• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pelosi threatens to delay Senate impeachment trial

dcsports said:
That's the thing - this isn't a situation where you have a 'deal'. The house's role is to impeach (or not). It's not to 'negotiate' the format of the Senate trial. The fact she's trying to hold up the trial as leverage to gain additional witnesses highlights what a political sham the impeachment process was.
Click to expand...

yes they were so 100% positive Trump was guilty; now they need more witnesses????
 
dcsports said:
Pelosi is attempting to use a process issue to delay the impeachment process. It's a House rule - not even a law, and not a part of the constitution. Pelosi is abusing her role as an administrator to prevent the will of the House from carrying out a constitutional function. I don't think she can really do that - at least not for a significant time.

There's a good case for intervention by the courts from several angles. The Senate or President could sue Pelosi and force her to either declare the articles invalid (not going to happen) or forward them to the senate. Members of Congress (perhaps even her own party) could sue to force her to deliver the articles. It's even possible the Senate could point to the recorded vote (on their own or with a judicial declaration) and start the trial.

Holding the articles for an extended time isn't a real option. Again, I don't think Pelosi has any intention of doing so.
Click to expand...
Hoowever perhaps they could be dismissed. That might be best. GOP senator plans to seek dismissal of impeachment articles | TheHill
 
vegas giants said:
The senate has not recieved the case.


Pelosi holds all the cards
Click to expand...
All she holds are the articles, and earlier claimed the process had to be carried out quickly because of the risk to 'national security'. She's entered the dementia zone.
 
Fred C Dobbs said:
All she holds are the articles, and earlier claimed the process had to be carried out quickly because of the risk to 'national security'. She's entered the dementia zone.
Click to expand...

The orange cheeto can have his trial when McConnell agrees to a fair trial.



Not before
 
vegas giants said:
All the more reason to pursue this impeachment trial fully and fairly....dont you agree? Should we rush it and do it poorly?
Click to expand...
The Senate will do it fairly and out in the open. Why the concern?
 
vegas giants said:
The orange cheeto can have his trial when McConnell agrees to a fair trial.
Not before
Click to expand...
There's no evidence that any unfair trial will take place. It seems the Democrats are looking for excuses not to deliver those articles to the Senate.
 
Fred C Dobbs said:
There's no evidence that any unfair trial will take place. It seems the Democrats are looking for excuses not to deliver those articles to the Senate.
Click to expand...

Great. Agree to Mulvaney and Bolton as witnesses.

Its gonna be fun
 
Fred C Dobbs said:
You may be right, but all options are being exercised. If Nancy continues to stall then some decision along those lines will have to be made.
Click to expand...

God I hope so.


No trial for months is my preference
 
vegas giants said:
Take your case to the courts. It will take months.


That would be my preference
Click to expand...

To get a judicial order? Probably not. Considering the constitutional issue it would get expedited treatment. In theory it could even be appealed directly to SCOTUS.
 
Last edited:
Fred C Dobbs said:
What did they witness?
Click to expand...

they witnessed a phone call ( aid for anti corruption) which was long standing foreign policy implemented by Trump Biden and many many others.
 
James972 said:
they witnessed a phone call ( aid for anti corruption) which was long standing foreign policy implemented by Trump Biden and many many others.
Click to expand...

Then let's hear their testimony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom