Trump impeachment charges may go to Senate as early as next week

[rooster59]

Trump impeachment charges may go to Senate as early as next week

By David Morgan and Richard Cowan

 

U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaks ahead of a House vote on a War Powers Resolution amid the stalemate surrounding the impeachment of U.S. President Donald Trump, as she holds her weekly news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., January 9, 2020. REUTERS/Tom Brenner

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Democratic-led U.S. House of Representatives will send formal impeachment charges against President Donald Trump to the Senate as early as next week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Friday, setting the stage for his long-awaited trial.

 

Pelosi, the top Democrat in the House, has been engaged in a three-week cat-and-mouse game with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell over the rules for Trump's trial in the Republican-controlled Senate.

 

Democrats have demanded it include new witness testimony and evidence about the Republican president's pressuring of Ukraine to probe former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading Democrat running for the right to face Trump in the November election.

 

McConnell slammed the door on that idea this week, saying he had enough Republican votes to start the trial without a commitment to hear from additional witnesses, including former Trump national security adviser John Bolton.

 

Democrats are trying to convince a few moderate Republican senators to allow witnesses. One moderate, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, told reporters in her home state that she and a "fairly small group" of her fellow Republican senators are working to ensure witnesses can be called.

 

The Senate is expected to acquit Trump before the 2020 presidential election campaign heats up, as no Republicans have voiced support for ousting him, a step that would require a two-thirds majority.

 

In a letter to House Democratic lawmakers on Friday, Pelosi said a resolution could be brought up next week to appoint House "managers" to prosecute the case against Trump at the trial and to transmit the impeachment charges to the Senate.

 

Last month, the House adopted a rule allowing Democrats to quickly bring up a resolution naming managers, and to vote on it after only 10 minutes of debate. That means the House could vote as soon as Tuesday.

 

House Democrats have said Pelosi could name up to 10 lawmakers as managers, including House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who spearheaded the impeachment probe, and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler.

 

Pelosi has declined to submit the charges, or articles of impeachment, to the Senate. She was seeking leverage for Democrats to negotiate rules of the trial, which cannot begin until the charges are transmitted.

 

Democrats fear McConnell plans to hold a cursory trial without hearing all the evidence. Adding to their concerns, McConnell has backed a Republican-backed resolution that would clear the way for senators to dismiss the charges before the House submits them.

 

"A dismissal is a cover-up and deprives the American people of the truth," Pelosi said in her letter, accusing McConnell of intending to "stonewall." She said she would consult with House Democrats on how to proceed on Tuesday.

 

The House impeached Trump on Dec. 18 on charges of abusing power and obstructing Congress. The investigation was sparked by a whistleblower's complaint about Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

 

Trump says he did nothing wrong and has dismissed his impeachment as a partisan bid to undo his 2016 election win.

 

"Well I think it’s ridiculous. She (Pelosi) should have sent them a long time ago. It just belittles the process," Trump said in an interview with Fox News on Friday.

 

White House senior adviser Kellyanne Conway said White House counsel Pat Cipollone would lead Trump's defence and outside counsel Jay Sekulow would be involved.

 

'ABOUT TIME'

 

Republicans in Congress have lambasted Pelosi's approach, noting that House Democrats claimed it was urgent to impeach Trump before the December holiday break, but now are delaying.

 

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley accused Pelosi of throwing Congress into "unnecessary chaos," saying the delay would postpone ratification of the new United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.

 

"About time," McConnell responded when asked about Pelosi's letter on Friday. McConnell, who has vowed to coordinate the trial with the White House, has said Pelosi cannot dictate to the Senate how to conduct the proceedings.

 

Meanwhile, Pelosi has accused McConnell of engaging in "tactics of delay" by refusing to spell out exactly how he proposes to conduct the trial.

 

A McConnell aide declined to say when such a resolution might be unveiled.

