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.
Mitch McConnell: Just Do it!
If you ever want to drive me insane, you don’t need to use the Chinese water torture on me. You just need to force me to watch the ineptness of the House and Senate and the histrionics and hand-wringing regarding impeachment. But I’m begging Mitch McConnell to put us all out of our misery. The Editorial Staff of the Wall Street Journal (sorry—it’s probably behind a paywall) describes the process to set us all free. Mr. McConnell is ignoring the hysterics of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. He seems to be doing that with a twinkle in his eye. In fact, he may already be contemplating these steps recommended by the WSJ. So what is he up against? I’m describing the basic process here.
- Nancy Pelosi insists that the articles of impeachment must be formally transmitted to the Senate. Not true:
There’s nothing in the Constitution that says impeachment requires a formal transmittal of the articles to the Senate, whether by sedan chair or overnight Fed Ex, or that the House must appoint impeachment managers. The parchment merely says the House has sole power over impeachment and the Senate the sole power to try an impeachment. The act of impeachment is the vote.
- Nancy Pelosi demands that the Senate state the rules it will follow. They not only do not have to state them, but they certainly don’t have to negotiate the rules with the House. Ms. Pelosi—those rules are none of your business.
- The Senate has rules in place that say a trial doesn’t begin until the House appoints managers to deliver the articles. Simple options: (1) Give Pelosi a deadline for appointing managers, or (2) start without managers (and the Presidents’ lawyers will make the case). As said earlier, the articles have already been “delivered.”
- Mitch McConnell can have witnesses or not. It’s not up to Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi. So get over it.
At this point, the House Democrats will be all hot and bothered if Mitch McConnell takes action. I believe the country knows what a sham the impeachment process has been, and what it continues to be, and citizens will reject the Democrat temper tantrums.
The WSJ closed with this statement:
For Senate Republicans, their constitutional duty here is also the best politics. Don’t join Nancy Pelosi in defining impeachment down. Honor the Constitution by holding a trial.
Just do it, Mitch.
Published in Politics
I agree. On the other hand, Trump should start insisting over and over again that he has not been impeached until the articles are delivered. That history will never consider him an impeached president if he never gets a trial. Which is certainly true.
I say it should be done like with Roger Maris’s 61 home runs in 1961: Asterisk it. Having it as something to argue about could be good over the next several years.
He took a Christmas break, now that it’s over lets wait and see what Cocaine Mitch the Murder Turtle decides to do…
I also think SCOTUS would be loathe to override rules that the Senate has elected to govern itself.
Holding the Senate trial or dismissing it in the Senate is important to preserve the separation of powers both between the branches of government as well as within the Congress. The House, by withholding articles of impeachment, is both trampling on executive authority and Senate prerogatives. From the WSJ editorial mentioned:
I think the Supreme Court wouldn’t hesitate to get involved. Impeachment involves more than just presidents, and the process could be better defined if the Congress can’t figure it out. The accused would be entitled to seeing finality.
But this is more important for Judges being impeached, not presidents with such flimsy accusations.
The problem with a highly politicized impeachment like we see today, is that if the Senate brings it to a contested trial, it will give the democrats more opportunity to Kavanaugh the President. They will bring out even more liars and sensationalist witnesses, and what not. I know the President needs to thump his chest and demand a trial, but it is no good for him or the country to have a trial. The Senate needs to dispose of this farce with as little respect as it’s already been given.
@skyler, can a trial be held without calling witnesses? After all, this is not a typical trial to start. Or is there a way to hold some kind of procedure without witnesses. At this point, I agree with you. Witnesses will probably muck things up. We can go after the “criminals” later through other investigations.
Well, the rules of procedure would be whatever the Senate wants them to be, but what is typical in a generic American court room is this: When there is no evidence of a crime, or that the accused committed the crime, then the defendant can ask for summary judgment. That means the judge will look at the evidence that is adversarial to the defendant, and looking at every point in a manner most favorable to the prosecution. If he then concludes that there is no way the accused can be found guilty, the judge can issue a “summary judgment” that dispenses with a trial or any other presentation of evidence.
In the case of this impeachment, the Senate can put forward a motion for summary judgment and have the Senators vote on that prior to any evidence being presented. That’s how I think this should be handled. It should be done quickly, but only after being presented to the Senate, and McConnell can orate about no high crime or misdemeanor is described in the articles of impeachment and shame on the House. Vote, be done with it and let them wail and gnash their teeth.
That’s an important point too. The impeachment is about Trump and Trump alone. You really can’t properly go after others in this proceeding. At most you’d identify them and they’d have to have their own criminal trial in an Article III court (regular federal court). So there’s no point if you’re interesting in prosecuting others. Attorney General Barr can bring those charges to trial without any help from a politicized impeachment proceeding.