I'm not sure just how cunning this maneuver will turn out to be in the long run. I'm not at all convinced the Dems will win in the courts. They may get a few lower court victories, but those will be harder to sustain as the appeal process continues.
The other thing this delay may bring into play is ... Bill Barr as a significant player. Declassification, revelations of investigative actions, and possible high profile legal actions such as indictments, could significantly tilt the playing field for the president. We shall see. If the delay expands Barr's room to maneuver this Dem ploy could turn out to not be cunning at all.
UPDATE 1: Laura Ingraham says We The People were "punked" by the Dems with this delayed impeachment ploy. IMO, Laura has a point. Most people with any sense of fair play--remember that concept?--will be outraged. I suspect that this won't wash that well with the courts, either.
I wish I could have heard what Robert Ray had to say--you'll see him waiting in the wings. He's usually very good.
And I suspect this will increasingly resonate with We The People:
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 19, 2019
UPDATE 2: Mitch McConnell says he'll speak in the Senate at 9:30 tomorrow morning. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts to the Imperious Nan and her demands.
I do not know where parallels between our legal system for trials and impeachment end, but I would think the principle of a right to a speedy trial would apply here. A prosecutor couldn't obtain an indictment and then hold that over a defendant in perpetuity without resolving in a trial. It would seem like an unconstitutional abuse of impeachment to conduct impeachment and then make the president and country wait for some indefinite time before the House decides to try the case. And isn't it the Senate that has the sole power to try an impeachment--the House is preventing the Senate from doing their duty.
ReplyDeleteInteresting argument. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that come up. Thanks for the idea.
DeleteThe Constitution says the House has sole power of impeachment. Well, they have impeached. That is all they get. If they hadn't been in such a hurry, they wouldn't need this. Call the Senate together and give House 24 Hours to send them articles or it will be defeated.
DeleteRob S
>If the delay expands Barr's room to maneuver this Dem ploy could turn out to not be cunning at all.<
ReplyDeleteThe Rolling Stones - Time Is On My Side
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_3oxD5dDSw
Right. I'm not at all sure that time is on the Dems' side.
DeleteI'm chomping at the bit, to hear of how the delay expands Barr's room to maneuver.
ReplyDeleteOK, you've put me on the spot. The FISA report has already given him more freedom to speak out on some aspects of the investigation. Today he criticized impeachment theater on Fox. The delay gives him scope to continue to speak like that. It also may give him the time he needs to explain the Durham investigation in ways that may be helpful to Trump, as Durham progresses. Things of that sort. It may not sound exciting, but it can have an effect on the public. And then the whole business of declassification is always out there.
DeleteThere are also other things in play. Revelations are still to be found in Ukraine etc. The Democrats may have hoisted a Sword of Damocles, but over whom doth it hover.
ReplyDeleteTom S.
Yeah. Lots of stuff out there.
DeleteThe Senate will just hold whatever trial they want, acquite, and the impeachment articles will then be legally void. That is what McConnell should announce tomorrow morning, and I suspect that is exactly what he will do.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how that will work. The Constitution doesn't specify procedures. It seems to me, therefore, that you and others may be right. The vote having been taken in the House, the Senate may not have to wait.
DeleteThey don't have to wait, Mark, as long as McConnell controls his majority, and I suspect he does. Whatever chance Schumer had of getting cooperation of 3 turncoats almost surely went down the drain with this silly maneuver by Pelosi- this maneuver taints anybody connected to it, and a Republican connected to it may as well resign.
DeleteI can predict, though, what is going to happen if McConnell does this- the Democrats will then go to distric court asking for an injunction. You ain't seen the depths of silliness that the Democrats will go to yet. They have completely lost all their common sense.
ReplyDeleteThey ultimately lose. This is like a legislative coup in which a partisan majority of the House claims to control the entire government--potentially all three branches.
DeleteOn Nancy’s holding up the Articles of Impeachment, Joel B. Pollak at Breitbart says it won’t make a bit of difference.
ReplyDeleteSpeaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) appears to be considering an idea Democrats have floated for several days of holding back the articles of impeachment to exercise leverage over the Senate and the president.
She declined formally to transmit the articles to the Senate on Wednesday evening after the House voted to impeach President Donald Trump.
Unfortunately for them, the Senate can act, regardless — and would vote to acquit.
That’s because the Constitution is absolutely clear about the Senate’s authority. Article I, Section 3 says: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”
That is all.
The Chief Justice presides over a trial involving the president, but the Senate makes the rules. And the Senate is controlled by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who regards what the House has done with contempt.
You’re in Cocaine Mitch’s court, now.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/18/pollak-senate-can-acquit-even-if-house-doesnt-transmit-articles-of-impeachment-constitution/
Or the Senate can dismiss… the ball is already in their court.
I think Pollak is right. And this attempt at a House dictatorship will surely PO the Senate. SCOTUS will know impeachment of justices is next up.
DeleteSources: McConnell will move to acquit President Trump if he’s impeached
ReplyDeleteDaniel Goldman, Democratic Judiciary Committee staff counsel, said a week ago that the danger is clear and present: "President Trump's persistent and continuing effort to coerce a foreign country to help him cheat to win an election is a clear and present danger to our free and fair elections and to our national security."
ReplyDeleteNancy Pelosi today says not so fast...and is apparently threatening to withhold the impeachment articles urgently passed last night to address the 'clear and present danger'.
Senator Schumer is now looking for ways to add witnesses and supplement the apparently insufficient record which Schiff and Nadler have rushed to the Senate.
Of course, with respect to tactics they are all working with -- or for -- Norm Eisen and Barry Berke and some others -- a handful of lawyers associated with the Lawfare group, the puppeteer here who is apparently pulling all the strings.
Another good question is whether the American people really want the ultra partisan Lawfare lawyers to decide who is President of the United States?
In his statement to the Senate just the other day McConnell asked rhetorically--"Is it just possible" that they (Schumer and the House lawyers) are consulting with outsiders?
DeleteThe outsiders - aka Lawfare - have been in place in both the Judicial and Intelligence Committees since this process began. Daniel Goldman is also Lawfare. Has anyone ever had a look at their blog? Their whole raison d’etre is to take down and remove President Trump….
DeleteI assume that most know Lawfare was a takeoff on Warfare. Should tell us much we need to know about this evil group...
Of course the House can consult anyone they want, but so can the Senate and the President. Mitch is right, however, to point at the vast Left Wing conspiratorial nature of this fake impeachment, because America needs to know the people and the ideas that are behind it.
DeleteLawfare has styled itself as a protector of the nation’s security. A cover for their primary purpose: To eradicate the policies of President Donald Trump and remove him from office.
DeleteIt was “founded” in 2010. What they were up to back then is anyone’s guess, but we know now that they provided the “Beach Friends” for Christine Blasey-Ford who helped (used?) Ford in her attempt to stop the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh.
OIG Horowitz’s report vindicated Devin Nunes and knocked the blocks out from under Schiff’s report. As an example of the propaganda Lawfare puts out, here is its managing editor and an intern writing on Schiff’s report about ten days ago:
Delete"How the Schiff Report Deals With Disinformation"
https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-schiff-report-deals-disinformation