 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has said Democrats would force votes during the trial to have the witnesses, including Bolton, testify and for new evidence to be submitted.

 

"Senate Democrats are ready for the trial to begin and will do everything we can to see that the truth comes out," Schumer said in a statement.

 

Bolton, who was fired by Trump in September, has said he is willing to testify, although the White House could object.

 

Other witnesses during the House impeachment investigation testified that Bolton strongly objected to an effort by Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to pressure Ukraine's government outside of regular diplomatic channels. One said Bolton referred to the arrangement as a "drug deal."

 

Congressional investigators believe Bolton objected to Trump's decision to delay $390 million in military aid to Ukraine and could elaborate on that, a Senate aide told Reuters this week.

 

When asked by Fox News if he would invoke executive privilege to prevent Bolton from testifying, Trump said: "Well, I think you have to for the sake of the office."

 

(Reporting by David Morgan, Richard Cowan, Steve Holland and Washington Speed Team; Writing by Paul Simao; Editing by Andy Sullivan, Nick Macfie and David Gregorio)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-11

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

 

[TopDeadSenter]

The world is moving so fast, Pelosi really lost whatever momentum and interest the impeachment may have held. There may be one or 2 fringe lunatics still holding out some hope that it will remove the electorally unbeatable Trump, who knows? During the panicked stall and backpedal Trump essentially neutered the Iranian military, and the world watched in horror as the Iranians went ape-droppings and mass trampled themselves to death and then shot down a commercial airliner. Who even remembers the impeachment hoax with so much important stuff going on. It is now as irrelevant as it is farcical.

Trump +1, Democrats -1.

[pmarlin]

Where it will get a quick death.

[Boon Mee]

 Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition (sweeping electoral defeat of whatever clown the Democrats choose). ???? 

[Emdog]

Guilty defendants don't want evidence. Innocent ones do.

[IAMHERE]

6 hours ago, rooster59 said:

as early as next week

I think Pelosi has waited to long to use the words "as early as".  What was the holdup? Just politics I'm supposing.

[candide]

Smart tactics by Pelosi. She has left enough time to expose the hypocrisy of Republicans. As a result, support for removing Trump has increased again in polls and there is twice as much respondents who think there should be new witnesses during the trial than respondents who don't.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/daily-presidential-tracking-poll/ar-AADKLI1

https://morningconsult.com/2020/01/08/most-voters-want-more-impeachment-witnesses-as-senate-prepares-for-trial/

Edited January 11, 2020 by candide

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

I think Pelosi has waited to long to use the words "as early as".  What was the holdup? Just politics I'm supposing.

If Moscow Mitch lives up to his oath to have fair and impartial trial with the relevant witnesses, Pelosi would not have delayed. Most people want a trial but not Mitch who just want to placate his boss. Just criminal intent to defend the indefensible I supposed. 

[Kelsall]

Pelosi caved.

 

"The speaker got nothing in return for her decision to end the holdout. Back on Dec. 18, the night the House impeached the president, Pelosi said she would not send the articles until she received some assurance that the Senate trial would be 'fair.'"

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/pelosi-caves

Edited January 11, 2020 by Kelsall

[Kelsall]

1 hour ago, candide said:

Smart tactics by Pelosi. She has left enough time to expose the hypocrisy of Republicans. As a result, support for removing Trump has increased again in polls and there is twice as much respondents who think there should be new witnesses during the trial than respondents who don't.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/daily-presidential-tracking-poll/ar-AADKLI1

https://morningconsult.com/2020/01/08/most-voters-want-more-impeachment-witnesses-as-senate-prepares-for-trial/

Same polls that predicted Hillary would win.

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, Kelsall said:

Same polls that predicted Hillary would win.

No polls predicted hilary would win. Polls dont predict. But im sure you and trump use them if in your favor.

[Sujo]

8 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Pelosi caved.

