HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Speaker Pelosi ties up Mi...

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 10:22 AM

 

Speaker Pelosi ties up Mitch in a knot with his own rules

Last edited Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:48 PM - Edit history (1)

Contrary to what some seem to think, the Constitution doesn't require the House to "immediately" refer impeachment to the Senate. It is silent on the process and timing and, in fact, doesn't require the House to refer the Articles to the Senate at any particular time or even at all.

However, the Senate rules on impeachment require the Senate to begin action "immediately" after receiving notice from the House that impeachment managers have been appointed. When such notice is received from the House, the rules require the Senate to "receive" the managers to present the articles and upon presentation, the Senate must begin the trial at 1:00 pm the day after the presentation. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CDOC-99sdoc33/html/CDOC-99sdoc33.htm

So, under its own rules, the Senate cannot begin its part of the impeachment process until the House notifies them that managers have been appointed - meaning that it's completely up to the House when the Senate process is triggered. Until Pelosi appoints managers and notifies the Senate thereof, there's nothing for the Senate to do.

Last night, Pelosi indicated that she may not appoint managers until the Senate provides her additional information about how they plan to proceed since she needs to have these details in order to appoint the appropriate managers.

In other words, she's saying "You can't start until I tell you to. But I'm not going to tell you to until you lay out your plan for me."

She is forcing Mitch's hand and keeping full control of the articles until he shows it - and she's doing it by using HIS rules against him.

She's obviously gamed all of this out so far ahead of everyone they never saw it coming. And no doubt, she has all of her next moves worked out and ready to go when the time comes. I can't wait to see what she has in store.

99 replies, 18802 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 99 replies Author Time Post
Reply Speaker Pelosi ties up Mitch in a knot with his own rules (Original post)
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 OP
empedocles Dec 2019 #1
Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2019 #7
Demsrule86 Dec 2019 #20
mgardener Dec 2019 #37
intrepidity Dec 2019 #2
dalton99a Dec 2019 #3
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #8
FBaggins Dec 2019 #57
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2019 #61
FBaggins Dec 2019 #62
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2019 #63
NJCher Dec 2019 #82
Iliyah Dec 2019 #52
FBaggins Dec 2019 #60
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #4
Shrek Dec 2019 #14
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #19
TommyCelt Dec 2019 #32
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #34
jberryhill Dec 2019 #41
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #53
FBaggins Dec 2019 #79
Eliot Rosewater Dec 2019 #28
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #33
Eliot Rosewater Dec 2019 #50
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2019 #59
DENVERPOPS Dec 2019 #68
napi21 Dec 2019 #91
CanonRay Dec 2019 #5
Mme. Defarge Dec 2019 #6
stillcool Dec 2019 #9
Fiendish Thingy Dec 2019 #10
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #70
mcar Dec 2019 #11
TygrBright Dec 2019 #12
yaesu Dec 2019 #13
LakeArenal Dec 2019 #51
yaesu Dec 2019 #58
LakeArenal Dec 2019 #80
somaticexperiencing Dec 2019 #15
marieo1 Dec 2019 #16
brush Dec 2019 #38
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #71
ismnotwasm Dec 2019 #75
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #81
NJCher Dec 2019 #84
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #86
Delmette2.0 Dec 2019 #17
bucolic_frolic Dec 2019 #21
Delmette2.0 Dec 2019 #24
IronLionZion Dec 2019 #18
Scarsdale Dec 2019 #22
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #23
empedocles Dec 2019 #25
Mr. Ected Dec 2019 #26
brush Dec 2019 #40
spicysista Dec 2019 #27
ancianita Dec 2019 #29
oldsoftie Dec 2019 #30
Nature Man Dec 2019 #35
Lock him up. Dec 2019 #42
DeminPennswoods Dec 2019 #54
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #72
DeminPennswoods Dec 2019 #78
hughee99 Dec 2019 #66
oldsoftie Dec 2019 #31
bluestarone Dec 2019 #36
jberryhill Dec 2019 #43
Lock him up. Dec 2019 #45
bluestarone Dec 2019 #47
Lock him up. Dec 2019 #48
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #73
bluestarone Dec 2019 #74
asiliveandbreathe Dec 2019 #39
TlalocW Dec 2019 #44
Viz Dec 2019 #46
Duppers Dec 2019 #49
DeminPennswoods Dec 2019 #55
SWBTATTReg Dec 2019 #56
Stinky The Clown Dec 2019 #64
Renew Deal Dec 2019 #65
mudstump Dec 2019 #67
OMGWTF Dec 2019 #69
NurseJackie Dec 2019 #76
JustAnotherGen Dec 2019 #77
Aquaria Dec 2019 #83
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #85
Pepsidog Dec 2019 #87
PJMcK Dec 2019 #88
Upthevibe Dec 2019 #89
pwb Dec 2019 #90
BlancheSplanchnik Dec 2019 #92
czarjak Dec 2019 #93
Aussie105 Dec 2019 #94
czarjak Dec 2019 #95
honest.abe Dec 2019 #96
Joinfortmill Dec 2019 #97
cheezmaka Dec 2019 #98
Eyeball_Kid Dec 2019 #99

Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 10:28 AM

1. Good OP, however, we should leave the 'gangster' stuff on trump.

'Legal Knots' are working very well against trump.

[trump would love to rw media broadcast gangsters on the Speaker or Dems in general].

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to empedocles (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:44 AM

7. +1. "Gangster" or "gangsta" is a positive only in a perverse universe. Best not to go there. . . .nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:19 PM

20. The only thing worse of course is Stein voters particularly those who voted for her or gasp maybe

even Trump in swing states...well we can agree on gangsta...Nancy is fantastic...there are great woman Democrats, Hillary, Nancy and Elizabeth...many others too. Go Nancy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to empedocles (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:01 PM

37. I agree.

Gangster, to me at least, means an underhanded, cheating, threatening, bullying, break all the rules you can, thinking you will get away with it.
I don't think that applies to Nancy Pelosi.
It does however, apply to Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 10:56 AM

2. And if the Senate changes their rule on this?

Wouldn't put it past them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:01 AM

3. +1. Moscow Mitch can change any Senate rule with 51 votes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dalton99a (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:48 AM

8. How would a rule change affect when Pelosi refers the Articles to the Senate?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:45 PM

57. The rule change would be WHETHER the Senate waits for a referral to begin a trial

The existing rule is "when this happens". You cannot extend that to "UNLESS this happens".

But that isn't going to happen. Schumer will negotiate and Pelosi will use this to lend him some ammo... but the Senate rules will be partisan (just like Republicans thought that the House rules were). McConnell will likely take his time (and have plenty of closed-door 'negotiations' attended only by Republicans) and then we'll all point out the obvious (that the rules are not capable of delivering justice).

Then what?

If the thought is that Pelosi will have the power to say "then you can't hold a trial" or that Roberts will stay away... you're on something that I hope you have a prescription for or are willing to share. Because it's some powerful stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #57)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:01 PM

61. Moscow Mitch likes being majority leader

McConnell does not want to campaign for Democrats and the end of his majority position. To hold a trial of an impeachment that has not been submitted to the Senate would do just that. It would be a glaring, public declaration that the GOP Senate is rogue. It might even be sufficient to ensure a supermajority of Democrats in the next Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #61)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:13 PM

62. And Pelosi likes being Speaker

You really think “we won’t LET you acquit him” sells in the swing districts?

It would get 90% support on DU... but not in purple districts. She wouldn’t be Speaker any longer and the new House would send Managers who would say “don’t know what we were thinking... never mind “

The worst part is that it doesn’t really get us anything. He still isn’t removed. All we dodge is a partisan “acquittal” that we always knew they were going to give us.

