The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (3 Viewers)

[Andrus]

By Laura Bassett

After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

“Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

Read the Full Story - InStyle

 

[JimEverett]

Not really, because that is the expectation most Americans have of a trial. And that is also how impeachment trials have always been carried out by the Senate. So why change all of that in this impeachment trial? The only reason is to protect Trump.

You may think most Americans are uninformed on the matter - I do not. I think most of them see through this impeachment as pure politics. So we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[coldseat]

You may think most Americans are uninformed on the matter - I do not. I think most of them see through this impeachment as pure politics. So we will have to agree to disagree.

Where did I say that? Lol You're just putting things in my mouth to make your point.

I in fact believe most Americans are informed on and have basic expectations of trials. Which is why I think many will pass judgement of the Senate for this farce that McConnell is attempting to set up.

 

[Nebaghead]

You may think most Americans are uninformed on the matter - I do not. I think most of them see through this impeachment as pure politics. So we will have to agree to disagree.

Dems and Repubs are both playing politics. The question is which side will people be more empathetic with? If people see the trial not getting a fair shake the Dems win the perception battle. Who ever has the best story and sound bytes wins. Do you agree? You can think the Repubs will win is fine, but if the Dems come across better, what do you think will happen?

 

[JimEverett]

Where did I say that? Lol You're just putting things in my mouth to make your point.

I in fact believe most Americans are informed on and have basic expectations of trials. Which is why I think many will pass judgement of the Senate for this farce that McConnell is attempting to set up.

You are saying people expect an impeachment trial to be like a non-impeachment trial. I think that means you think people are uninformed.

 

[coldseat]

You are saying people expect an impeachment trial to be like a non-impeachment trial. I think that means you think people are uninformed.

You're reaching and twisting.

It does not mean people are uninformed. It means people that have an expectation of a fair trial. And most know of or have heard of what's happened in past impeachment trial. That includes everything I've already mentioned. So that's the expectation.

 

[Dadsdream]

Not really, because that is the expectation most Americans have of a trial. And that is also how impeachment trials have always been carried out by the Senate. So why change all of that in this impeachment trial? The only reason is to protect Trump.

You're reaching and twisting.

It does not mean people are uninformed. It means people that have an expectation of a fair trial. And most know of or have heard of what's happened in past impeachment trial. That includes everything I've already mentioned. So that's the expectation.

Well, since you know what most Americans think and you choose to speak on their behalf . . . I'd say you are reaching and twisting. I'm with JE on this one. Oh, I also agree with NEBaghead. Weird.

 

[Nebaghead]

Well, since you know what most Americans think and you choose to speak on their behalf . . . I'd say you are reaching and twisting. I'm with JE on this one. Oh, I also agree with NEBaghead. Weird.

My wife who is college educated with a masters thinks Trump is on his way to jail because of the impeachment. Most people don't know or don't care. Probably the 200 million people who don't vote.

 

[Nebaghead]

Looks like Mitch is going to allow House evidence without a vote. They must have not liked the negative spin coming out this morning. If the Senate takes away the Dem's arguing points in the rules, they will come out looking reasonable and fair.

 

[coldseat]

Well, since you know what most Americans think and you choose to speak on their behalf . . . I'd say you are reaching and twisting. I'm with JE on this one. Oh, I also agree with NEBaghead. Weird.

I'm happy to speak up for most Americans.

Of course I grant you Trump supporters don't care what happens. They know they have the outcome in the bag and that's all that matter. All this is for them is an opportunity to get under liberals skin by defending this perversion that McConnell is running and trying to legitimize it. It's funny, you see, I know you agree.

 

[Dadsdream]

My wife who is college educated with a masters thinks Trump is on his way to jail because of the impeachment. Most people don't know or don't care. Probably the 200 million people who don't vote.

She may be totally right. Then again, I detect notes of pragmatism in your responses with a hint of fatalistic stoicism, and a vague feeling that we are resigned to our fate. Then again, maybe I just need a beer.

 

[dtc]

But it is not a trial in the ordinary sense. Its an impeachment trial. And the impeachment record consists of far more than opening statements. There are no rules about evidentiary matters in an impeachment trial. It is completely up to the Senate at this phase. It was up to the House before - you know, when there was little to no attention paid to Republican evidentiary concerns.

The idea that the guy who had complete control of the fact-finding phase of the impeachment itself is now crying about trying to get factual evidence in from the Senate should have us all laughing at the absurdity of it all.

Lady Justice is laughing at anyone who agrees with you. Or crying.

And, what about the authority of Justice Roberts to preside?

I think there's at least as good an argument that he can rule however he likes as there is that McConnell can hamstring the entire process, but I'll leave that up to you to opine.

 

[Nebaghead]

She may be totally right. Then again, I detect notes of pragmatism in your responses with a hint of fatalistic stoicism, and a vague feeling that we are resigned to our fate. Then again, maybe I just need a beer.

I don't think I worded it right. Because the house passed articles of impeachment, she think the process is over and Trump goes to jail. No trial, no nothing.

 

[Dadsdream]

I don't think I worded it right. Because the house passed articles of impeachment, she think the process is over and Trump goes to jail. No trial, no nothing.

My wife has a BS in Animal Science. I have similar problems explaining anything to her that doesn't involve equine breeding, pedigrees, and whether Seattle Slew was the greatest sire.

 

[JimEverett]

Lady Justice is laughing at anyone who agrees with you. Or crying.

And, what about the authority of Justice Roberts to preside?

I think there's at least as good an argument that he can rule however he likes as there is that McConnell can hamstring the entire process, but I'll leave that up to you to opine.

Lady Justice was all laughed out after watching the ridiculous spectacle of an impeachment.

 

[samiam5211]

Lady Justice quit her job and became a rich man’s trophy wife a long time ago.

 

[wardorican]

This isn't a criminal trial. It's got its own rules and decorum.
Chief among those is that the Senate can summarily dismiss without comment.
In that regard, it has more in common with the Supreme Court than the House.

People have been using criminal/court proceedings, rules, and expectations since this began. Arguments about due process were used for the House investigation. Why is it so wild to use similarities to a court of law for the Senate?

 

[wardorican]

You may think most Americans are uninformed on the matter - I do not. I think most of them see through this impeachment as pure politics. So we will have to agree to disagree.

I think the pure politics part will flip. A majority or near majority favored impeachment and removal. If they feel like the senate isnt taking this seriously, the "pure politics" take will be focused on Republicans, not Democrats.

 

[wardorican]

I forgot his name but the Whitehouse council who was on about 45 min ago was pretty good. I disagree with his argument, but he was far better at giving a defense than anything I heard from the house during those investigations.