 

"The speaker got nothing in return for her decision to end the holdout. Back on Dec. 18, the night the House impeached the president, Pelosi said she would not send the articles until she received some assurance that the Senate trial would be 'fair.'"

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/pelosi-caves

She will pass impeachment to the senate when she knows the rules of the trial so she can appoint managers.

She also got moscow mitch to change from saying no witnesses and dead on arrival to consider witnesses.

 

As per the oath he takes to be fair.

 

Do you want to know if the president is corrupt or not. Or is your mind made up.

Edited January 11, 2020 by Sujo

[candide]

26 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Same polls that predicted Hillary would win.

This is not an election forecast, it's the current state of public opinion. What they show is quite interesting:

- support for removing Trump and support for additional witnesses in Senate trial have increased. It suggests that Pelosi was right to wait.

- the Republican propaganda has been a complete failure: only 24%  of respondents think there should not be additional witnesses.  Even worse, only 39% of Republican voters think so.

[sirineou]

The Republicans are trying to stage a sham trial in the Senate,

They claim that they want the same process as in the Clinton Senate impeachment trial yet the Clinton impeachment was conducted under the investigation of Independent Counsel Ken Starr.All necessary  witnesses had being interviewed and a witness list had had being established by the Independent   Counsel, which clearly is not the case now.  

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, Kelsall said:

Same polls that predicted Hillary would win.

That line is stale.

[malibukid]

best thing for Trump to do is resign and not embarrass the country, it would be the classy thing to do, but since Trump is not known to be a class act, this will never happen and it will cause the Nation more pain and anguish. 

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

No polls predicted hilary would win. Polls dont predict. But im sure you and trump use them if in your favor.

Amybody paying attention knew trump had a chance electorally.

[Sujo]

40 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Amybody paying attention knew trump had a chance electorally.

Which was what the polls indicated.

[Tug]

2 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Same polls that predicted Hillary would win.

Ohhhh but she did and by the margin they predicted trump eked out the win in the electoral college by about  70,000 votes across 3 states but that’s enough deflection the senate has in its history held trials never without witnesses full stop truth and facts are the enemy of trump that beeing said the vast majority want witnesses we will rember come 2020 what a rigged trial Mitch is trying to set up we will rember the rule by tweet and troll dumpster fire of the trump administration 

[bendejo]

If this whole thing is just a fake news witch hunt hoax then he should allow the the fake news witch hunt hoax witnesses to testify and his expensive lawyers will prove they are are all part of a fake news witch hunt hoax conspiracy, and he will emerge from this victimhood and the Dems will cower off in disgrace.  Right?

But blocking people from testifying makes him look like a man with something to hide.  What is he hiding?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/11/john-bolton-impeachment-testimony-donald-trump

 

Man up, DT!

 

 

Edited January 11, 2020 by bendejo

[sirineou]

Let's see if I understand this correctly. You can't use second hand witnesses to convict but you can't  call first hand witnesses to convict because of executive privilege.

In other words regardless what a president does, you can't convict? 

   Only those stupid enough to support trump would believe and support  something like that.

[Nyezhov]

11 hours ago, sirineou said:

The Republicans are trying to stage a sham trial in the Senate,

They claim that they want the same process as in the Clinton Senate impeachment trial yet the Clinton impeachment was conducted under the investigation of Independent Counsel Ken Starr.All necessary  witnesses had being interviewed and a witness list had had being established by the Independent   Counsel, which clearly is not the case now.  

Then Adam Schiff should have called more witnesses. But they were in a hurry. Critical. Had to happen immediately, the fate of the nation demanded immediate action!

 

Juat kidding.

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, Nyezhov said:

Then Adam Schiff should have called more witnesses. But they were in a hurry. Critical. Had to happen immediately, the fate of the nation demanded immediate action!

 

Juat kidding.

You don't think Adam Schiff wanted these witnesses to testify in the house????????

and sets suppose that the democrats were so incompetent and or negligent  not to think about inviting these important witnesses to testify in the house hearing. are you saying that the republicans are equally or should be equally incompetent and or negligent??????

