Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Billy,

I would not. However, most modern day people seldom do the honorable thing when faced with a choice between honor or their jobs. Reputation, dignity, honesty, or fairness are not a concerns.

As for history....written history is ignored. You see it daily right here on OPP....their history book is the rewritten opinion found in liberal or progressive newspapers. Truth or actual events are ignored.

amadjuster Loc: Texas Panhandle

I'm curious. If the House fails to send the Impeachment resolution over and the term then ends in January, does that mean all pending legislation is dead?

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Asking for a fair trial was/is not unreasonable. How fair would a trial be if the House forces the Senate to comply with rules of the House? Pelosi made the Democrats' position clear...conform to their methods and rules or the trial may never take place. And that is a possibility, there is nothing that provides a timeline. Question is, would this help or hurt Democrats? Politically, this should not hurt House Democrats as the majority took an oath to impeachment the President. So, technically they made good on their promise. Also, if there is no trial or Senate vote...then Senate Democrats can not be held responsible....so, it should be a win/win for Democrats. But, hold on!! I think this will backfire. The "crimes" are vague and based on hearsay, assumptions, and do not meet Constitutional standards. Refusing to send the impeachment forward send a signal of "something to hide", unfairness and reeks of political bias, akin to railroading the President.

Should there be a trial, with rules established by the Senate? That is what the Constitution provides. The House, to include Pelosi, Nadler, and "Buggs" Schiff's jobs are done.....no other involvement, unless called as a witness.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

No... it remains as an indictment in perpetuity or such time as the Senate and Chief Justice assembles to first review for hearing and it is dismissed or heard with a verdict.

Idaho

Or if she leaves it until January 2021, the new Republican dominated house can vote to nullify it.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

I suppose it is possible for a bill to be passed for reinvestigation …. but, I do not know if a Republican House can vote to nullify a completed vote without reopening the investigation. Good question!!

Idaho

They can certainly vote to repeal.

On a general note - I’d like to see a program in place for the next 10 year that goes like this:
- all bill must be cleanly about a specific topic (no pork added on) and
- a bill can only be passed if two others are repealed. There is out of date junk laying around that needs to be cleaned up and put in the bin.

jSmitty45 Loc: Fl born, lived in Texas 30 yrs, now Louisiana

👍👍👍👍

Big Kahuna

Peeloosli likes withholding things. She hasn't emptied her bladder nor her bowels since Trump won the presidency. The old bag is full of poison.

billy a Loc: South Florida

Heard on Fox...."Impeachment in Drag"

peanutcream

Really? Too late , she needs to see it through ;Nancy knew what was coming , not surprised action taken sooner crying wolf

snowbear37 Loc: MA.

I don't believe that the House can "force" the Senate to do anything. Pelosi may think she has that power, but she doesn't....Article 1 Section 4 ....Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings...

Tug484

She said she had a spring in her step today and I said she has a bitch in her britches.

F.D.R.

Sad to say I doubt we'll win the House back. The fools who voted for these Dems will do so again and again. They thrive on BS.

peanutcream

We need to send both parties back to the drawing board; run the nation ourselves