Nancy Pelosi Will Hold Off Sending The Articles of Impeachment To The Senate

[bambino]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Do you concede the ball is still in the House's court? The business of the House will adjourn without assigning the case manager. Today. He may go through Christmas with this over his head. Who wants a speedy trial now?









"Clock and calendar."

As I said before, McConnell can move to dismiss the trial. Two can play dirty pool. Trump was so bummed out he went to a rally last night and posted the vote during the rally. He knew this was a far gone conclusion when Pelosi started this bullshit. But there isn’t a crime listed in the articles of impeachment. Only dimwits like you won’t accept that. Pelosi doesn’t have a case. Trumps poll numbers are rising, support for impeachment tanked with Independents. The RNC raised a record 20 million last month. It’s Pelosi who will be second guessing herself over the Holidays, not Trump.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

And of course Mitch. Not surprising why he is working with counsel for the accused. Imagine if the opposition party was in charge of the Senate?

Because it is a political process not a legal one. Isn't that what the Left has been telling us from the beginning? This is not a court of law but a purely political process? In any "political process" the party of the President will council with him.


And if there were 53 Democrats in charge of the Senate, they would still need 14 Republicans to get to 67 to convict. There is no scenario beyond a Democratic Senate with 67 Democrats that convict's Trump but you knew that right?


But wait, according to some Constitutional scholars, that 2/3 is on a sliding scale. Remember how Jeff Flake said that if the Republicans could vote a secret ballot, 30 would vote to convict? I think Flake was smoking the really good stuff when he said that because it's absolute bullshit IMHO but lets say instead of casting a vote to convict, 30 Republican Senators decide to stay away from the vote that day. Since the 2/3 rule slides down to take in the actual number present for the vote, it would only take 47 votes to convict and guess who has 47 votes?



https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/1...talking-about/



You can dream Democrats but don't place any bets would be my advice.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by bambino

As I said before, McConnell can move to dismiss the trial. Two can play dirty pool. Trump was so bummed out he went to a rally last night and posted the vote during the rally. He knew this was a far gone conclusion when Pelosi started this bullshit. But there isn’t a crime listed in the articles of impeachment. Only dimwits like you won’t accept that. Pelosi doesn’t have a case. Trumps poll numbers are rising, support for impeachment tanked with Independents. The RNC raised a record 20 million last month. It’s Pelosi who will be second guessing herself over the Holidays, not Trump.

spot on!

Trump was so confident, he did his rally like any other day. no crimes committed, no first hand witnesses, no quid pro quo, no anything. the money is flowing in.. Nancy will have shitty Christmas when this finally hits her.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Remember how Jeff Flake said that if the Republicans could vote a secret ballot, 30 would vote to convict? I think Flake was smoking the really good stuff when he said that because it's absolute bullshit [/url]

Jeff Flake, now that must be the most appropriate name since Peter Pumpkin Eater. he needs to scrape the dandruff flakes off his head, they are impeding his thinking. I hope he was smoking some Good Colombian shit, I hate to think he didn't need "help" with that asinine prediction!

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by bambino

As I said before, McConnell can move to dismiss the trial.

He can't dismiss a case that's not before him.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Because it is a political process not a legal one. Isn't that what the Left has been telling us from the beginning? This is not a court of law but a purely political process? In any "political process" the party of the President will council with him.


And if there were 53 Democrats in charge of the Senate, they would still need 14 Republicans to get to 67 to convict. There is no scenario beyond a Democratic Senate with 67 Democrats that convict's Trump but you knew that right?


But wait, according to some Constitutional scholars, that 2/3 is on a sliding scale. Remember how Jeff Flake said that if the Republicans could vote a secret ballot, 30 would vote to convict? I think Flake was smoking the really good stuff when he said that because it's absolute bullshit IMHO but lets say instead of casting a vote to convict, 30 Republican Senators decide to stay away from the vote that day. Since the 2/3 rule slides down to take in the actual number present for the vote, it would only take 47 votes to convict and guess who has 47 votes?



https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/1...talking-about/



You can dream Democrats but don't place any bets would be my advice.

Let's hope for Senate witnesses.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Let's hope for Senate witnesses.

Sure, hell, it's Xmas, I wouldn't want to dash your "hopes" but no matter how this plays out, Trump wins. Pelosi doesn't send over the articles, she is admitting they don't have a strong case. She does and Republicans acquit. The only thing Democrats can say is that they think all this will help them in 2020 and all the polling says "it ain't so"!


Me, I'd like to hear Bolton and see the look on Democrats faces when he shoves it up their ass. Anybody thinks Bolton is going to do harm to the Republican party even if Trump did fire him is crazy. Then we can watch the Republicans drag Hunter and Joe through the mud, try to catch Schiff in a lie, Comey in a lie, Brennan in a lie. Bring in Steele and maybe fly in Zelensky and watch the lawyer for the Dems try to discredit the President of Ukraine while he is fighting the Russians to "protect OUR national security" perhaps the dumbest thing said in all this crap.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Sure, hell, it's Xmas, I wouldn't want to dash your "hopes"

[HoeHummer]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Sure, hell, it's Xmas, I wouldn't want to dash your "hopes" but no matter how this plays out, Trump wins. Pelosi doesn't send over the articles, she is admitting they don't have a strong case. She does and Republicans acquit. The only thing Democrats can say is that they think all this will help them in 2020 and all the polling says "it ain't so"!


Me, I'd like to hear Bolton and see the look on Democrats faces when he shoves it up their ass. Anybody thinks Bolton is going to do harm to the Republican party even if Trump did fire him is crazy. Then we can watch the Republicans drag Hunter and Joe through the mud, try to catch Schiff in a lie, Comey in a lie, Brennan in a lie. Bring in Steele and maybe fly in Zelensky and watch the lawyer for the Dems try to discredit the President of Ukraine while he is fighting the Russians to "protect OUR national security" perhaps the dumbest thing said in all this crap.

Welcomes to Fantasy Islands good buddy.

Looks like someone’s spiked your Kool Aid

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

He can't dismiss a case that's not before him.

If getting rid of this President was so urgent why isn't she in a hurry to get to the trial?

[oeb11]

Nancy and the DPST's are trying to set precedent with the LSM - if their terms are not met - it is an "unfair" trial slanted in favor of Trump regardless.

She is just playing games with the Impeachment - trying to wring as much damage to Trump out of it as she can.

Trying to keep it in the LSM as current - rather than have the trial and it be over with a not guilty vote.

Same old lying, hypocritical DPST's - not to mention nancy and Schumer would never accept any terms that were not the same as Schiff and his clown show and Nadler set against the POTUS.



They have set a terrible precedent for misuse of the the Constitutional process of impeachment. And it may come back on their heads and butts one day.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

+2

Lying Nancy is "so concerned" about Due process and fairness now, where the fuck was that idea before? she got her ass handed to her, now she wants to change the rules of the game. fuck that Bitch!

the Big T 2020

Hear! Hear!

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by friendly fred

If getting rid of this President was so urgent why isn't she in a hurry to get to the trial?

Even though it is a crime in progress, she wants to be as sure the trial would be as fair as possible. But, I've explained that here.

[oeb11]

"Fair" in the opinion of the radical leftists DPST narrative.

May your own rights be the same as you offer the POTUS.

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Even though it is a crime in progress, she wants to be as sure the trial would be as fair as possible. But, I've explained that here.

crime in progress.

That's funny.

Fair Trial concerns after the circus that was the House impeachment.

That's even funnier.