 

[bendejo]

43 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Let's see if I understand this correctly. You can't use second hand witnesses to convict but you can't  call first hand witnesses to convict because of executive privilege.

In other words regardless what a president does, you can't convict? 

   Only those stupid enough to support trump would believe and support  something like that.

You're doing something wrong here: you're trying to use sense and reason.

BZZZZZZZZZZT!!!

Anything that DT doesn't like is wrong, illegal, treason, and anything else he thinks to say at the moment he's speaking, and he has the US Constitution to back him up: don't ask how.

 

And then there are boot-licks lined up behind him, ensuring their political futures.  Oops!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/10/politics/trump-matt-gaetz-iran-war-powers-resolution/index.html

 

Maybe Matt can march a bunch of his fellow GOP Congressman into the Oval Office, order a pizza etc.

 

I don't know if this is possible, but it could it work out at the beginning of the trial when the senators/jurors take the oath, someone stands up and says "so-and-so has already declared publicly that their mind is already made up..." and demand that person be barred from the jury?  That would certainly jumble up the numbers!

 

McConnell on impeachment: 'I'm not impartial about this at all'

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/474946-mcconnell-on-impeachment-im-not-impartial-about-this-at-all

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by bendejo

[tifino]

2 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Anything that DT doesn't like is wrong, illegal, treason, and anything else he thinks to say at the moment he's speaking, and he has the US Constitution to back him up: don't ask how.

yes but he's a political sub-party in his own Right... 

  He can say what&when ever he likes unscripted,

as he is an Ad-Lib(eral) Republican ???? 

[sirineou]

2 minutes ago, bendejo said:

You're doing something wrong here: you're trying to use sense and reason.

BZZZZZZZZZZT!!!

Anything that DT doesn't like is wrong, illegal, treason, and anything else he thinks to say at the moment he's speaking, and he has the US Constitution to back him up: don't ask how.

 

And then there are boot-licks lined up behind him, ensuring their political futures.  Oops!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/10/politics/trump-matt-gaetz-iran-war-powers-resolution/index.html

 

Maybe Matt can march a bunch of his fellow GOP Congressman into the Oval Office, order a pizza etc.

 

 

What some Republicans don't seem to understand is that this resolution is not against trump but against an Imperial Presidency.

Not sure if the Democrats if this was a Democratic administration would had being better. 

The system is broken beyond repair IMO , and our democracy hungs in the balance. IMO the only solution is term limits, and publicly funded elections. I know there are negatives associated with implementing such policies, but the alternative is much much worst. 

[Nyezhov]

13 minutes ago, tifino said:

He can say what&when ever he likes unscripted,

Part of his charm to folks who have been forced their entire lives to listen to non comittal smarmy gladhanding pandering intellectually wandering  carefully phrased non answers and vacuous statements out of mealy mouthed politicians.

 

 

[bendejo]

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Not sure if the Democrats if this was a Democratic administration would had being better. 

I would say the Dem party these days (January 11, 2020) doesn't have it together enough to make such a stand to even attempt to pull stunts of this caliber.  DT has brought a cohesion to his new-found party (bear in mind he only joined the GOP in 2015) that can only be done with an iron fist, which the Dem members of Congress would not sit still for.  It's like herding cats.  And maybe that's for the better in some cases.

You can be sure Pelosi gets a lot more backtalk from her reps than Mitch does from his brood.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 1/11/2020 at 3:00 PM, rooster59 said:

Pelosi has declined to submit the charges, or articles of impeachment, to the Senate. She was seeking leverage for Democrats to negotiate rules of the trial, which cannot begin until the charges are transmitted.

In her dreams. She has as much leverage in the senate as McConnell has in the house.

 

Anyway, go Nancy, you go girl, send those articles.

Nothing to fear.

[Chomper Higgot]

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.