RNC has money haul over DNC.

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I really don't care one way or the other. All I'm pointing out is there is no formal protocol that requires an impeachment to follow any set of rules. The House and Senate can make up the rules as they go along. Do you think that the process followed by the Republican Senate will not be biased if Trump is impeached by the House and it moves on to the Senate?

There is inherently a political bias when it comes to impeachment, but I honestly don't think the Senate will not follow previous protocol or general rules in place for the Senate if/when it would come to trial.

The House is playing every covert and inscrutable game they can at this point. But you are right they are free to do that and if you don't care one way or the other, I'll continue to point out their hypocrisy to educate you. As you noted no formal protocol, but in that case precedent generally is used. Dems, well don't think so.

I have no problem watching them look bad and also pointing out that they look bad.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by eccielover

There is inherently a political bias when it comes to impeachment, but I honestly don't think the Senate will not follow previous protocol or general rules in place for the Senate if/when it would come to trial.

The House is playing every covert and inscrutable game they can at this point. But you are right they are free to do that and if you don't care one way or the other, I'll continue to point out their hypocrisy to educate you. As you noted no formal protocol, but in that case precedent generally is used. Dems, well don't think so.

I have no problem watching them look bad and also pointing out that they look bad.

It's a matter of opinion. I cited an article which explains why Democrats are using closed-door sessions. You reject it. Each case is different and there have been so few impeachment proceedings I would say there is no precedent that must be followed.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

It's a matter of opinion. I cited an article which explains why Democrats are using closed-door sessions. You reject it. Each case is different and there have been so few impeachment proceedings I would say there is no precedent that must be followed.

Since when did turning over an election become the province of a few, self-selected politicos? The impeachment process requires the WHOLE House playing the game by the exact same privileges presently only accorded the dim-retards. What the dim-retards are doing is chickenshit, posturing politics to destroy Trump in the public's eye with slander and innuendo and deny him the right and his place on their stage to defend himself.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Since when did turning over an election become the province of a few, self-selected politicos? The impeachment process requires the WHOLE House playing the game by the exact same privileges presently only accorded the dim-retards. What the dim-retards are doing is chickenshit, posturing politics to destroy Trump in the public's eye with slander and innuendo and deny him the right and his place on their stage to defend himself.

This is NOT a trial. I consider it equal to a Grand Jury. If impeached, the Senate will conduct the trial at which the POTUS and his representatives can defend Trump.

"The purpose of the grand jury is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide whether there is probable cause to prosecute someone for a felony crime. The grand jury operates in secrecy and the normal rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecutor runs the proceedings and no judge is present."

"Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, the House of Representatives has the “sole Power of Impeachment.”

In other words, only the House can pass a resolution of impeachment alleging that a president has committed “high Crimes and misdemeanors.” Such a resolution, which requires only a simple majority vote, is similar to a criminal indictment by a grand jury—it is an unproven list of charges that a president has engaged in actions that warrant his impeachment.

If the House passes such an impeachment resolution, then the process moves to the Senate. Under Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution, the Senate has the “sole Power to try all impeachments.”"


If the House decides not to impeach, I will fully support their decision.

[Chung Tran]

this is a horseshit argument. one side believes precedent need not be followed, worries about leaks, the other side, despite 1/4 of the members being allowed to observe the proceedings, feels like the Deep State is out to destroy "them" and "overturn the 2016 election".. same tired talking points they accidentally leak to the Democrats, among other leaks, LOL

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

This is NOT a trial. I consider it equal to a Grand Jury. If impeached, the Senate will conduct the trial at which the POTUS and his representatives can defend Trump.

"The purpose of the grand jury is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide whether there is probable cause to prosecute someone for a felony crime. The grand jury operates in secrecy and the normal rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecutor runs the proceedings and no judge is present."

"Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, the House of Representatives has the “sole Power of Impeachment.”

In other words, only the House can pass a resolution of impeachment alleging that a president has committed “high Crimes and misdemeanors.” Such a resolution, which requires only a simple majority vote, is similar to a criminal indictment by a grand jury—it is an unproven list of charges that a president has engaged in actions that warrant his impeachment.

If the House passes such an impeachment resolution, then the process moves to the Senate. Under Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution, the Senate has the “sole Power to try all impeachments.”"


If the House decides not to impeach, I will fully support their decision.

Notice how you did't see the names "Nadler", "Schitty", "Pelosi", etc., or "Committee Chairman" or "Speaker of the House" in Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. It says the HOUSE, the whole HOUSE, and nothing but the HOUSE. What the dim-retards are doing is 16th Century Star Chamber stuff and in violation of their own rules and the U.S. Constitution.