Posted on 12/21/2019 7:58:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
It's starting to look as if the House vote to impeach President Trump is the impeachment that wasn't.
That's the word from a lot of legal scholars, including Noah Feldman, who was one of the three leftist professors who spoke before the House Judiciary Committee, arguing for impeaching Trump shortly before the Democrats' deed was done.
In a Bloomberg column, Feldman wrote:
Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.
...and...
But if the House never sends the articles, then Trump could say with strong justification that he was never actually impeached. And that's probably not the message Congressional Democrats are hoping to send.
Feldman's a bigwig in his own Harvard Law circles, and Democrats certainly take his word for it on the importance of impeaching Trump. But he's far from the only one reading the law to say that as it's being executed now, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declaring she might not send the articles of impeachment for the Senate to vote on until she can dictate terms, she's invalidating her own impeachment.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, a conservative, pretty much says the same thing. In a National Review column, he wrote:
Pelosi and Democratic leadership have convinced themselves there may be advantage in delaying the formal, ministerial delivery of the impeachment articles — as if McConnell were in as much a hurry to receive them as Democrats were to conjure them up.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Dismissed With Prejudice Law and Legal Definition
A dismissal with prejudice is dismissal of a case on merits after adjudication.The plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim. Dismissal with prejudice is a final judgment and the case becomes res judicata on the claims that were or could have been brought in it.
A court has inherent power to dismiss an action with prejudice if it is vexatious, brought in bad faith, or when there has been a failure to prosecute it within a reasonable time. When a plaintiff who has commenced an action fails to comply with discovery devices, a court, which has issued the order of compliance, may sua sponte dismiss the case with prejudice.
In criminal prosecutions, dismissal with prejudice bars the government from prosecuting the accused later on the same charge. A dismissal with prejudice is made in response to a motion to the court by the defendant or by the court sua sponte, if the accused is deprived of the constitutional right to a speedy trial.
Nancy wants to dictate to the Senate how they proceed and what the outcome will be. This is the same person who said on TV that after Trump, she wants to remove Pence and install herself in the WH. So who is the dictator again? Is anyone watching and listening to her? It’s a wonder the UN hasn’t stepped int to secure our nuclear weapons until the WH gets the insurgent Democrats under control
The wretched democrat party will have to be satisfied with merely putting an asterisk on President Donald J. Trump’s first term.
Bingo! This is according to the Democrats own star impeachment witness, Noah Feldman.
Who am I to argue with him? Case closed.
This should become the drumbeat from the Whitehouse and what little conservative media there is in this country:
So far, the President has not been impeached.
We’re dealing with shameless politicians. This situation lets Democrats dodge and weave, depending on how the wind blows. In a pro-impeach environment they’ll say, oh yes we voted to impeach. To anti-impeachment constituents they’ll deny having impeached at all.
IOW Nan's quid has no pro quo.
President Trump should get some fun out of this. He loves it when he’s got the BEST economy (which he has), the best military (true), the best stock market, VA treatment, etc. He loves being the FIRST president to do this or that.....now he can be the first president to be impeached without being impeached....and with no crimes lol.
Have to wonder if Will Rogers and his jokes about congress were really intended as...jokes ???????
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gyg@PlanetWTF?/WNW!
SemperTRUMP.45!
*****************
She is hoping to have Mitch dismiss the Democrat impeachment charade for procedural and process issues while she withholds for “unfairness” pretext.
Once the Senate disposes, she can restart her impeachment carnival in the House with a second round of show trials with updated and more carefully manufactured crimes
Pelosi certainly fits Alexander Hamilton's description of "the most conspicuous characters in it will, from that circumstance, be too often the leaders or the tools of the most cunning or the most numerous faction..." in Federalist #65.
A well-constituted court for the trial of impeachments is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself. The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.The delicacy and magnitude of a trust which so deeply concerns the political reputation and existence of every man engaged in the administration of public affairs, speak for themselves. The difficulty of placing it rightly, in a government resting entirely on the basis of periodical elections, will as readily be perceived, when it is considered that the most conspicuous characters in it will, from that circumstance, be too often the leaders or the tools of the most cunning or the most numerous faction, and on this account, can hardly be expected to possess the requisite neutrality towards those whose conduct may be the subject of scrutiny.
-PJ
Not if the Senate dismisses it with prejudice and votes a directed acquittal of the President.
Democrats will have find new charges to bring against him.
Anyone who has ever dealt with government at any level knows that if there’s no paperwork, then it didn’t happen. The same applies here.
No, nothing so complex
She has succeeded in getting all the media attention for two or maybe three weeks before she turns over the managers and the formal letter to the Senate
Her action is a hoax within a hoax.
Best thing to do is wait for an extended period of time and then go forward with or without her on a dismissal
Am I the only one who is glad she hasn’t sent it on? To me, it means she knows it’s not going to fly and she’s hoping her party will be satisfied with having voted on it, and she also knows it’s not popular with the American people, so she’s hoping if she sits on it long enough, it’ll kind of fade out.
This is such a ridiculous premise. It’s officially been argued and analyzed to death as though it has a basis in reality.
But it’s analogous to the OJ prosecutors not showing up to close their case.
To believe that this was her ulterior motive underestimates her and the criminal dems covering up their prior crimes and is, frankly, idiotic.
I’m not happy. I want the acquittal. Too bad there’s no way to force her to send it over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.