Liberty Tree

Since impeachment is a matter of record they should set a trial date and notify the House when it will be. If the House chooses it can present its evidence at that time. If they fail to show move for an acquittal for lack of evidence.

American Vet

The House has already presented it's evidence" - nothing there.

bikerlee

If Nancy wants a fair trial in the Senate, I think she should have it. — Let the Senate use the same rules the House adopted. Then the Senate ruling party can let the minority side suggest witnesses and ask questions approved by the majority.

American Vet

If the Senate uses the same rules the House adopted, it would not be 'fair'.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Why bother? Set a date and v**e. The outcome is already foretold. I'm good with that. Then let's get on with the main event...the e******neering.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I think that Pelosi won't "officially" present the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for consideration unless they can get assurances regarding what they perceive now as "fairness." I think McConnell might go ahead and call for a v**e but the democrats will not show up. I think two thirds of the Senate has to be present for a v**e.

I am not sure about the rules in this regard, however.

Lonewolf

Trump will take the entire republican party down the rat hole he's heading for!
Go ahead and hide witness that have first hand information on the call show the American people how crooked you all are! We're waiting and watching every move and you will be held accountable.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

The Senate needs a quorum to v**e on impeachment. 51 Senators would suffice, of whom 2/3 would need to v**e on impeachment so 34 would be the magic number. Currently, that would mean no Democrats are needed to continue.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

That's awesome! Thanks for the info.

bikerlee

According to the Democrats their trial fair, so we should return their fairness in-kind, I can't see where they could abject to that without confirming their trial was a sham.

Lonewolf

They followed republican rules are you saying you don't care if trump is c*********d by another country. Not even interested enough to call a few witness if Trump was a president I v**ed for id sure as hell would want to know!
So instead of showing the world he's innocent you will continue the coverup!

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Yup...the right never acknowledges that the procedures they consider unfair were set up by Republicans. Just too much cognitive dissonance to deal with that fact.

bikerlee

The Democrats were not interested in fair, as proven by some of the rules they laid out for the Republicans, so I figure that seeing how Nancy won't move forward with sending over the articles of impeachment until the Republicans will preform what she says is a fair trial, that the Republicans should use the same rules the Democrats set to use in their SHAM impeachment.

Lonewolf

How do you know it sham when the WH blocks evidence and books people from testifying
The fact there in coverup mode should tell you trumps guilty and of alot more than obstruction most likely treason !

jwrevagent

The Dems made a mistake in not allowing the courts to decide about the subpoenas and whether or not executive privilege applies. So Trump went to the courts instead, which is the proper way to handle subpoenas that are not complied with. That is not a cover up, that is separation of powers. Shades of the Obama administration-remember Eric Holder and his contempt of Congress citation that is still out there and no one is pursuing because the judges in DC were Obama people?- . Trump does not have to prove his innocence-the Dems have to prove his guilt. It is like asking a man if they have stopped beating their wife, How does one answer that if the beatings never took place in the first place? We have due process in this country, and as far as I know, neither Congress nor the president is exempt from granting that or from exercising that prerogative. Trump is not required to mount any defense-especially when there is no evidence of a crime-though Trump is sometimes a blowhard and a liar, but if all politicians were our of office because of that, there would be no one left in any of our government-from local to state to Congress, to Judiciary to Executive. Trump is crude, and not afraid of a fight, not constrained by diplomacy to walk away from the table, and to pull out of agreements made by other administrations that are not in our best interest. Perhaps that is why we elected him! If Dems would consider that maybe people are tired of the same old way of doing things and the corruption and cronyism that is our government, and cooperate in fixing it, they may actually have some success. It seems to me I recall Pelosi saying when she became speaker during Obama's first term, that they were going to "drain the swamp". Anyone remember that? Instead, they made it deeper and muckier with the blessing of Obama and his minions.