A Supermajority is a fantasy. Isn’t it clear that Republicans and Democrats see this differently? All those small red states

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #62)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:22 PM

63. pick a spot for your goalposts, please

Pelosi put off retirement to do this job.

So now you're arguing about acquittal? What happened to the Senate holding a trial before the House submits the Articles of Impeachment?

Where did you get the quote, "we won’t LET you acquit him"?

Figure out what you want to discuss and get back to me, please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #62)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 06:41 PM

82. I don't agree with that at all

especially this part:

The worst part is that it doesn’t really get us anything.

The criterion as set by the Constitution is most certainly not "impeach if it gets you something."

Their responsibility is to do what is prescribed for the House. And that's what they did.
That's all they are required to do.

It appears they want to go beyond their responsibility to insure a fair trial. That's admirable--it's taking on more than they have to do, but their only real commitment was to impeach him if they saw fit.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dalton99a (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:59 PM

52. I assume if it is 50/50 then

arse kisser Pence can cast the 51th vote in favor of McTurtle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iliyah (Reply #52)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:52 PM

60. Sure... but if it's 50/50 the rule negotiation will go our way

At least on the margins.

If Republicans lose three votes this entire dynamic changes.

But we're just as likely to lose Manchin if she actually tries to block a trial as they are to lose three on their side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:07 AM

4. The Senate can change its rules, but it can't change House rules or make the House do anything

 

And I don't see them changing the rules on this since the current rules simply require them to take up a trial within a specific timeframe after receiving notice of the appointment of House managers and the presentation of the Articles to them by the House managers. The most that changing the rules would do would be to change that timing on their end. It wouldn't do anything to change when the House refers the Articles to them, since that's solely up to the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:06 PM

14. I suppose they could adopt a rule that doesn't require a House referral

And simply start a trial based on the articles voted on by the House. It's all a matter of public record so it's not like they need to wait for the actual paperwork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrek (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:13 PM

19. Starting a trial without any House managers would so clearly be a show trial, it would be a joke

 

It also would be highly unlikely they'd have a judge since I doubt the Chief Justice would hike over to the Senate to preside over a "trial" of an impeachment that hasn't been referred to the Senate.

That would be like OJ Simpson, Johnnie Cochrane and F. Lee Bailey holding a murder trial without Marcia Clark and Chris Darden. It would be too stupid for words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:56 PM

32. It's already a show trial.

McConnell, Graham, and a score of others have made it PUBLICLY clear that will not be impartial and will take their cues from the WH counsel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TommyCelt (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:58 PM

34. It's a show trial. But it's a trial

 

What some people are proposing - a proceeding without any House managers isn't a trial. It's a joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:15 PM

41. So what?

 


Aside from which, they can change the rules at any time. So they can change the rules to suit Pelosi, receive the impeachment, and change them right back again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #41)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:02 PM

53. The "what" is not that Pelosi's trying to get them to agree to anything in particular

 

since she's surely aware they can change the rules at any time.

But she is forcing them to actually come up with some rules, in public now rather than play around and make up rules as they go along later. They'll have to either put forward some rules now that the public can see and hear and there'll be a lot of public scrutiny of them or get blamed for holding up the process. And if come up with rules now and later change them, that will also be very public and obvious. I think it will be harder (not impossible, but not as easy) to change them once agreed to since they'd have to convince the Romneys and Murkowskis to agree to a revision, which won't be a breeze.

I think their plan was to play hide the ball, get the Articles and then make things up as they went along. Pelosi called the vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:24 PM

79. I think she has something very specific in mind

Speculation I've seen includes being able to call new witnesses (including forcing those who Trump withheld), but NOT being able to call the whistleblower, Schiff, or Biden.

I agree that they aren't going to agree to rules and then change them significantly after the Articles are sent over. Of course it's within their power, but it couldn't possibly help them in the court of public opinion and that's the only court whose ruling is uncertain at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:50 PM

28. The concern is Nancy is ASKING Moscow Traitor Mitch how he intends to proceed.

Because there is little else she can do, she is used to dealing with patriots who tell the truth, mitch is not a patriot and wont ever tell the truth.

