Posted on 09/20/2020 9:43:44 AM PDT by AnthonySoprano
They could impeach on the grounds of ongoing NY AG state investigations into possible banking fraud; over estimating property values to get the best interest rates was one such stupid charge. The argument will be that the investigation throws shade on the ethics of the president and hampers his ability to conduct federal business in a transparent and trustworthy manner. I believe that is how they will try to frame it!
They can SAY that, but it isn’t anywhere in the Constitution.
All I can find is the following, Article 2, Section 2:
“He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
Do they have time? I’d like to see a twice-impeached President win re-election.
She was on This Weak when Little Georgie asked her if she would impeach to prevent a nomination.
She said “Yes, I have options. I have lots of arrows in my quiver.”
If the Senate so chooses to take up said impeachment which they don’t have to do!
Would think voters that see this would swing and support Trump.
The senate could just put impeachment on the back burner and deal with the SC nomination first.
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.....................
Then Prez should nominate today.
>It’s amazing they’ll try this. Such a circus. Tells us all we need to know about the type of people they are and exactly why they should not hold the reigns of power. These folks should be voted out, even if replaced by other Democrats.
I hope they try this.
It backfired last time. This time it will just look like partisan desperation to anyone that’s not a Mother Jones reader.
I don’t get it either. Why would that stop anything. It might be to give cover for the traitor Republicans.
Ha, ha, ha, ha! That’s the funniest one yet. Trump and McConnel could simply delay acting on any House impeachment votes until after a new Justice is approved. It’s hard to believe that Stephanopoulos is so ignorant that he would even repeat the story.
Bigtime!
Agreed. They already overplayed their hand on the last charade.
Be that as it may, the president still retains the right to appoint Supreme Justices.
Even Ginsburg herself admitted there was nothing in the Constitution to prevent a sitting president from filling a vacant SCOTUS seat at any time during an election year. All they have is precedent and precedent isn’t law.
I really think they are powerless here and have nothing but empty threats, and Trump doesn’t care about their threats.
That’s a good article you posted. One excerpt below
“The current rules governing Senate practice and procedure do not pose an insurmountable problem for this maneuver. Senate leadership can seek to have the rules “reinterpreted” at any time by the device of seeking a ruling of the chair on the question, and avoiding a formal revision of the rule that would require supermajority approval.
The question presented in some form would be whether, under the relevant rules, the Senate is required to hold an impeachment “trial” fully consistent with current rules—or even any trial at all. A chair’s ruling in the affirmative would be subject to being overturned by a majority, not two-thirds, vote.”
The key is whether a reinterpretation of the rules would result in a ruling that the Senate does not have to hold an impeachment trial. Since we are so close to an election I think the Senate would rule that such a House impeachment is purely political and without merit and thus no trial is required.
The irony is huge. It is close to the election so the House believes a SC justice should not be confirmed yet they want to conduct an impeachment and a trial.
Nancy
I Left my heart in San Francisco
Guess I’ll leave more poop in your driveway.
I have to wonder: does double jeopardy apply to impeachment?
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.