Pelosi's pocket veto

[WTF]

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/12/26/...rom%20%251%24s


I hope this is exactly wtf she does.

It puts Trump under wraps to moderate Senate Republicans until after the election.

Why send it to the Senate where you can't get a fair trial!

[00 gauge]

As if the impeachment hearings were "fair" ..... Pelosi is no dummy - she realizes the Democrats may have already committed political suicide by their votes on impeachment , and as the article states, "So why put 25-35 vulnerable Democratic House members in marginal or pro-Trump districts in harm's way? (More to the point: why should she put her tenure as Speaker of the House at risk?) Why engage in a process that will enrage the President's supporters and give him a rallying cry for his re-election campaign?" ..... so not sending the papers is more about saving her own neck because her worst possible nightmare could be losing those 35 "vulnerable" seats, and don't for a minute believe that Trump won't campaign his ass off in those districts ..... as I've stated in other posts, in their crazed zeal to impeach Trump, some Democrats may very well have committed their political suicide ..... If you think the idea of having Hillary become president wasn't a big enough "rallying cry for Republican voters in 2016, just watch what we do at the polls next November .....

[R.M.]

I’m hoping for a piano to fall on the hag.

[Unique_Carpenter]

WTF,
That article is a good write. And Pelosi has recently stated she won't send the paper to Senate unless a,b,c,... So she's already setting that script up.

[Hotrod511]

Originally Posted by WTF

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/12/26/...rom%20%251%24s


I hope this is exactly wtf she does.

It puts Trump under wraps to moderate Senate Republicans until after the election.

Why send it to the Senate where you can't get a fair trial!

Pelosi's best option would be a "pocket veto." Legislative leadership, of course, can't execute a "pocket veto." That's an executive function. But something very much like a "pocket veto" would serve Pelosi and her party's interests well. more partisan politics the left is good at

[Redhot1960]

WTF's pocket Beto...

[Jaxson66]

The Mcgahn ruling is coming soon, if the court compels Mcghan to testify before the judiciary committee more Articles are likely on the way. That’s a legitimate reason to slow the process down, but when the next appeal is filed I hope she moves forward. Moscow Mitch and the trump party will suffer at the polls after they Whitewash trump’s trial. But everything considered, I think she’s done a good job so far with the impeachment.

[HedonistForever]

Uh! What happened to our national security is at risk if we don't vote to remove the President whether the Republicans vote to do so is beside the point if one were to truly believe it's their duty to hold the vote and prove they have the best interest of the country at heart which of course they don't.


What's truly funny is thinking that holding off on sending the articles to the Senate will some how make voters forget the names of the Democratic House members that voted to impeach. That vote is in and it isn't going away.


Remember how the MSM told us day in and day out that there was a Constitutional crisis brought on by Republicans? Well, holding back articles of impeachment already voted on would constitute the kind of constitutional crisis the Dem's talked about. Just as the House had the "sole" authority to conduct the House impeachment inquiry with little to no input from Republicans, the Senate has the "sole" authority to conduct the trial with little to no input from Democrats, the minority party. For the House to now say that they should be given input to how the Senate conducts it's trial is laughable and flies in the face of their constitutional duties.


Remember Noah Feldman, the Democrats constitutional scholar that was there to explain how this whole process is suppose to work? He says that if Pelosi doesn't send over the articles, then Trump is not really impeached at all and holding back the articles would be a violation of the House's constitutional duty. So expect Trump to say day in and day out if Pelosi holds back the articles, that he wasn't really impeached at all putting the Democrats on the defensive to explain he is wrong when one of their own experts called in the impeachment inquiry agrees with Trump. How funny is that? There is no good way out of this mess the Democrats brought on themselves. If they don't allow the Democratic Senators to go on record as wanting to remove Trump, they are cowards without the conviction of their so called principles, allowing a President that is a national security threat to remain in office because they wouldn't move forward with the vote. Again, the damage, if there is any real damage to House Democrats has already happened and the damage to Democratic Senators in looking like cowards will not help in their re-election either.


While I can't find the polling that would confirm this, I don't doubt it is true that 30% of Americans thought that Trump was no longer President because he was impeached. Sounds about right. Another poll I can't confirm but also do not doubt is that 70% of Americans can not name all 3 branches of the government and 40% can't name one. We are a truly ignorant populace when it comes to our government and this board as well as the last one I was on confirms this everyday.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

The Mcgahn ruling is coming soon, if the court compels Mcghan to testify before the judiciary committee more Articles are likely on the way. That’s a legitimate reason to slow the process down, but when the next appeal is filed I hope she moves forward. Moscow Mitch and the trump party will suffer at the polls after they Whitewash trump’s trial.
But everything considered, I think she’s done a good job so far with the impeachment.

And what articles would those be prey tell? If McGahn confirms everything that Democrats believe Trump did, what else would be added to "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress"? Bribery and treason are already off the table, you think McGahn is going to prove bribery or treason?

[WTF]

The moderate Republicans gotta hope Pelosi does not send it over to the Senate...it gives them some control over Trump!


.

[eccieuser9500]

Holding on to the impeachment means she has SOME control over his media blitz. He continues to rant and rave about the same thing over and over again.


Bill Barr’s DOJ Tells the Courts and Congress to Get Lost

https://www.thedailybeast.com/attorn...in-new-filings

If a president can avoid compliance with his legal obligations by getting impeached, then he would have a strong incentive to solicit impeachment by the House of Representatives in order to gain, quite literally, a license to break the law without recourse.

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Uh! What happened to our national security is at risk if we don't vote to remove the President whether the Republicans vote to do so is beside the point if one were to truly believe it's their duty to hold the vote and prove they have the best interest of the country at heart which of course they don't.

[Chung Tran]

I'm not sure what I think yet.. sounds risky, but might be smart.

I don't know yet

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

I'm not sure what I think yet.. sounds risky, but might be smart.

I don't know yet

We are all sure you will know what you think when the lsm tells you what to think! You're a parrot of their narrative!

[HoeHummer]

Give your balls a tug, Winnsy. You sounds like, well, everybody’s else on this here forum, actually. You jerk off to red and black velvet paintings of Trump buttfucking Sean Hannity! That’s how hard you follow the Trumpholian narrative. And don’t Denys it.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

And what articles would those be prey tell? If McGahn confirms everything that Democrats believe Trump did, what else would be added to "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress"? Bribery and treason are already off the table, you think McGahn is going to prove bribery or treason?

The first would be Obstruction of Justice for three separate incidents described in Volume ll of the Mueller report. Don Mcghan has firsthand knowledge of those incidents and his testimony could support a new charge.

The second would be perjury. The fat lying bastard claimed he knew nothing about contacts with Russians or Wikileaks. The testimony from Roger Stone’s trial indicates he lied in his written response to the Mueller questionnaire. Bottom line, he knew his good buddy was working with Wikileaks.