We\u2019ve heard a lot of talk from Democrats, especially younger Democratic leaders like Ocasio-Cortez, about impeaching President Trump. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted again on June 21: \u201cThis president needs to be impeached.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I say, go for it!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, careful not to antagonize\nmoderate independent and Democratic voters, has issued many statements about\nimpeachment since January, when Democrats regained control of the House. Failing\nimpeachment, the House can censure the president.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Politico, <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The California Democrat [Pelosi] remained firm in her opposition to opening an impeachment inquiry into Trump right now but quashed the notion of censure \u2014 a less severe reprimand for public officials. Pelosi\u2019s censure comments are significant because she is leaving the House with one option if they want to punish Trump \u2014 impeachment. \u2018I think censure is just a way out. If you want to go, you gotta go,\u2019 she said. \u2018If the goods are there, you must impeach. Censure is nice, but it is not commensurate with the violations of the Constitution should we decide that\u2019s the way to go.’\u201d <\/p>(Source: https:\/\/www.politico.com\/story\/2019\/06\/19\/nancy-pelosi-mueller-report-1369894<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Well, why not? The House should impeach and get this over with. Then, during the Senate trial, Trump and his lawyers can bring forth all of the evidence in support of their claim \u2013 that officials in the Obama Administration, including Barack Obama himself \u2013 conducted an attempted coup against a legally elected president. I say, let\u2019s get this impeachment evidence out into the open, or as much of it as possible. Then we can hopefully get on with governing this country in a rational manner, instead of the constant and pointless fighting between the two parties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We know that the House writes the Articles of Impeachment,\nbut what does the Senate do? It hears evidence and holds a trial. If two-thirds\nof Senators vote in favor, impeachment is successful and Trump is kicked out of\noffice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Here is what the United States Senate website says about\nimpeachment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Impeachment is a very serious affair. This power of Congress is the ultimate weapon against officials of the federal government, and is a fundamental component of the constitutional system of \u2018checks and balances.\u2019 In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called \u2018managers,\u2019 acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate Chamber serves as the courtroom. The Senate becomes jury and judge, except in the case of presidential impeachment trials when the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official is removal from office. In some cases, disqualification from holding future offices is also imposed. There is no appeal.\u201d <\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
How is evidence collected during an impeachment trial?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 1934, Senator Henry Ashurst of Arizona, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, offered the resolution that became Rule XI after its adoption the following year. Rule XI provided: That in the trial of any impeachment the Presiding Officer of the Senate, if the Senate so orders, shall appoint a committee of senators to receive evidence and take testimony at such times and places as the committee may determine…<\/p>
…The impeachment of Harry E. Claiborne in 1986 finally put into action Rule XI, and the Senate established a special trial committee to hear evidence and report to the full Senate. Likewise, Senate trial committees considered evidence in the cases of Alcee Hastings (1989), Walter Nixon, Jr. (1989), and G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. (2010), all of whom were convicted and removed from office. Nixon challenged the use of an impeachment committee on constitutional grounds. In 1993, in the case Nixon v. United States, the Supreme Court upheld the Senate\u2019s right to determine its own procedures, including the use of a trial committee.\u201d<\/p>Source: https:\/\/www.senate.gov\/artandhistory\/history\/common\/briefing\/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm<\/a> <\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
So \u2013 the House impeaches and the Senate convicts. A special trial committee hears and collects this evidence in the Senate. Let\u2019s lay it all out on the table: the Democrats present their evidence of obstruction and Russian collusion, and whatever else is in the Articles of Impeachment; the Republicans present their evidence of a Democratic coup, and any other evidence they have to support the president. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nothing is being done in Congress anyway, except the appointment of more Trump judges, so why not get the impeachment thing over with now, before the 2020 election ramps up? The Democrats have everything in the Mueller Report. Adam Schiff keeps telling us the president is guilty as sin. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Democrats should stop talking and start acting! Either that, or STFU about it and get on with the business of the legislative branch. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
We\u2019ve heard a lot of talk from Democrats, especially younger Democratic leaders like Ocasio-Cortez, about impeaching President Trump. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted again on June 21: \u201cThis president needs to be impeached.\u201d I say, go for it! Speaker of the House Nancy … Continue reading