He will likely tell her what she wants to hear then do the opposite.

We are past talk, they are no longer Americans, they are agents for the KGB or whatever acronym Putin wants us to call it.

Moscow mitchy will make up a plan and show it to her that she likes then not do it at all.

Moscow Mitch is FILTH


I love Nancy, ,she is our only chance to save the country, her and Schiff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #28)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:57 PM

33. You don't think Pelosi knows this about Mitch?

 

There's not one thing he'll do that she doesn't expect and won't be prepared for.

She's smoking him out. Of course he can just say whatever and change it later. But the critical thing is that she now has him on blast. If he tries that, everyone will see it. And it would be very difficult for him to get a majority of Senators to go along with a rule change after the first rule change.

She's forcing his hand and shining a spotlight on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:50 PM

50. I am the biggest fan of Nancy Pelosi on this site, or there is NO bigger fan and my

posts over time will show that.

What I am saying is he will do

a n y t h i n g

he wants, he will lie, promise, etc. Normally that spotlight you point it would matter, it no longer does unless it gets fence sitters to come out as a result, and it might.

I am saying no human being in this country can fix the problem of a political party and their followers no longer caring, AT ALL, about the law or the Constitution or right and wrong. The GOP has been shown to be murderous filth, and yet rump still has 40% support and I know that is low but still...

She is the master, but she and we are now up against KGB agents as Moscow Mitch basically is, who will do anything he wants and will likely NOT pay a political price.

I think the country is in much worse shape than most do for this reason. I am preparing for a disaster on election day...power grids, etc.

I am not criticizing Nancy, I am pointing out she is up against Moscow and the GOP and racist killers. It is all different now...all of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #50)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:50 PM

59. Moscow Mitch is reachable

McConnell complained about the label, "Moscow Mitch". This is evidence that he is susceptible to public opinion.

Pelosi has trapped him between the unhinged impatience of Twitler and a public which overwhelmingly wants witnesses and a fair trial. (Last number I saw was 71% want witnesses). He will be fuming and scheming, but he cannot do anything about a trial until Pelosi decides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:36 PM

68. Trump's

wholly owned subsidiary's will take care of that.....You know, Republican Senators, Supreme Court, DOJ, etc etc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 09:42 PM

91. I don't think he can change the rules that trigger the stial. That's part of the Constitution.

Gotta love it when the Speaker of the House brings the Senate leader & the Prez to their knees, and even that speaker is A WOMAN! They must be throwing things y now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:08 AM

5. Nancy "OG" Pelosi

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:32 AM

6. Badass is

as badass does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:52 AM

9. It must take a long time...

to go through procedural rules, and what the other side is then likely to do as a result, and the answer to that...and on, and on, and on. Makes the rationale for basing the impeachment on a simple, provable case much easier to understand. Any of his other crimes, would not have the same factual basis. Would be nice if he could get impeached, over and over and over, each time getting more facts out in the open.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:56 AM

10. Of course, Moscow Mitch could try to change the rules at any time

But that would still force his hand and make his chicanery all the more obvious.

Well played, Madame Speaker (with credit to Lawrence Tribe and John Dean who publicized the idea in recent days)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:50 PM

70. This

 

She put him on Front Street

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:58 AM

11. She knows her stuff

Don't mess with Nancy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:01 PM

12. NEVER forget that Nancy D'Alessandro Pelosi was born and raised in Baltimore.

And in Baltimore, politics, government, and everything to do therewith is extreme bloodsport, buried under folksy and tortuously complex cultural normalizing.

Nancy learned it all at an early age.

informatively,
Bright

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:03 PM

13. so, now that we have him on two articles why not add some, I'm sure they can come up with a few

more, now that we have a few in the bank lets go for broke, lets launder all his dirty laundry for all to see!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yaesu (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:51 PM

51. I was thinking that the other day.

I think I heard that it was still possible to bring additional charges.

