Well, I was wrong about the impeachment vote ...

[dogtag]

I guess Pelosi's threatened punishment for voting the wrong way
must have been pretty harsh for them to more or less guarantee
their being dumped come election time. Probably a plus in the
long run as the impeachment is going nowhere - and so are they.
Time for them to brush up on their typing skills, if they can find
a typewriter.

[blackhawknj]

I watched some of it on MSNBC, I noted how many Democrats did not vote.

[togor]

Trump gets his asterisk. And for what? A botched errand led by Rudy Giuliani of all people. That reeks of poor judgement.

[dogtag]

I watched some of it on MSNBC, I noted how many Democrats did not vote.

I find that cowardly. I might respect someone who votes, but not someone who hides.

[Roadkingtrax]

I find that cowardly. I might respect someone who votes, but not someone who hides.

Vote in 2020.

[lyman]

this was inevitable, the D's were like a pit bull on a milk bone,

now maybe they can be satisfied and move on to governing,,,



somehow, I doubt that,

[togor]

There is talk that Pelosi won't transmit the articles to the Senate until they offer something other than a trial stacked the way the administration wants it. Those are Graham's and McConnell's words, not mine. Leaving the articles out there like a Sword of Damocles over Trump's head.

The problem for Trump is that he doesn't want his principals to testify because he does not think their accounts will exonerate him. If he did, what better way to score a smashing victory over his enemies than to give them a full measure of what they ask for and destroy them in the eyes of the press and public both. It's the obvious play...if he's innocent. But he's not and therein lies the problem.

[Gun Smoke]

this was inevitable, the D's were like a pit bull on a milk bone,

now maybe they can be satisfied and move on to governing,,,



somehow, I doubt that,

"Move on to governing,,,"

Let's hope not. What could they govern?

[Major Tom]

When the Senate acquits Trump, Pelosi and her ilk will find other ways to rid the White House of Trump. I think Trum is a shoe in for his 2nd term as there are no viable democrats running for POTUS. Hillary will have to spend more millions to to covertly defeat Trump.

[Art]

There is talk that Pelosi won't transmit the articles to the Senate until they offer something other than a trial stacked the way the administration wants it. Those are Graham's and McConnell's words, not mine. Leaving the articles out there like a Sword of Damocles over Trump's head.

The problem for Trump is that he doesn't want his principals to testify because he does not think their accounts will exonerate him. If he did, what better way to score a smashing victory over his enemies than to give them a full measure of what they ask for and destroy them in the eyes of the press and public both. It's the obvious play...if he's innocent. But he's not and therein lies the problem.

Who wants who to testify depends entirely on whose ox is being gored. Trump has said he prefers a long trial and wants the "whistleblower" the Bidens and Schiff to testify in a Senate trial and the Democrats have given a big "thumbs down" to that one so that's that. It's all political B.S. and not benign B.S. either.

The Constitution doesn't say that the House has to transmit the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for the Senate to hold a trial. So there is a Constitutional "gray area." In theory the Senate could simply get a published copy of the Articles of Impeachment, commence the trial, bring Chief Justice Roberts over to preside and let him rule on whether the traditional form of walking the paperwork over from the House of Representatives is binding on the Senate.

As far as the trial being stacked goes; McConnell and Graham are only saying honestly what everyone knows. The trial in the Senate will be no more "stacked" than the impeachment hearings in the House, probably less so.

You are right about the "sword of Damocles." If the House democrats have their way it can simply send the Articles of Impeachment over at the most opportune time including any time in a Trump second term, and a Trump second term is looking more likely by the day.

As my daughter said, "it's a black day for America." Nobody's clean in this. Donald Trump certainly has his malfunctions, but the actions of the Democrats, especially this sitting on the Articles of Impeachment is despicable.

Apparently "The Squad" (probably with the blessing of Mrs. Pelosi) let the waverers know that they would be "primaried" if they voted against impeachment. So they picked a very narrow path to reelection in some cases over no path at all.

I saw that Tulsi Gabbard, who her fellow Dems look on as a Trump accomplice voted "present." Who else didn't vote "yea or nay" I honestly didn't notice.

[Roadkingtrax]

Looks like they could sit on the Articles of Impeachment, much like sitting on the SCOTUS Garland pick. Politics can certainly be dirty.

[Art]

Looks like they could sit on the Articles of Impeachment, much like sitting on the SCOTUS Garland pick. Politics can certainly be dirty.

Yes it can be dirty and has gotten a lot dirtier over the last 15 years or so. Sort of like Chuck Schumer saying 18 months before an election that he would block any replacement nominated By George W. Bush except in "extrodinary circumstances." I'd post the video clip but unfortunately my keyboard is acting up. They, of course, count on a short memory. The Democrats dug their own grave on judges when Harry Reed decided to abolish the filibuster in the case of Federal Judges. Trump and McConnell have been ramming judges through at an alarming rate if you're a leftist, in addition to two Supreme Court Judges there have been 170 so far including 48 on the Courts of Appeal. A really big deal because most cases never get past appellate courts. If the Dems think they're unhappy now they better hope another vacancy doesn't open up on the Supreme Court while Trump is president. I understand there is an excellent chance that Amy Coney Barrett, the hardest of cultural conservative hardliners is in the on deck circle for that.

[dogtag]

If Pelosi refuses to hand impeachment over to the Senate,
it will be an admittance that it has no substance so maybe
O'Connell can dismiss charges. End of story.

[Roadkingtrax]

If Pelosi refuses to hand impeachment over to the Senate,
it will be an admittance that it has no substance so maybe
O'Connell can dismiss charges. End of story.

The White House hopes not. Trump can finally say he achieved something that Obama didn't.

[togor]

If Pelosi refuses to hand impeachment over to the Senate,
it will be an admittance that it has no substance so maybe
O'Connell can dismiss charges. End of story.

Is it reasonable for Pelosi to take Moscow Mitch at his word when he says he has no intention of running an impartial trial or serving as an impartial juror? Might as well leave the articles hanging out there and get back to legislating and campaigning.