If Idiot is impeached by the House, does McTurtle have to present it to the Senate for a vote?

[MoonRiver]

I kind of remember hearing this, but not entirely sure if it is correct.

[dewsgirl]

1. I vaguely remember something about this as well.

[shraby]

2. Here is an overview of the process

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212492087

[ProudMNDemocrat]

3. Getting Senate Republicans on the record that they SUPPORT a CRIMINAL.....

will not bode well for them in 2020 and 2022 after even more facts come out.

Democrats will have ammunition for their campaigns.. TREASON is a word voters do not like. If used effectively, it just might turn voters away from them and Trump.

[unblock]

4. he likely could block it.

current rules have a trial starting as soon as the senate is notified of impeachment and that the designated house managers are ready to present the case for impeachment to the senate.

however, mcturtle could "go nuclear" using the same tradition-busting technique that's been used before to modify filibuster rules. he just needs a senate majority to agree to an "interpretation" of the rules that would allow him to schedule the trial a week after never.


it's probably constitutional, the senate has the "sole power" to try impeachment cases, so it's hard to envision the supreme court of anyone else compelling them to hold a trial according to their own rules (other than the specific elements laid out in the constitution, which don't address timing).

[hlthe2b]

5. Here's the answer to the question you really want to ask (whether the turtle can ignore the process)

https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-senate-decline-try-impeachment-case
Can the Senate Decline to Try an Impeachment Case?

It is a detailed analysis, but the short answer is yes, the Senate could scuttle any trial.

[MoonRiver]

7. And if Moscow Mitch can, he will.

Of course, that will also reflect poorly on him and any other Repukes who go along with him.

[unblock]

6. separate from my technical comments in #4, not holding a trial would be a disaster for republicans

a trial wouldn't bring out anything that wasn't already brought out during the investigation on the house side.

so all a trial would really do, other than formalizing the accusations and evidence, is that it would allow republicans a chance to defend and excuse donnie and then to vote to not convict and then to (falsely) claim that this exonerates him and that it was all a witch hunt.


*not* holding a trial would deny them any such advantage *and* it would allow democrats a chance to paint *all* republicans, particularly senate republicans, as equally criminal in their obstruction and cover-up.

i really can't see mcturtle not allowing a trial when he can easily manipulate it instead.

[MoonRiver]

8. I hope your analysis is correct. It seems so,

but maybe depends on how much pressure Moscow Mitch gets from the Chump.

I, for one would be delighted to watch Collins vote nay. That would be the final nail in her political coffin.