Mark Levin: "...declare the impeachment null and void"

floridafan said:
When was the last time you saw a trial where the jury had their mind made up before entering the courtroom.
Click to expand...

Republicans had two vans full of evidence for the Clinton impeachment.

Democrats have hearsay testimony and testimony from a WB they won’t let anyone talk to. The guilt aspect was settled in both prior impeachments. The Democrats had such a *thoroughly investigated* case against Nixon he resigned before the House voted to impeach him. In both instances the trial was over removal from office.

If Nixon were still alive he’d probably want a do-over to see if Democrats would sit on the articles so he could finish his term.

Democrats have turned impeachment into a farce.
 
Darth Omar said:
If Pelosi continues to sit on it past the holidays Levin has a good argument.

The House has the power to impeach but they have no authority to deprive the Senate of *its duty* to adjudicate it. So, the Senate can declare the impeachment null and void. If there’s nothing in the constitution that explicitly states the articles must be turned over to the senate—then the turn about is fair play—no where does the constitution explicitly prohibit the senate from declaring an impeachment null and void.

And it would be a fitting end to this political stunt of an impeachment.
Click to expand...

Declaring something null and void does not make it so. This is not even a real issue unless she has not referred it in several weeks. Some have suggested she is trying to give Schummer a better bargaining position to get the rules he wants for the trial since Republicans seem anxious to get it started.

I wonder if the House/Senate rules contains a time limit?
 
Flash said:
Declaring something null and void does not make it so. This is not even a real issue unless she has not referred it in several weeks. Some have suggested she is trying to give Schummer a better bargaining position to get the rules he wants for the trial since Republicans seem anxious to get it started.

I wonder if the House/Senate rules contains a time limit?
Click to expand...

Schumer is the minority leader. Hopefully Republicans will give Democrats the same treatment Democrats did in the House.
 
Sailor said:
Schumer is the minority leader. Hopefully Republicans will give Democrats the same treatment Democrats did in the House.
Click to expand...

He is the minority leader but will have some influence on the procedures. The longer the delay the more influence (according to some).
 
Sailor said:
I believe him. Democrats are that stupid.
Click to expand...

Of course you believe him, he is counting on you believing him, that is how he makes his money, he'll tell you exactly what you want to hear regardless of its validity, reason conservatives are easy prey for demogogues, and so many have gone from spinning Top 40 to millionaires
 
Flash said:
He is the minority leader but will have some influence on the procedures. The longer the delay the more influence (according to some).
Click to expand...

The longer the delay the less. He needs to tell nancy to quit playing games. It only hurts her cause.
 
Darth Omar said:
The first sentence says it all.

It’s the House’s duty to conduct a *full investigation* prior to voting on the articles. They didn’t do this because of ‘the Christmas rush’ so to speak. And now they want to do it in the Senate.

Bull shyte.

The Senate doesn’t have a responsibility to take over the Pelosi’s half-cooked Ukraine investigation/impeachment/thingy. And it’s literally funny that she thinks the articles give her some kind of leverage over McConnell. I know Trump wants [and deserves] a trial but McConnell should vote to dismiss the articles the moment when/if Pelosi decides to stop sitting on them.

Or maybe she could sit on them a little harder so they’ll end up where they belong.
Click to expand...

Democrats would love for Mitch to dismiss the articles the moment they arrive
 
Flash said:
He is the minority leader but will have some influence on the procedures. The longer the delay the more influence (according to some).
Click to expand...

I personally do not think Schumer will get anything but air time. But hey, lets see what happens.
 
Celticguy said:
The longer the delay the less. He needs to tell nancy to quit playing games. It only hurts her cause.
Click to expand...

How does it hurt her cause?

She can keep the articles over Trump's head as long as she wants and echo the rationale that Mitch, Lindsey and the like have already confirmed there will be no fair trial in the Senate, so why send them to a kangaroo court
 
archives said:
Of course you believe him, he is counting on you believing him, that is how he makes his money, he'll tell you exactly what you want to hear regardless of its validity, reason conservatives are easy prey for demogogues, and so many have gone from spinning Top 40 to millionaires
Click to expand...

Care to show where Pelosi is not listening to a non governmental lawyer? How about you try that first. Then I will kick your ass as usual.
 
Stretch said:
Pelosi’s unilaterally sitting on the impeachment. This is another brazen unconstitutional act...
Mark Levin·Thursday, December 19, 2019·1 minute

Nancy Pelosi was apparently advised by leftwing Harvard law professor Lawrence Tribe to delay sending the impeachment to the Senate. So she’s unilaterally sitting on the impeachment. This is another brazen unconstitutional act.

Here’s what Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans must do in response: The Senate has the sole power under the Constitution to adjudicate an impeachment. Therefore, Pelosi is attempting to obstruct the Senate’s power to act on its constitutional authority. McConnell should immediately put an end to this and declare the impeachment null and void as the speaker has failed to complete the impeachment process by timely sending it to the Senate for adjudication. McConnell has no less authority to unilaterally make such a decision than Pelosi does to withhold the administrative notification of an impeachment to the Senate either indefinitely or with conditions. Her effort to cripple the presidency and blackmail the Senate must be defeated.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark...s-another-brazen-unconstit/10156402590090946/

*******************

Full 12 minute context is here from time mark 20:00 > 32:00...


Click to expand...


You are a moron
 
Flash said:
Declaring something null and void does not make it so. This is not even a real issue unless she has not referred it in several weeks. Some have suggested she is trying to give Schummer a better bargaining position to get the rules he wants for the trial since Republicans seem anxious to get it started.

I wonder if the House/Senate rules contains a time limit?
Click to expand...

I doubt it.

The constitution leaves a lot unsaid about impeachment. I doubt the founders ever envisioned the House passing articles and then hitting the pause button. Why would they? Impeachment was intended to be the Final Option and only to be used in dire circumstances. It would make no sense for the House to sit on the articles.

This stunt by Pelosi goes back to Democrats doing an incomplete investigation: since the investigation is incomplete they need as much control over the process as they can get. It shouldn’t be that way.

Under the circumstances, the Senate declaring the impeachment null and void carries as much weight as the impeachment itself. For the foreseeable future scholars would argue back and forth whether Trump was impeached or not, since the Senate is the more prestigious body etc.

Hardly what one would call a win for democrats, politically.
 
Sailor said:
And the reason Schumer is trying to introduce more evidence. And the reason Pelosi want to know how the Senate is going to proceed. It is none of her damn business. She knows she has nothing. She also knows this may open up a can of worms with Senate calling witnesses. Maybe even Pelosi herself. Either way it is the Titanic scenario for Democrats.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Their time is up. They rushed the whole thing through without thinking ahead.
They had a House vote and their part is DONE...as in, they stuck a fork in it. They had
their opportunity to bring in and question witnesses. It's the Senate who calls the shots now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top