Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
House Impeaches President Trump on 2 Articles
Wednesday evening, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives impeached President Donald Trump for “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress.” Both were related to his dealings with Ukraine. He is the third American president to be impeached.
If and when the House forwards the articles to the GOP-controlled Senate, the president faces a near-certain acquittal. Neither result comes as a surprise since Democrats began promising impeachment before Trump was even inaugurated.
At 9:30am tomorrow morning, on the Senate floor, I will speak about House Democrats’ precedent-breaking impeachment of the President of the United States.
— Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) December 19, 2019
No Republicans voted to impeach. Every Democrat voted for the first article except Reps. Jefferson Van Drew (NJ) and Collin Peterson (MN). For the second article, Rep. Jared Golden (ME) joined Van Drew and Peterson to vote against. Independent Rep. Justin Amash (MI) voted for each article, while presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard (D–HI) voted present on both.
In a remarkable press conference, Pelosi refused to say repeatedly if the House would send over the articles to the Senate. She would not guarantee sending over the articles to the Senate until they are assured a fair trial. She wouldn’t describe what a fair trial was
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 19, 2019
As the House voted, Trump enjoyed a packed Christmas rally at an arena in Battle Creek, MI.
Published in Politics
As soon as the Articles are transmitted, the Senate could do a motion to dismiss, and short-circuit Impeachment. Pelosi is acting not unlike how Cocaine Mitch acted when he refused to schedule any hearings for Merrick Garland.
In the Impeachments of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, witnesses were interviewed. Trump prevented witnesses from testifying before the House. But if Trump prevents to allow witnesses to testify in the Senate, he is proving Article II, Obstruction of Congress.
Why shouldn’t the Democrats allow time for this to be adjudicated? They didn’t even try.
Impeachment is the vehicle to remove an office holder. Biden is not an office holder. The Senate Judiciary Committee could call Biden as a witness in a hearing. But that would play to Biden’s strengths, as Biden chaired the Judiciary Committee for many years.
History shows that when she refused to allow Trump to do the State of the Union Address in the House Chambers, Trump had to back down.
It took eight months for a District Court to order that Don McGann appear before Congress.
You aren’t addressing what I have highlighted because you can’t defend this process. They never should have started if there wasn’t more bipartisan support. That’s the requirement the Founder set up.
Both parties should have simply just raised all kinds of hell under oversight. That is the way the constitution is supposed to work.
So what? Are we on an election calendar?
I have a copy of the Constitution available. Please point out to the “requirement” that an impeachment cannot be considered unless there is bipartisan support.
I am referring to the Founder’s discussion about impeachment in the Federalist papers. The Democrats imposed their lousy due process in the House and now the Republicans are going to pay them back in the Senate. It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Listen to the VDH interview for the implications.
I can almost guarantee you that if the Founders came back they would say all of this should have been done under oversight with censures flying everywhere as everyone saw fit.
I suppose arguably it could’ve been seen as pre-impeachment work for after the next election provided the Democrat party could actually find something more clear-cut to get Trump on. Election fodder produced by the more or less disingenuous application of government force.
Impeachment was not supposed to flow like this.
More Democratic talking points.
They want a trial as “fair” as the impeachment was.
But that’s what putting the Insane Clown Party in charge, like some advocated.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind in November.
Notwithstanding the merits of the argument, at what point will people stop paying attention, or revolt, even if there is a proverbial ‘wolf’?
I believe it’s already happening anyway.
Utter and complete nonsense.
The Democrats were frantic, for something, anything to impeach Trump over.
3 years of Mueller fell flat on its face. So they jumped on the phone call as an excuse.
Thats why they rushed it through a Star Chamber and then a sham Judiciary committee in record time.
There was real corruption involving the 2016 election. And all all of it involved the Democrats.
And Trump had every right to try and investigate it, and asking for the help of the current Ukrainian government, bound by treaty to cooperate was absolutely correct.
Nonense.
After Mueller the Dems, who you endorsed, were frantic for something and jumped on nothing, not expecting Trump to promptly release the transcript of the phone conversation.
Strangely, or perhaps the strategy all along, Congress and the President are simultaneously moving forward with a couple more unread books masquerading as legislation.
@joelpollak who is a Harvard Law grad just said that Pelosi holding the impeachment is the same thing as a cop not showing up for a disputed traffic ticket. Legally speaking it’s a default and you get to walk. All the Senate has to do is vote for this decision just like what a judge would do in traffic court.
Breitbart News on SiriusXM is absolutely excellent. All of those guys are really dialed in and very smart. None of the shows are on tight time clocks like terrestrial radio.
It is more like a sealed indictment. The prosecutor can proceed at any time.
Witnesses to what??? There was a phone call. We have a transcript. We know what happened. So witnesses to what?
Every witness called by the House Committees offered up nothing but hearsay and conclusory opinions. Not a word of it would ever have been admissible in a court of law. Only one of the witnesses had actually heard the conversation, and he confirmed that the transcript was accurate. None of them had talked to Trump about anything pertinent to the inquiry, which did not stop them from opining about what Trump was thinking. So do we need mind-readers as witnesses? Here in Las Vegas we have a guy named Frederic Da Silva, who does a mind-reading show at Bally’s Hotel and Casino. Let’s call him as the witness.
See? We are only in this spot because it isn’t bipartisan.
Pelosi says she wants to hold it until she gets to see the Republican due process structure. No I don’t think so. The Republicans in the Senate get to pay back the Democrats in the House.
It has been argued that there was only one witness who actually spoke to Trump. Trump blocked the testimony of the witnesses who he had spoken to.
Because Trump blocked the better witnesses.
Not necessarily. See Rule 2 of the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure. See the 23 exceptions to the hearsay rule in Section 803 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Let’s hear from the witnesses that Trump blocked.
This shines the spotlight on how, unlike the impeachment trials of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, McConnell opposes the calling of any witnesses.
It takes months to adjudicate executive privilege.
Anyone on the right who thinks either charge has any merit should also condemn every single Republican who voted no.
Then, please, go on to claim you are the heart of the “real” GOP.
Why is this apparently getting out of control?
Only problem is who can investigate? I have no trust in any of the federal government agencies. They have all proven themselves to be corrupt to some degree.
Yes and no. The withholding of witnesses is part of Article II.
Because McConnell has announced his intention to thwart the Impeachment Trial, by refusing to allow the House Managers to call witnesses.
Rep. Doug Collins made the case that the Democrats thwarted Republican / Trump due process on the floor yesterday and all of Shumer’s whining about what they are going to do doesn’t matter.
The clip of Collins is here. 47 seconds.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/18/house-pass-partisan-articles-of-impeachment-against-president-trump/