Any scholars out there? Are you, yaesu?

Interesting thought anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LakeArenal (Reply #51)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:45 PM

58. I'm no scholar, but i did stay at a holiday inn express last night 😋 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yaesu (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 05:52 PM

80. That should've been a commercial.

You funny, yaesu.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:06 PM

15. This is the best thing I've heard of in a long time. Love Democratic hardball.

Bravo Speaker Pelosi!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:08 PM

16. brilliant lady

Nancy Pelosi is one brilliant lady............nothing about her suggests 'gangster'. She is just doing her job and working hard for all of us and doing 'what is right'. I have always admired her and her strength. We need her strength now more than ever. Thank you, Speaker Pelosi!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marieo1 (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:02 PM

38. "Gangster" or "gangsta" is slang and in today's parlance it's a compliment...

meaning she's a boss, she's totally in charge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:51 PM

71. You're right, but I edited it out because it's just not worth the distraction

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:12 PM

75. Yeah I'm sorry about that

Shouldn’t have been a distraction, excellent OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #75)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 06:02 PM

81. No worries.

 

You didn't cause the distraction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 06:56 PM

84. a story about gangsta'

I once taught at a university where I had a class in which there was student who had a broken leg. It was in a cast. One class period I noticed Duane in a bit of distress so I asked him if there was anything I could do to help. He said it would help if he had an extra chair, maybe to rest his cast on. Unfortunately, every chair in our room was taken. The classroom next door was empty, so I went in and dragged over a chair for him. This took all of one minute.

When I put the chair in front of him, he said, "Prof, you're so gangster."

One of the prized compliments I've had a as a teacher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NJCher (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 07:22 PM

86. That's such a sweet story!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:08 PM

17. Let's not forget January 2019.

When the R's delayed appointments to key House Committees. No work could be done by the Dems until they had a full committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Delmette2.0 (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:24 PM

21. The puzzle is so large we tend to cubbhole the moving parts

Good point you make! Just like Mitch declared Obama a one-term president before he took office, yet Mitch says impeachment of Trump is a conspiracy.

And what's with July 27 and Trump? 2016: "Russia, if you're listening ....". 2019: Sondland confirms an announcement of Biden investigation was quid and pro and quo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:40 PM

24. I like your subject line.

It truly will take years and years to sort it all out and fix it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:10 PM

18. I'm so glad we have her on our side. Pity the fools going up against her.


Mitch may be backed by Moscow, but Pelosi is battle hardened and experienced to lead on this type of stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:32 PM

22. So proud of her, and

all the other intelligent members of the democratic party. We get the BRAINS, the gop gets the leftovers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scarsdale (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:33 PM

23. True

 

Pelosi and the Democrats have thought this through from every possible angle and have a move for every scenario.

The Republicans think only as far as the next FOX soundbyte and are kneejerking from moment to moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:41 PM

25. Yep

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:47 PM

26. I had been despondent, thinking this was going to be Mueller II

Not taking into account our OG in the House, Nancy Friggin' Pelosi.

...and she didn't show her hand until the impeachment articles were voted on. Bet Mitch didn't see it coming.

Merrick Garland, your legacy may have helped slay the beast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. Ected (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:11 PM

40. Yep, she out maneuvered Barr with her quick strike for impeachment,...

not giving Barr a chance to get out in front with a false, misleading summary like he did on the Mueller report.

She's a boss and it's a good thing we beat back those who didn't want her to be Speaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:49 PM

27. Who's down with NDP?!?

Yeah, you know me! "Let me be clear, the house democrats are down with NDP!"


