world

White House predicts Pelosi will yield on impeachment delay

60 Comments
By HOPE YEN and ZEKE MILLER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

60 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

If I were Pelosi, I'd flat out state that she's just holding onto the impeachment papers like Moscow Mitch held onto Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

*Trump, who became only the third president in U.S. history to *be impeached.

Short called Pelosi’s delay unacceptable, saying she’s “trampling” Trump’s rights to “rush this through, and now we’re going to hold it up to demand a longer process in the Senate with more witnesses."

What is this guy talking about? Donny’s rights allegedly being trampled because the process is moving too quickly or too slowly?

Donny wants to call witnesses. Give him a trial with witnesses. Those witnesses will get to be cross-examined and rebutted by other witnesses.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

The Senate's second-ranking Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, said his party is looking for a signal from McConnell that he hasn’t ruled out new witnesses and documents. But Durbin acknowledged that Democrats may not have much leverage in pushing a deal.

He criticized both Republican and Democratic senators who have already announced how they will vote in the trial, saying the Constitution requires senators to act as impartial jurors. Republicans hold a 53-vote majority in the Senate.

Just as House Democrats entered into their impeachment inquisitions with a pre-determined verdict, most of the members, on both sides of the aisle, of the Senate have already heard the evidence presented by the House, and have judged accordingly. Democrats in the House had the option of calling more witnesses, and following thru on their issued subpoenas. Something they chose not to do. Oops.

I'm expecting Pelosi to continue to horde her impeachment papers until the end of the 116th Congress, at which time her impeachment charges will become null and void.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Just as House Democrats entered into their impeachment inquisitions with a pre-determined verdict,

No.

most of the members, on both sides of the aisle, of the Senate have already heard the evidence presented by the House, and have judged accordingly. 

Unfortunate.

Durbin is 100% correct:

*He criticized both Republican and Democratic senators who have already announced how they will vote in the trial, saying the Constitution requires senators to act as impartial jurors.*

Even if the Dems weren’t impartial in the House, it doesn’t excuse the republicans from being biased as jurors. That is not how it works. You price your case at trial with evidence of the investigators’ bias.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

“She will yield. There’s no way she can hold this position,” said Marc Short, the chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence. "We think her case is going nowhere.’’

Queen of the swamp Pelosi is fully aware that the U.S. House has absolutely no say in how the U.S. Senate conducts it's business. Pelosi is attempting a quid pro quo. It's one thing for Pelosi to glare at her pet Congressmen, and silence them with a wave of her hand, as if they were disobedient dogs, but the U.S. Senate is an equal legislative body which is not subservient to Nancy's fits of displeasure.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Chip Star - No.

You would have a point if House Democrats had not repeatedly tried to impeach the Republican candidate who had dared to prevent Hillary's 2nd attempt to become POTUS. House Democrats have been demanding Trump's impeachment for three years.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Pelosi has zero political benefit to putting the papers through to the Senate. Zero.

However, keeping the papers leaves Trump in a state of permanent impeachment - and it is forever tied to his legacy now.

So there is no reason for Pelosi to "cave". The democrats are way stronger if they don't send the papers on.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Farmboy - My guess is that the next impeachment would be Mitch.

My guess is that the next impeachment will be the very next Democrat Party candidate to become President while the Republicans hold the majority in the U.S. House. Pelosi, Nadler, and Schiff have established a new, and extremely low threshold, for pursuing an impeachment.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Donny wants to call witnesses. Give him a trial with witnesses. Those witnesses will get to be cross-examined and rebutted by other witnesses.

But the witnesses Trump wants don’t or won’t show like the whistleblower or Schiff, so we know Pelosi and the House Dems are full of air and they can’t control what the Senate does, they want to stall, go ahead and stall and while everyone else dines on Turkey, dressing and eggnog McConnell will be waiting either way when it gets to his lap, he’ll acquit this farce or make it a speedy trial, but the Dems won’t run the show or call the shots, they had their chance.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Strangerland - So there is no reason for Pelosi to "cave". The democrats are way stronger if they don't send the papers on.

Since Congress has gone home for the Christmas break, Pelosi doesn't currently have anyone to hand her papers to. But after the Senate reconvenes, Pelosi should hang on to those papers until the 116th Congress ends it's term. At that point, if the Democrats still wish to impeach Trump, they will have to start the process all over again.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Since Congress has gone home for the Christmas break, Pelosi doesn't currently have anyone to hand her papers to.

That's like pointing at a teetotaler and saying 'the bar is closed, you can't go!', and thinking that the bar being closed has any relevance whatsoever to them not going to the bar.

But after the Senate reconvenes, Pelosi should hang on to those papers until the 116th Congress ends it's term.

You mean like she's already shown she is going to do, and your boy is freaking out about? Yeah, I agree!

At that point, if the Democrats still wish to impeach Trump, they will have to start the process all over again.

First goal of the Democrats when they take both houses next election.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Strangerland - Then when the Democrats take both houses in the next election (look at the last few midterm elections to see what I mean), they can re-impeach him, and then try him in a proper fair trial.

Then you agree that Trump will be re-elected.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Then you agree that Trump will be re-elected.

Um, how could I agree that something will happen?

You do understand how 'time' works right, that it flows forward, not backward, and that none of us can know what will happen in the future.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

That said, I think Trump the Impeached has a good chance of winning next year. I said that before he won last time too.

He'd better hope he wins, because he needs to in order to run out the statue of limitations clock on some of the crimes he's being protected from.

Either way, he's screwed. He gets arrested if he loses, impeached if he wins.

And he's already got impeachment tied to his legacy. Wouldn't that be great if he got impeached again:

"Only three presidents have been impeached, however #45, Donald Trump, was actually impeached twice, due to corruption in his party, preventing the original impeachment from being followed all the way through."

4 ( +7 / -3 )

“impeachment tied to his legacy”

Yes, but like everything else in these times, “impeachment” will take on a weaker image. And one that’s very partisan.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Why won’t the GOP senate leadership give Trump the witnesses he wants, like the Bidens, Schiff, and the whistleblower?

Simple answer. The GOP knows Trump is guilty as sin and that subpoenaing these people would simply further cement the case for Trump’s impeachment.

Even simpler answer. Trump’s cult following can’t handle the truth.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Yes, but like everything else in these times, “impeachment” will take on a weaker image.

Hah, if that were true, then impeachment would have had no meaning after Bill's BJ.

And one that’s very partisan.

See above comment.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

A clear majority of Trump’s base wants Trump’s people (like Mulvaney and Bolton) to testify. Trump’s base believes they will exculpate the president. GOP senate leadership doesn’t agree with its constituency.

Why?

Because the GOP senate is smarter than Trump’s base. The GOP senators know that Trump is a crook. They just don’t care.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

First goal of the Democrats when they take both houses next election.

They failed at getting rid of Trump 5 times now, a 6th try?

https://theweek.com/articles/876728/democrats-impeach-way-2020-loss

History is definitely not on their side...

https://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_kyle_kondik/house_2020_incumbents_hardly_ever_lose_primaries

Yup!

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/impeachment-house-democrats-2020/599755/

Even God can’t help them at this point.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Any sitting U.S. senator who still lacks sufficient facts to reach a position on the impeachment issues has purposely avoided them. That's not objectivity, it's cowardice. When the time comes, stand up and be counted, yay or nay. Don't sit there waiting to see which way the political winds blow until the last possible moment.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Simple answer. The GOP knows Trump is guilty as sin and that subpoenaing these people would simply further cement the case for Trump’s impeachment. 

Not really, I personally don’t think idiots like Schiff or Er....I mean, the whistleblower will show up, they’ll be in the hen house waiting it out and then Mitch can give this crap the coup de grace it deserves.

Even simpler answer. Trump’s cult following can’t handle the truth

Oh, we can. We are just waiting for Mitch to acquit him.

Any sitting U.S. senator who still lacks sufficient facts to reach a position on the impeachment issues has purposely avoided them.

That’s the problem, they’re not that stupid to play along with this farce. Even Romney is like...come one Dems....

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Dems are really nervous watching those Trump approval poll numbers going up and up and 2020 Dems fighting with each other and lying about not taking billionaire money in “wine caves”.

speaking of “caves”, Nancy will be doing that soon enough. Just like she caved on wall funding.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Oh look who is on the Trump train now. Choo choo all aboard.

That said, I think Trump the Impeached has a good chance of winning next year. I said that before he won last time too.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Trump like he wanted has ensured his legacy in US history. Not only is he the third president in US history to be impeached, but....HE IS THE ONLY PRESIDENT TO BE IMPEACHED IN HIS FIRST TERM! (Winning!)

