General Discussion

onenote

(46,244 posts)

56. In this instance, John Dean proves he doesn't know House procedural rules

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 06:27 PM

Dec 2019

There seems to be some belief that the House can vote to adopt articles of impeachment and then never take any action to appoint managers or direct their delivery to the Senate.

Well, even if that was a good idea...and it most definitely is not, unlike the Garland situation where McConnell could prevent a vote from taking place, Pelosi cannot prevent a vote from being called on a resolution to immediately appoint managers and send the articles to the Senate. Any Republican member of the House could introduce such a resolution and under the House rules, it would be "privileged" meaning no other action could be taken by the House until they voted on that resolution. The Democrats who just rushed to vote on articles of impeachment are not going to want to publicly vote to shelve those articles. It would be unprecedented to do so and it would give the Republicans a chance to shape the media narrative by accusing the Democrats of engaging in a sham proceeding and denying Trump his "day in court."

Pelosi has made it abundantly clear that impeachment is a constitutional imperative that couldn't wait. She's not going to support any effort to stall out the process. You can bet the mortgage on it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

OK, once again John Dean proves his brilliance.... [View all] Sogo Dec 2019 OP

It takes 2/3rds of the senate to remove. unblock Dec 2019 #1

2/3rds of those present Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2019 #3

yeah, this is the kind of vote that only senators in a coma can miss. unblock Dec 2019 #5

If you're in a swing state, you'd rather have a drs appointment that day; Volaris Dec 2019 #33

More like you'd rather have heart surgery and be under general anaethsia that day. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2019 #40

Whatever is the excuse is fine with me lol, as long as the result is trump is gone. Volaris Dec 2019 #44

If only we could compel the recusal of accomplices ... n/t soldierant Dec 2019 #47

yes - but it only takes 51 to make approve the Trial Rules. CincyDem Dec 2019 #6

Excellent point. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2019 #41

True. But with the D's running the trial, there is a greater chance pnwmom Dec 2019 #17

Hmmm ... Mme. Defarge Dec 2019 #2

The Dems are saying we have to do it now, before the election because.... JoeOtterbein Dec 2019 #4

I feel your pain............. MyOwnPeace Dec 2019 #7

Bingo! Thanks cause... JoeOtterbein Dec 2019 #9

Any rules about only impeaching once? quakerboy Dec 2019 #12

+1000! nt JoeOtterbein Dec 2019 #14

Yes! Enough evidence is there to impeach for each Article of Impeachment! Tie that do-nothing ancianita Dec 2019 #38

Do we really want to give Trump.... SergeStorms Dec 2019 #43

+1000! JoeOtterbein Dec 2019 #45

Indeed. warmfeet Dec 2019 #46

I wish. But we know that the Senate will not convict. wnylib Dec 2019 #49

That's the rationale Pelosi is putting out for public consumption . . . . markpkessinger Dec 2019 #50

+1 JoeOtterbein Dec 2019 #51

If it is not required per the U.S. Constitution.... LovingA2andMI Dec 2019 #8

Something tells me that this is the plan. GoCubsGo Dec 2019 #10

He's gonna pull ugly shit no matter what the house/congress does and no matter what is good erronis Dec 2019 #31

Shit. Not a bad idea. Especially after we peel the Senate away from him. Just so long as Pence ... marble falls Dec 2019 #11

Not a bad idea, at all. burrowowl Dec 2019 #13

If enough negative sh*t comes out about Pence, ,, lastlib Dec 2019 #42

Subtitle to this thread: Sogo Dec 2019 #15

An excellent thought DonaldsRump Dec 2019 #16

I so much want Sogo Dec 2019 #18

That works for me. Go for it. oasis Dec 2019 #19

Dems need to play this like "Merrick Garland Revisited" Mr. Ected Dec 2019 #20

Exactly! Sogo Dec 2019 #21

100% agree. Keep Trump facing his trial in a Dem Senate vs gifting it now to Mitch & his SCOTUS. stuffmatters Dec 2019 #37

Kick! UCmeNdc Dec 2019 #22

That is precisely my thinking malaise Dec 2019 #23

I really like this idea! calimary Dec 2019 #24

I had to read this entire thread before this idea made sense to me... IndyOp Dec 2019 #25

I agree. Especially after the call logs only came out with the report. LiberalFighter Dec 2019 #29

Now that's a great idea duforsure Dec 2019 #26

I thought for awhile that waiting until after the election... kentuck Dec 2019 #27

I'm not sure they can do that... Wounded Bear Dec 2019 #28

The first part you may be right. LiberalFighter Dec 2019 #30

"But the House does have control in the trial as they do the prosecution." AncientGeezer Dec 2019 #55

Correct. Once voted it on it is automatically the business of the Senate grantcart Dec 2019 #32

Send it to the Senate, make GOP Senators defend the orange criminal, AND keep investigating. CaptainTruth Dec 2019 #34

Yes, let's do a Moscow Mitch maneuver...serves him right being that's he a worthless toady ... SWBTATTReg Dec 2019 #35

sounds like my plan scarytomcat Dec 2019 #36

Wouldn't it Rebl2 Dec 2019 #39

Have new impeachment hearings The Wizard Dec 2019 #48

You want to wind up the Dumsters....this is the way to do it. And the Press...apoplectic. AncientGeezer Dec 2019 #52

OK, Sogo Dec 2019 #53

You can't stop it..what JD suggested is a a wet dream. AncientGeezer Dec 2019 #54

In this instance, John Dean proves he doesn't know House procedural rules onenote Dec 2019 #56

Well, well, well..... Sogo Dec 2019 #57