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:51 PM

29. Pelosi La Grande -- making sure there's nothing McConnell's Do-Nothing Senate CAN do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 12:54 PM

30. Going against the grain here, I dont think this is a good idea.

I think its bad optics. The outcome isnt going to change. And We sometimes forget that MOST people arent like us here on DU; always reading, listening or watching the news. Keeping informed. MOST people didnt watch any of the impeachment. If they do this, I believe a lot of those people will say "Oh, they impeached him just for the sake of doing it"
Dont have any proof thats what would happen, just a gut feeling knowing how flaky folks can be when it comes to stuff like this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldsoftie (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:00 PM

35. "optics" kinda flew out the window a while back

these are the same people who get off on "optics" of children in cages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldsoftie (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:16 PM

42. Whatever they Faux Snooze say, a big majority in polls want to see a Fair trial.

Even over 70% of Republicans do. So when Nancy says she's doing it to force Moscow Mitch into respecting the oath all Senators must take before the trial, they can't spin that one.

Relax. There are more of us than there are of them. Just got to force them to be fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldsoftie (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:02 PM

54. Regardless of political views, Americans all understand the word fair

This what Pelosi is arguing for, a fair process. Many Americans have experience either with being actual jurors or being called for jury duty. They understand the rules of what constitutes a fair trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #54)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:53 PM

72. And since Mitch has been crowing for weeks that he had no intention of being fair

 

this pulls the rug out from under him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #72)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:22 PM

78. Yep

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldsoftie (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:27 PM

66. I agree. Sitting on the impeachment charges instead of sending them

As soon as possible sends the message that this isn’t urgent, that Trump’s not as dangerous as the politicians have claimed, and that this isn’t being done out of some sense of duty or patriotism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:00 PM

36. I could see Mcturtle change the rules to get the House to submit it's managers THEN

Change them back! Is this possible?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:16 PM

43. Yes

 


Of course, who know what further impeachable acts Trump is going to commit now that we are at this point. IMHO, the only practical point of delaying transmission to the Senate is to wait for Trump to tack more on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:20 PM

45. He needs 51 votes and that cheating would be too obvious.

Some Senators would feel ashamed in front of their constituents... (hopefully).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lock him up. (Reply #45)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:22 PM

47. At this point i don't think any of them

Would feel ashamed under ANY circumstances!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:28 PM

48. Maybe that's true, or not.

Depends what Romney, Collins and a couple more value most: Russian mob's dirty money or their State (their seat and reputation since it's possible everything will come out like a big hand grenade RICO).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:56 PM

73. I don't necessarily agree

 

It's one thing to wimp out and go along with agreeing on rigged rules. It's another to agree to halfway decent rules and then when the articles are presented, to go back and change the rules again to push through even more drastically rigged rules. Some Republicans just might not be willing to go that far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #73)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:10 PM

74. See your point for sure

Still some republicans Are not aware of how deeply involved their leaders are. (and i guess don't care) They will just go with the flow as they are now. It would NOT surprise me if they did change rules again. (not arguing here, just giving my thoughts) Also i have full faith in Nancy for sure!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:02 PM

39. Rep Blumenauer, D-OR, last night with Lawrence O..

Articles have NO expiration date..played the pos in the WH like a fiddle.. - nice...

Thanks for your OP..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:19 PM

44. Be a shame if the Senate trial had to happen in the middle of the '20 Republican National Convention

I'm just sayin'.

TlalocW

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:21 PM

46. This story is not about DT

Its the GOP-party, stupid
&. The Dark Money.
That’s what needs exposing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 01:29 PM

49. MSNBC correspondent mins ago:

Paraphrasing: Pelosi is going to tie up the process in the Senate until she can get terms "favorable to Democrats."


How about saying "FAIR to Democrats."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duppers (Reply #49)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:04 PM

55. Saying FAIR is enough

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 02:41 PM

56. Thanks for posting this very informative post. If Moscow Mitch can play a game, so can the ...

House and I totally agree w/ you in that there is nothing in the rules on Impeachment as to timing, etc. Ironic as you state, that they are having to contort themselves (the Senate republicans) over the very same rules they established some time ago. Karma does have a way of coming back and biting those in the proverbial butt.