MAGA!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

While the Republicans continue to stonewall and refuse to do their constitutional duty by calling witnesses and demanding the White House release all pertinent documents for an impartial trial in the Senate, Congress should initiate further investigations into Trump's other impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors" following the trail of damning evidence uncovered in the Mueller Report. With a weasely scam artist you also follow the money, too, tax returns, emoluments, fraud, porn-star pay offs and a myriad of shady deals that define the Trump crime family brand. If the Dems thus threaten to bring further articles of impeachment against Trump, the shame of a precedent-setting second impeachment might just concentrate the minds of "Moscow Mitch" and his Republican wrecking crew to put their boy on trial for real.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Dems are really nervous watching those Trump approval poll numbers going up and up and 2020 Dems fighting with each other and lying about not taking billionaire money in “wine caves”.

speaking of “caves”, Nancy will be doing that soon enough. Just like she caved on wall funding.

Poll: Majority approve of Trump's impeachment and removal from office

https://www.yahoo.com/news/poll-majority-approve-trumps-impeachment-201802352.html

Oh, my..............

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Acknowledging trump may win means one is “on the trump train”?

Um okay. Gotcha. Because that makes logical sense, right?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Yes you are not allowed by your side to admit that there is any chance of Trump re-election. That is blasphemy.

This impeachment* prevents any chance of that happening, right? Right?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

you are not allowed by your side to admit that there is any chance of Trump re-election. That is blasphemy.

Where’d you hear that one?

Trump may very well win in 2020. In any case, the GOP has already put America on the fast track to authoritarian kleptocracy.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Poll: Majority approve of Trump's impeachment and removal from office

But not in Swing States....

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/26/politics/impeachment-unpopular-swing-states-wisconsin/index.html

https://www.axios.com/trump-impeachment-poll-michigan-pennsylvania-wisconsin-6776a580-9a0f-4362-a8a7-e6180f18ed14.html

Yippie!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

All the while she holds on to impeachment before sending to the Senate, gives more time for;

Crazy Rudy to further implode

Has nothing to do with Trump.

Bolton to further consider how much he liked being called a "disaster" 

Naw, been a Bolton junkie for years, he may not be fond of the President, but he loathes Dems and he doesn’t want to be anywhere near or play in their pathetic schemes

And Donnie daily melting down - going to his rallies and insulting savored heroes in their home state! Next stop Alabama where he calls Bear Bryant a Loser...

Meltdown?? More like laughing his butt off. Lol

0 ( +4 / -4 )

All the House Dems who said impeachment was necessary and urgent and if not done immediately, Trump would win again.

glad to see you guys coming onboard the Trump train, all are welcome.

Where’d you hear that one?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Any sitting U.S. senator who still lacks sufficient facts to reach a position on the impeachment issues has purposely avoided them.

True! Same with any sitting U.S. congressman. Seems like most of the Dem congressmen have purposely avoided the facts.

As long as Pelosi holds onto the articles, Trump is technically kind sorta not fully impeached yet. She is looking mighty foolish. Dems can't even railroad the president properly and they want to lead the country? Pffft!

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

She is very clever, She wants to impeach Trump in the year 2020 also. After that she will bring those two together to the senate in Dec, 2020. ha ha ha .. what a pity the Democrat, crat, cat ...

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

So I guess the new fairy tale is Rudy was doing all this on his own?

Can YOU prove he didn’t?

None of the Dems have called him a "disaster"

Yes, they’ve always hated Bolton

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/12/democrats-hated-john-bolton-until-donald-trump-fir/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/23/john-bolton-democrats-attack

Next stop Rikers Island..

And Kamala Harris will be the next President as well.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

As long as Pelosi holds onto the articles, Trump is technically kind sorta not fully impeached yet.

Doesn't really matter though. His name and impeachment are like brothers now - neither will ever be mentioned in the future, without the other being mentioned.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

@Serrano

As long as Pelosi holds onto the articles, Trump is technically kind sorta not fully impeached yet.

It is written in the Constitution that only the House can impeach! Only the Senate can hold a trial to remove the president from office.

The House has already impeached Trump, but they have delayed the Senate trial to remove him.

So, you are kind of sort wrong!

Oh, my.........

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Plenty of them said it. Dem Al Green for one. swallwell called it a crime spree that we need to stop right away! What happened? It’s all casual now, just whenever you get around to it.

And even you saying Trump has a good chance to win. so obviously Nancy is rethinking her blunder.

You mean that thing that you made up and none of them actually said?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Lindsey Graham during CLINTON IMPEACHMENT : “You don’t have to be convicted of a CRIME to lose your job in this Constitutional Republic. Impeachment is NOT about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring HONOR and INTEGRITY to the office.”

