What if....Madam Speaker holds off on sending the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate? Is that

[monmouth4]

allowed until after the new year? More Articles of Impeachment might be added, etc. I think this was suggested and just wondering.

[malaise]

1. That is my hope

[mopinko]

2. john dean says yes.

that's all i know.

[monmouth4]

3. That's the one, had a senior moment and could not remember his name. He's so smart..n/t

[targetpractice]

11. I believe Lawrence Tribe suggested the same thing. n/t

[shanti]

33. When Prof Tribe speaks

one should listen!

[Hortensis]

24. Umhm. And what don't they know? Or don't know?

Remembering, knowledge is power. They don't have it, and for our top strategists to give it to them would be to give it to the Republicans and Russia.

After all, these days they make their livings, handsome ones, as talking heads, instant experts on every subject. No bucks even pass by their desks, much less stop.

[democratisphere]

4. I'd like NP to sit on it until 2021.

Add more Articles and much more evidence!

[StarfishSaver]

10. If they don't act, the articles will expire at end of this Congress and they must start over again

Last edited Fri Dec 13, 2019, 02:43 PM - Edit history (1)

On edit: It appears articles of impeachment don't expire at the end of a session.

[NYC Liberal]

20. Not sure about that. Clinton was impeached in the 105th Congress and then tried in the 106th.

They didn't have to re-vote on the impeachment articles.

Edit: Found an official source that impeachment articles don't expire:

However, an impeachment proceeding does not expire with adjournment. An impeachment proceeding begun in the House in one Congress may be resumed in the next Congress. 3 Hinds § 2321; 111-1, Jan. 13, 2009, p ll. An official impeached by the House in one Congress may be tried by the Senate in the next Congress. Manual § 620; 3 Hinds §§ 2319, 2320.

Although impeachment proceedings may continue from one Congress to the next, the authority of the managers appointed by the House expires at the end of a Congress; and managers must be reappointed when a new Con- gress convenes. Manual §620. Managers on the part of the House are re-appointed by resolution. Manual § 604; Deschler Ch 14 § 4.2. Thus, the articles of impeachment against Judge Alcee Hastings were presented in the Senate during the second session of the 100th Congress (100-2, Aug. 3, 1988, p 20223) but were still pending trial by the Senate in the 101st Con- gress, when the House reappointed managers (101-1, Jan. 3, 1989, p 84). The articles of impeachment against President Clinton were presented to the Senate after the Senate had adjourned sine die for the 105th Congress, and the Senate conducted the trial in the 106th Congress. Manual § 620.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-112/pdf/GPO-HPRACTICE-112-28.pdf

[StarfishSaver]

25. I think they referred the articles to the Senate before the term ended

I believe it they don't refer them to the Senate before the end of the term, they would lapse and have to be voted on again since legislation generally doesn't carry over into the next Congress.

But I could be wrong about that.

[NYC Liberal]

27. I guess it's a bit different because it's not really legislation; it's a unique process.

The Constitution has basically no detail about it other than the role each house plays. Combined with the fact that it's only gotten to that point twice in 200+ years, there's not a lot of precedent to go on.

Definitely an interesting question. But they're not gonna wait that long anyway, so...

[StarfishSaver]

29. Exactly

I don't know if it's treated as legislation that hasn't been fully acted upon - for example, a bill approved on the floor but not sent to the Senate for action would die.

I assume this would be the same. But who knows?

But as you said, it probably won't be an issue.

[StarfishSaver]

37. I think NYC Liberal found the answer we're looking for

[StarfishSaver]

36. Thanks for taking the time to find this additional info!

[tritsofme]

21. Clinton was impeached by a lame duck House session

And the trial happened in the new Senate.

[StarfishSaver]

28. I need to research it but I think if the House doesn't refer the articles out, they lapse

It's an interesting question.

[H2O Man]

30. Indeed they were.

The question is, did the House refer them to the Senate before January? I believe our friend is correct that they did.

[TEB]

5. Exactly

[RKP5637]

6. I've heard that before too. Not being an expert, I think this could be, it seems, an effective

tactic. Hopefully tRump will be voted out in 2020, and I think McConnell hangs on by just a thread in Kentucky ... whenever his term is up. And Barr can go to hell.

[shanti]

34. Barr worries me

Maybe he wants to be the next SCJ?

[RKP5637]

35. Yeah, I think that's what Barr is banking on!!! Barr, is dangerous as hell. He appears to want a

dictatorship IMO.

[monmouth4]

7. Poor Mitch, wouldn't he lose his chance to be a dumbass once again?..LOL n/t

[PRETZEL]

8. I know it's doable,

there have been others aside from John Dean who have proposed this strategy,

However, I hate to disagree with this strategy, and for a couple of reasons,

First and foremost, it wouldn't be in the country's best interest. The whole reason why Speaker Pelosi went all in on this was for this very reason. I wholeheartedly agree with the Speaker.

Also, you don't want to give the R's another talking point that the American people will understand. The optics and politics of impeaching the President and not sending it over to the Senate just does not look good. If you're trying to build some semblence of bi-partisanship, doing an obvious political move like this would only feed into the R's narrative that the impeachment was solely a political move.

[RKP5637]

12. Good point!!! n/t

[Thomas Hurt]

26. The GOP have never had nor do they have any interest in holding a trial, much less convicting.

Everyone paying attention knows that there is no bipartisanship involved in this impeachment, never was.

[2naSalit]

9. I suspect

because timing is crucial, that our amazing Speaker will see that a few crucial Bills are passed and then we will hear what the plan is.

[Hortensis]

19. Yes. Timing's always crucial and usually multiple and in flux.

I can't imagine what it would be like to imagine Pelosi and the rest of them didn't know at least something I didn't, much less a great deal. If it were me, though, I'd probably be hiding under the bed.

[2naSalit]

22. I'm sure that the House leadership

has a pathway and have a full understanding of what the Senate can and cannot do. I trust they have a plan for success no matter what the rs choose to do. I suspect they have thought out all possible scenarios.

But We the People have to get really loud now, every day, until they act on our will.

[Hortensis]

31. Agree, but it's the Republicans who have to be pressured,

with the threat of losing their power.

[2naSalit]

32. That should be the message.

But I hope most of them get voted out regardless of how they vote on this.

[Hortensis]

38. Absolutely. That party needs a total gut remodel.

[moondust]

13. You know

that would drive a certain someone batshit crazy, right? He wants it over with so he can start crowing about being found totally innocent in a fake witch hunt.

[targetpractice]

14. Agree with this 100%. Let it hang over him...

...He's do something else impeachable in short order. Mark my words.

[2naSalit]

23. I think you're both correct...nt

[cbdo2007]

15. Nancy has to have a plan. She is as mad as we are...

about Moscow Mitch saying the White House will be leading the Senate impeachment trial, and she knows it would be foolish to send things over to them like this.

It is tough to wait but we've got to trust her here and assume she knows A LOT more than the Dems are letting on right now.

[LenaBaby61]

39. Pelosi's probably ...

Waiting for something big to come in.

IF Tribe/Dean say say to slow-walk these articles of Impeachment, then slow walk away.

I have the feeling that more bombshells are on the way which would be helpful for Dems.

[Tennessee Hillbilly]

16. Nancy could easily delay until January

It normally takes 1-2 weeks for any legislation that passes the House to be formally presented to the Senate. There are certain procedures that have to be followed. The rules give Nancy enough flexibility to easily delay until January before presenting the Articles to the Senate.

[Timewas]

17. Turn these over

And start on the next set for the new year.. give orange one a new record to be the first pres impeached 2 or more times.. Keep senate busy so less harm done

[The Valley Below]

18. I trust our Speaker to make the right play.

No one in politics is as strategic as Nancy Pelosi.

We are in great hands.

[Talitha]

40. With Nancy in charge, I'm as safe as being in my Mother's arms.

I trust her, and always have. Nancy knows.