Nancy P. is a master at this game, and continues to demonstrate her finesse and expertise, and rump isn't helping by insulting her as he has been doing. Idiot as usual, and he's finding out that having a temper fit isn't going to work, especially as Nancy P. has said, I know how to handle temper tantrums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:24 PM

64. Excellent post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:25 PM

65. Can't McConnell just ignore the entire thing?

I don't understand why this forces him to take action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:36 PM

67. If Moscow Mitch can refuse Obama his rightful Supreme Court nominee....

Nancy can do whatever the hell she wants. All bets are off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 03:37 PM

69. To those who say a woman can't beat Trump -- Pelosi does it almost every day!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:13 PM

76. Experience we can trust! NANCY PELOSI ROCKS!!! She knows what she's doing!

Nancy Pelosi deserves our eternal gratitude. Thank you Speaker Pelosi! She also deserves an apology from those who insulted her with ageist vulgarities, and who were "too big for their own panties" in their hot-headed, impatient and grandstanding attacks on her.

Nancy Pelosi is a national treasure. We are very fortunate to have her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 04:20 PM

77. I'm in total agreement

At minimum - can we all agree she is a Master of the Game?

Sorry - but I trust her knowledge, tactics, and instincts. I just do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 06:50 PM

83. My husband's grandmother was friendly with the Pelosis for decades

 

She and Nancy's mother-in-law were movers and shakers behind assorted Catholic charities in the Bay Area for a long time, so the families knew each other well. Back in 2006, Grams said that Republicans had better get used to being mowed down on a regular basis by the new Speaker, because Nancy always was smarter than everyone else in the room, and tougher than a rhino's hide, too.

Nancy was born to be Speaker, almost literally. Everything in her life led her to this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquaria (Reply #83)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 07:19 PM

85. Cool!

 

If she were a man, she'd have gone straight into politics after college and would have been president in the 1980s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 07:34 PM

87. Sweet!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 09:24 PM

88. A late post

There's an Aristocratic interpretation applicable to your OP headline.

If you know what I mean.

(wink)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 09:26 PM

89. I loved that!

And I had to post this that was on Colbert's show a couple of weeks ago....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 09:41 PM

90. Trump cant be acquitted if they never send them to the senate.

Pukes think they are so clever but we are on to them now. I like to see us give it back i feel better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2019, 11:48 PM

92. Wow, she is brilliant! So inspiring!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 01:38 AM

93. When you've become so accustomed to your cheating succeeding you're dumbfounded, huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 01:44 AM

94. Mexican standoff!

No point sending the Articles of Impeachment to Mitch, as he has already said that he will treat them with disdain, dismiss them and dance the night away with Trump afterwards, alternatively telling each other how clever it was, the way it all went down as a nothing_burger.

And Nancy knows this, so she is going to play the waiting game. And pressure Mitch into doing it properly. Only well defined rules that he sticks to, will do!

Who will back down first? Nancy is a lady not for turning, to borrow a Thatcher phrase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 01:55 AM

95. Trump-Takers, stand strong now, the "I alone can fix it" dude is gonna need you more than ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 02:40 AM

96. Yes, just hold them until Mitch gives in.

Or until the day after the election.. whichever comes first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 06:19 AM

97. I must say,

Madam Speaker rocks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joinfortmill (Reply #97)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 08:01 AM

98. Yes Indeed!

Making Mitch with his own rules... Like David killing Goliath with his OWN SWORD...lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Fri Dec 20, 2019, 10:22 AM

99. THIS TIME, Pelosi is getting it right.

IMO, she floundered when she was elected Speaker during the Bush 43 list of offenses by refusing to deal with the War Crimes cabal. Her position this time is measured, with a good smattering of reluctance. Her resistance to making a quick push toward impeachment gives her much more credibility. Good for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread