Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

25. The only constitutional requirement is that the Chief Justice preside

Reply to bluestarone (Reply #23)

Mon May 27, 2019, 12:57 PM

May 2019

and 2/3 vote is required to convict.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What exactly would occur in the early stages of an impeachment inquiry that's not happening now? [View all] StarfishSaver May 2019 OP

The stonewalling would continue redstateblues May 2019 #1

Information gathering through hearings, investigations, etc. greatauntoftriplets May 2019 #2

That's all happening now. StarfishSaver May 2019 #4

Isn't that really what's going on now? greatauntoftriplets May 2019 #6

It is more serious than just an investigation scarytomcat May 2019 #3

What powers does the House get in an impeachment inquiry that it doesn't otherwise have? StarfishSaver May 2019 #5

Haven't you heard? The House would get the Magic Wand. CaptainTruth May 2019 #11

What powers are those? They already have subpoena power. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #8

good explanation stopdiggin May 2019 #10

Thanks for providing this research and excellent explanation StarfishSaver May 2019 #12

Arguably a judge might be more inclined to release grand jury information The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #14

Exactly StarfishSaver May 2019 #17

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2019 #21

Last week's rulings are completely relevant StarfishSaver May 2019 #24

Executive privilege and attorney-client privilege are privileges that aren't based on The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #31

What powers? N/T lapucelle May 2019 #28

I think it would give the Congress more leverage.. kentuck May 2019 #7

How would it give them more leverage? StarfishSaver May 2019 #15

You could always write the multiple Democrats of House Judiciary BeyondGeography May 2019 #30

A few things StarfishSaver May 2019 #35

You see THIS is what most of us here do NOT undertstand. bluestarone May 2019 #9

It would focus the citizenry davekriss May 2019 #13

No. It's a big assumption to draw that callingit impeachment will suddenly rivet the public StarfishSaver May 2019 #16

I disagree, I believe it is a safe assumption davekriss May 2019 #18

I keep relating it back to Watergate. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #19

"Has more to do with what they are uncovering than whether they're called impeachment" StarfishSaver May 2019 #20

I always thought they were impeachment hearings davekriss May 2019 #33

The 1973 hearings were held by a Senate select committee The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #34

A lot of people would feel better, but that's about it. n/t Captain Stern May 2019 #22

Question here. bluestarone May 2019 #23

The only constitutional requirement is that the Chief Justice preside StarfishSaver May 2019 #25

Here are the Senate's rules for impeachment trials: The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #26

The Senate doesn't indict because an impeachment trial isn't a criminal proceeding. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #27

TY i get confused a lot on this bluestarone May 2019 #29

The House makes the accusations; the Senate decides whether The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #32

The question is whether we'd get a faster, stronger, response from the courts if Trump pnwmom May 2019 #36

It would be hard to beat the speed and strength we got from the courts last week StarfishSaver May 2019 #37

That's true. We'll need to see how the Supreme Court handles this now, before we know. nt pnwmom May 2019 #38