2 ( +6 / -4 )

@Numan

It is written in the Constitution that only the House can impeach! Only the Senate can hold a trial to remove the president from office.

So let the house impeach the president every month.. until they get tired. When is the next impeachment. I say it will be end of January 2020. and the next to next is on April 1 , 2020 . The fool's day.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Plenty of them said it. Dem Al Green for one.

I just looked. He didn't say it, which is quite clear from the fact that you can't post a quote showing it.

swallwell called it a crime spree that we need to stop right away!

It is. I hope you don't think your shifting of the goal posts shows your original incorrect statement to be correct somehow.

What happened?

You made up a statement, and tried to attribute it to the Democrats. Which, as with every time you do that, was shown to be something you've made up in your own mind and not actually real.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

His quote has been printed in big black and white letters on a poster board set up by the Republican staff on the Intelligence and Judiciary committees: “I’m concerned if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”

Thanks for showing that what he actually said wasn't what Black claimed he did.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Lindsey Graham during CLINTON IMPEACHMENT : “You don’t have to be convicted of a CRIME to lose your job in this Constitutional Republic. Impeachment is NOT about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring HONOR and INTEGRITY to the office.”

Now he is for enabling corruption so that his team can retain power.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

"I'm concerned that if we don't impeach this president, he will get re-elected."

that’s exactly what Al Green said. Now go try to spin it.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

that’s exactly what Al Green said.

Exactly.

You don't think your shifting goalposts somehow makes your original comment correct do you?

Silly republican, logic is for adults.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

And here’s the urgent part, same guy:

“The Texas lawmaker, who was one of the first on Capitol Hill to push for impeachment, continued his efforts at a pro-impeachment rally.

"If we don’t do this rather quickly, the public is going to turn on us," Green told the crowd. "And we are going to find that those who went to the polls and gave us this great majority are going to be very disappointed. They are not going to side with us when we did not side with them."

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Exactly.

So Basically, Green and other Democrats think it is their solemn duty to impeach Trump or he could get re-elected.

This is the reason why he WILL get re-elected, because the Democrats are just politically incompetent.

This is get rid of the President failed attempt Num.5th.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

No, that's not what was said.

That’s what he said, the transcript and the video, in a court of law, we call that in America incriminating evidence, irrefutable and indisputable.

Now he's been impeached, and will forever be known as a traitor to the American people. Even more than Nixon!

What a loser.

He’ll be fine, he’s producing results, the economy is booming, Christmas sales and jobs are a plenty, Wall St, and investors are overly excited despite the guy being impeached, personally, I think this has been a much needed plus for him in many ways.

Trump/Pence 2020

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Sounds like you guys reading the call transcript.

you read something and then make up your own meaning of it that isn't actually based in reality.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Nope, that comment means “urgent”, if we don’t do this quickly, the people will turn on us. Even our own people, he said.

Ok, another comment that once again shows you were distorting reality with your original comment.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Sounds like you guys reading the call transcript.

The tran

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Farmboy: Trial will happen if we can find any Republicans left with fondness for the rule of law and a set of boys for the job.

Set of boys, eh? Tee hee!

The trial will happen if Pelosi ever gets around to submitting the articles of Impeachment Lite to the Senate.

I've got my popcorn and Junior Mints all ready!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

So I guess the new fairy tale is Rudy was doing all this on his own?

> Bass4funk wrote: Can YOU prove he didn’t?

Still wondering where Giuliani's security clearance and Senate confirmation is. If you are going to this kind o#$%$ you need both.

Trump, Giuliani Spoke Briefly at Mar-a-Lago Party on Saturday

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-giuliani-spoke-briefly-mar-185602659.html

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Oh.my.god. Impeach him again! he talked to his own personal lawyer "briefly" and "at a party". Criminal act!

Trump, Giuliani Spoke Briefly at Mar-a-Lago Party on Saturday

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Luv the way Nancy's handling this. She's irritating Trump the longer she holds this impeachment over his head and she can hold it over his head during the entire time he's in office if she wants to. Now Trump would like this to be over and done with, which is what would happen if Pelosi was to send this to the Senate just to be shot down by Moscow Mitch. She's smart and in the meantime if something does happen like the economy takes a nose dive or there's an even more atrocious Trump scandal that breaks the surface, well, she just might pull this impeachment out at that time when it might have more public support. Trump is rattled and will remain so the longer she holds this over his head. Smart move.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites