “when rules become fair we will send articles”…

The entire House effort to impeach President Donald Trump has been a one-sided partisan effort; built upon a foundation of manipulation of process and dismissal of the minority rights throughout.

After the House voted along party lines, and in an act of stunning hubris, Speaker Pelosi now declares she will withhold the articles of impeachment until the Senate makes rules that she determines will be “fair” to the prosecution.  [Video at 09:00 prompted]


This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Supreme Court, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

501 Responses to Hubris – Nancy Pelosi Declares: “the senate rules are unfair” – “when rules become fair we will send articles”…

  1. flatlandgoober says:

    Nancy put POTUS Trump on double secret probation. That’ll do it.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Retired USMC says:

    You could always shove them up your ample ass….

    Liked by 3 people

  3. hokkoda says:

    I think there’s room in McConnell’s statement today for the GOP to use the term “with prejudice” when talking about the possibility of dismissal. If you’re a lawyer, correct me if I’m wrong, but “with prejudice” means it’s over and done and cannot be brought back to the court at a later time. Senate rules which allow the Senate to dismiss a case with prejudice would be a fitting end to this charade.

    Liked by 3 people

    • jmuniz1 says:

      With Prejudice means once McConnell refuses to take up impeachment in the senate its case closed. If it was without Prejudice the Senate can take it up again.

      Liked by 2 people

      • hokkoda says:

        Does the term, or would the term, prevent the House from resubmitting the same articles again in the sense that “with prejudice” means the court won’t reconsider the same case again?


  4. NOET says:

    Following Senator McConnell’s opening remarks in the Senate this morning, Chucky Schumer offered up his own alternative facts. During his predictable blah-blah-blah, he employed a slimy but noteworthy rhetorical strategy, alluding at least three times to “All the President’s Men” (Bernstein and Woodward,1974):

    —- “We ask: Is the President’s case so weak that none of the President’s men can defend him under oath?”

    — “Is the President’s case so weak that none of the President’s men can defend him under oath?”

    — “Again, can none of the President’s men come defend him under oath?”

    After yesterday’s marathon putsch in the House, my body has apparently expended its reserves of adrenaline. Rather than yelling (or flipping a middle finger) at my undeserving television, I found myself responding, instead, with simple, unadorned dispassion. Instead, reflections of Shakespeare’s Iago appropriated my thoughts.

    Zen moment: Cold Anger.

    Nineteenth-century actor Edwin Booth (elder brother of Lincoln’s assassin) wrote about playing Shakespeare’s Iago:

    “To portray Iago properly you must seem to be what all the characters think, and say, you are, not what the spectators know you to be; try to win even them by your sincerity. Don’t act the villain, don’t look it or speak it (by scowling and growling, I mean), but think it all the time. Be genial, sometimes jovial, always gentlemanly. Quick in motion as in thought; lithe and sinuous as a snake.”

    Iago. Chucky. Nancy. Lawfare. Cabal. Snakes all.

    Fight slime with slime (but “lithe and sinuous as a snake”).

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Caius Lowell says:

    I can almost hear the DNC Prevarication Scientists creating those Democrat talking points — that is, lies…


  6. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Poor Pelosi is desperate to stay in the limelight. However now, the game is over for her. All the little democrat talking heads have had their say and the House votes have all been counted. Now it’s up to the Senate, as obligated in the Constitution, to take the House impeachment indictment and try it in the Senate.
    Pelosi does not control the matter any more, McConnel does. He could schedule the trial to start next Monday if he had a mind to; and some people think he damm well should. Call her cards and if she refuses to send over her “managers”, prosecutors, then he can throw out the whole impeachment case lock, stock, and barrel.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Frances Bosserman says:

      I think that is what he should do. anyway. These charges are from a vindictive alcoholic who has been grabbing at straws for over 3 years. The present charges were made well before the “phone call” If the Articles are not received by the Senate within 2 weeks, they should be considered “null and void”

      Liked by 1 person

  7. jingosam says:

    Since when does the House have the constitutional right to change Senate rules anyway? This could very well indeed be a fishing expedition on the part of Nadler and the Dems. But just maybe they are afraid of what could possibly see the light of day if there is a trial. If the right witnesses are called, Biden will be toast and the Dems would be in such a state of disarray they’d have no chance to recover … certainly not before November 2020. I think once PT said “Bring it on!” and mentioned the witness’s he would call, they just about cropped their pants. I think, for the moment, they are fine with to let matters stand as they are and this is their pathetic excuse for doing just that.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. littleanniefannie says:

    The idiot Swallwell says all Nancy Pelosi wants is a fair trial. She just condoned travesty hearings and now that they are done NOW she wants to talk about fairness. How dumb can you be?????

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Anon says:

    It would look great if they put an empty seat with her name on it. Or a podium. Or a call from the chair to silence.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. So, Ms. Pelosi is demanding a quid pro quo from the Senate before she will perform her constitutionally mandated duty – We need a whistleblower!

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Blindfaith says:

    Somethimes I think Mitch is posturing to make it “unfair” so that Pelosi is forced to delay sending the Articles. Tha way, it makes the Dem case appear even weaker, as if it wasn’t weak enough to begin with.


  12. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Sorry Nanzi, the party’s over. Feel free to watch reruns of yesterday’s House Spectacle today and tomorrow and next year but you no longer control the narrative. This is Majority Leader McConnell’s mess to deal with now.


  13. Youessaa says:

    I’ve been a reader for a long time here, but have never posted.

    Sundance is correct in that the 2nd Article of Impeachment is clearly designed to prolong this sham by dragging it through the courts after the entire Impeachment Circus fails. There is no law on our books relating to “Obstructing Congress”, so their attempt at using this bogus term to accuse a President of utilizing his Constitutional Executive Privilege – not in response to Congress, but in response to a subcommittee of Congress – is as Mitch put it, “Constitutionally Incoherent”.

    Nancy – nor any of the other Uniparty Rats on either side of the aisle – want this to actually go to a real trial. It exposes them all. Thus, Nancy’s pathetic accusation toward McConnell that – regarding Impeachment – somehow a Republican must be non-partisan in the Senate, but that no such standard applies to a Democrat in the House.

    If it even makes it into a Senate trial, the 1st article would most likely be held to the standard of 25 CFR § 11.448 – Abuse of office;

    § 11.448 Abuse of office.
    A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor if, knowing that his or her conduct is illegal, he or she:

    (a) Subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or

    (b) Denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.

    The President’s behavior doesn’t rise to this level – not even remotely. However, it sure could apply to the actions of Little Schift, Jerr-Bear, Pelosi Galore and their abuse of creating and initiating an Impeachment “Inquiry” by subcommittee (HJC) – using their power of majority in a manner to exclude the full House from being able to refute their propaganda parade (a denial of the full Congress’ ability to act in its official capacity), in order to purposefully deny a President his due process rights.

    As usual, the SocioFascists are guilty of the very things they accuse their “enemies” of doing.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Ken Burch says:

    I can’t believe (but yet, I do) that an open ended, continuous impeachment “process” is legal. Where is the push back from the Defence, or the Supreme Court. Articles are so (purposely) vague so as to just go on and on. The only push back will be from voters, but who knows in what state the country will be in, in 11 mos.


  15. Nancy Pelosi is NOT queen of the USA regardless of what she thinks. She doesn’t seem to understand that SHE is not the rule maker of this country. She can make the rules for Congress but has no authority in the Senate and if she does not sent her impeachment farce on to the Senate then that should make it ALL null and void. She has no idea of the cold anger and pure hate she has unleashed. I will be proud to be counted as one of the 3% if it comes down to that.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. drlou007 says:

    So don’t send your fraudulent articles to the Senate, Nancy. Who the hell cares? McConnell can simply set a date for the trial and if the Dems do not show up, dismiss the charges.


  17. MikeC says:

    McConnell should set the date for trial. If Nancy fails to show, McConnell should then petition Chief Justice Roberts to have US Marshall’s find and compel Pelosi to attend the trial. If Pelosi fails to attend or submit articles then Rogers should find her in contempt and threaten her with a fine and/or jail.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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