****MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Hoyer and Pelosi seem ready to play hardball to get a fair senate trial!!**

[NewsCenter28]

This is awesome. Basically, Madam Speaker's top lieutenant seems to be signalling that we will not allow Toad to have a sham exoneration trial in the senate. We have the power to force Mcconnell's hand here and it looks like we will do so!

Hoyer: 'We need to talk about' delaying Senate impeachment trial
By Kyle Cheney and John Bresnahan
12/18/2019 03:32 PM EDT

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, the second-ranking lawmaker in the House, said Wednesday that Democrats must discuss a last-ditch gambit to delay sending articles of impeachment to the Senate and prevent the Republican controlled chamber from summarily discarding the case against President Donald Trump.

"Some think it's a good idea. And we need to talk about it," Hoyer said just as the House began debating articles of impeachment that charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

In recent weeks, some legal scholars have suggested Speaker Nancy Pelosi could consider refusing to transmit articles of impeachment — likely to pass the House Wednesday evening — to the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has declared he is coordinating trial strategy with the White House.

Though the request seemed to have little currency on the hill, it's gained steam in recent days as McConnell has continued to insist he doesn't intend to act as an impartial overseer of the Senate trial.

Hoyer said Democratic colleagues have approached him in recent days, citing an op-ed by constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe in which he calls on Democrats to delay sending impeachment articles to the Senate until McConnell agrees to run a fairer process.

"Under the current circumstances, such a proceeding would fail to render a meaningful verdict of acquittal," Tribe wrote. Notably, House Judiciary Committee Democrats huddled with Tribe earlier this month as they practiced behind closed doors for their series of impeachment hearings.

Some Democrats said they became convinced such a move was under consideration when House leaders decided against naming impeachment managers — the set of lawmakers who would argue their case on the Senate floor — until an undetermined later date.
When President Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998, House leaders identified their impeachment managers on the same day. But Pelosi instead will be empowered to pick managers at her discretion and without a deadline.

"The rule will allow the speaker to name managers at any point after the articles pass," a senior House Democratic aide said, noting that the House needs to name managers in order to transmit the articles to the Senate.

That effort, some Democrats noted, could not begin until managers are named.
Hoyer emphasized that early discussions about the timing of transmitting articles of impeachment to the Senate are "not in the context" of Tribe's proposal. But he said colleagues keep raising it.

"People have read that article, discussed it. People have come up to me, discussed it," he said, adding, "We will talk about it in some point in time. It's within the speaker's purview, obviously, she'll make that decision. And I also think she'll do it in discussions with McConnell and [Senate Minority Leader Chuck] Schumer."

To view online:

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/18/trump-impeachment-trial-steny-hoyer-087319

[Sogo]

1. Bravo!!

[pbmus]

96. YES AND YESSIR...

[oasis]

2. Bury the "Grim Reaper". !

[EmeraldCoaster]

3. Yes do it!

Drag it out till Election Day.

[babylonsister]

4. He stonewalled us with Garland. Turnabout yadda yadda... nt

[Wellstone ruled]

5. Alright,Steny found

his nerve to join his Speaker and Jointly move forward.

Let the Orange Anus stew for a month or two.

[BigmanPigman]

6. YES! I vote YES! Sit on the articles and drive tRump crazier!

Keep investigating and watch Mitch get what he deserves. Yesterday the DU poll had 69% "Don't send them to the Senate yet, but keep investigating" compared to 23% "Send them to the Senate now".
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212791373

[NewsCenter28]

7. Yep

And also Roberts won't preside over any sham trial that the senate tries to put on, if they decide to try to go around this brilliant move of our leadership.

[PSPS]

8. Actually, Roberts' role is largely ceremonial. Moscow Mitch establishes all the rules.

[joost5]

16. Plus the GOP Senate can overrule any of Roberts' decisions with a majority vote. nt

[Scotch-Irish]

22. Hmm. I wouldn't want to piss off the chief justice, if I were the republicans.

That shit can always come around and bite one in the arse.

[SergeStorms]

73. Moscow Mitch establishes the rules...

once the articles of impeachment reach the Senate. Until then he's just another brick in Trump's wall. He doesn't get to fortify Trump's wall until it's the Senate's turn.

[onetexan]

25. +1 K&R

[Mike 03]

44. This would render Trump non-functional. I'm on board if Pelosi is behind it

but these things are always a double edge sword. Making him "crazy" has what consequences that we are not foreseeing?

[wryter2000]

9. Great news

And keep the hearings going.

[gibraltar72]

10. Impeach, Hold, Investigate.

[BigmanPigman]

11. Too bad that wasn't a chant at the rally I attended.

[Kahuna7]

54. Was the chant you heard, 'Senate Trial Now???'

[BigmanPigman]

57. No, there were several different ones but

that wasn't one of them. There was stuff like, " What do we want? Impeachment! When do we want it? Now!".

[Kahuna7]

60. They're going to get impeachment. The house impeaches, then the

trial is in the senate. They've already promised to not take it seriously. So why give them the opportunity to quickly say, nothing to see here and let trump off the hook.

[BigmanPigman]

63. It is now time to call their offices. I did

when I saw the number on a DU post. The mailbox is full so we have to keep it that way. Tell them to wait, continue to investigate and demand a fair trial in the Senate.

[Kahuna7]

66. Agreed. nt

[yellowdogintexas]

83. don't forget you can usually get through easier to their district or

local offices. Senators usually have several.

Every phone call and every piece of mail and every email has to be logged in BY LAW

[BigmanPigman]

89. I called the district office but it doesn't really matter now

since Pelosi said that she decided not ot send the articles to the Senate until Mitch plays fair.
That is what I wanted to tell them I supported.

[onetexan]

27. BRAVO!! Great slogan

[Kahuna7]

51. That's the ticket. Make Beelzetrump twist in the wind. nt

[JudyM]

88. Hey, they're saying they don't see the evidence, after all...

[neohippie]

12. I agree don't rush

Keep pushing the document and subpoena requests and demand witness testimony to congress

The GOP said they are upset about the fast track and not being allowed to hear from witnesses, call their bluff

[Ligyron]

94. Add more articles like Bribery, violations of the Emolument Clause.

Or maybe hold them in reserve depending on what Senate does if they are not transmitted.

If only the media was more fair like before that act was scrapped by Ray gun.

[bucolic_frolic]

13. This is shining sunlight on GOP prejudice and collusion, because that's what it is

I don't see what power Democrats have that will sway the Senate toward the middle, but this will make it public knowledge for all to see for all time. A Sham Trial is a hollow acquittal and a FAKE TRIAL! If we have to wait until January 2021, so be it.

[Eyeball_Kid]

23. If my understanding is proper, from an amateur attorney POV,

A Congressperson cannot be impeached. That privilege is available in both the Judicial and Executive Branches.

[pangaia]

45. "This is shining sunlight on GOP prejudice and collusion," ONLY if we get on the PR aspect.

Pound it in !!

[CaptYossarian]

14. I am not an attorney or a Condtitutional scholar, but

can the House impeach McConnell for obstruction of justice? It could be two counts if you include the Garland debacle.

I'd bet they can find more from the Obama years. Is there a statute of limitations?

[Karadeniz]

18. This guy has well earned an impeachment...along with Barr.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

30. No

Members of Congress cannot be impeached. They can be expelled by their own houses though. 2/3 vote is still required regardless.

[CaptYossarian]

40. Too bad. What color is your parachute? His is red.

[Tarc]

92. "can the House impeach McConnell for obstruction of justice?"

No, Senators can only be expelled by a 2/3rds vote of the Senate.

[CaptYossarian]

93. I know the Senate confirms cabinet members and Supreme Court justices.

With all that responsibility, it's too bad they don't behave like grown ups.

[rurallib]

15. I hope my HALLELULIA isn't too early

been hoping for this

[warmfeet]

17. This is precisely what the Democrats should do.

Don't let this egregious abuse of power be swept under the rug.

[nykym]

19. Finally

Dems taking a cue from McConnell and using tricks he uses to denying him the trial he wants.

[calimary]

20. YESSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh Please Dear God! Let it be so!

[yortsed snacilbuper]

21. Do the slow walk,

sounds like a plan.

[calimary]

24. QUICK! Call his office! [phone] !

There’s someone answering the phone RIGHT NOW!

Tell her PLEASE to have him say YES to this!!!!!!

[Adsos Letter]

33. I tried.

All of the voicemail boxes of his assistants were full. I hope that is a good thing.

[OliverQ]

26. My issue here is how will the Senate trial ever be fair?

Republicans have already decided they're going to acquit Trump no matter what. They have no intention of being impartial jurors. So unless you literally prevent Republicans from being jurors at all, it will always be a sham.

[stopwastingmymoney]

90. You keep piling on the evidence until their constituents are sitting outside

Their offices and jamming their phones lines. Rinse, repeat until one breaks, then another

It could happen...

[budkin]

28. Nancy is absolutely killing it

I love her.

[onetexan]

29. Impeach and delay transferring article to the Senate

If the Idiot cheats and gets reelected again, the House can then transfer them to a Dem-controlled Senate to remove him. Hopefully this will not be the case given the rolling impeachment but it is a last resort.

[srobertss]

31. I contacted my congressmen about this

They are all Democrats and may not have any say in this anyway, but I figured it doesn’t hurt for them to know there’s support for this. I also wrote a letter to Chief Justice, even though Rehnquist defined his role during the Clinton impeachment as “chair” of the proceedings, not “judge.” Again, I figured it couldn’t hurt to let him know that the Senate Republicans coordinating with the White House has made me more fearful for our democracy than just about anything to date, with the exception of our very evil attorney general.

[pintobean]

32. So, they claimed it was too urgent to wait on the courts

to rule on subpoenas, and now they're going to sit on it? I don't think this looks good at all.

[Pantagruel]

39. "claimed it was too urgent to wait on the courts"

Ah, but the situation has changed with the Parnas revelations. Opens up a new set of Russian collusion charges. Now you need Parnas and Giuliani testimony, so you slow walk it forward-it will only get better.

[pintobean]

46. The polls suggest otherwise.

[ancianita]

56. Impeachment is urgent; trial less so. This is about emphasizing impeachment evidence.

This is about not allowing 45 + henchmen to use his party's acquittal all next year as proof of his bulletproof power.

A Senate acquittal would embolden both foreign and domestic bot armies to smear the Democratic Party candidates, Pelosi, the whole party, and corrupt state level vote counters on Nov 2020.

People will get muddled, disgusted, and stop caring. This is exactly what GOP cheaters and Trump want -- just enough to eke out that small margin across enough states to get that electoral college win again.

Impeachment facts and footage are what we want through as much of 2020 as possible.

[JenniferJuniper]

34. John Dean has been suggesting

this would happen for awhile now

[FailureToCommunicate]

38. His excellent NPR interview was where I first heard of the notion.

[moonseller66]

35. Twist the knife!

Don't send anything. He's losing it now and his only hope is to claim exoneration and/or acquittal by the senate which he will use in his campaign against the Democrats and constantly remind the public.

If he's impeached but there's never a Senate trial, everywhere he goes he'll be asked about it, criticized for it and reminded of it for the next 9 months. It'll probably drive him over the edge.

Mr. President, you were impeached. What can you do now since Moscow Mitch can't exonerate you. The first president impeached but not given a hearing by the senate. How does it feel?

Sweet! Like a Rolling Stone!

[Mike 03]

36. If Pelosi and Hoyer are behind it, that gives it a lot of credibility.

It also denies Trump his "vindication" and prolongs his turmoil.

[Thekaspervote]

37. Absolute best news of the day!!

[BlueIdaho]

41. What's the rush? nt.

[pangaia]

43. PR PR PR PR PR

SOMEBODY get on the PR !!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. Awesome news... stick to the Traitor-in-Chief, where it hurts!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[onenote]

48. The problem with this approach is the endgame

It is not sustainable for the Democrats to adopt articles of impeachment and then take the unprecedented step of never sending them to the Senate. It will blow up in our faces. So at some point, the articles will have to be sent -- but what will be the trigger and how does it not end up looking like the Democrats caved? Does anyone actually believe there is a chance in hell that the Senate will convict Trump whenever the articles arrive?

[DanieRains]

50. Make It As Hot As Possible For Him To Protect Trump

Push for justice.

Demand justice.

Demand a fair trial.

Over and over and over.

And we need witnesses.

No witnesses no trial.

[onenote]

58. Let's say the Republicans give in and allow all four witnesses

How certain are you that their testimony will change anything? For that matter, how certain are you that their testimony will be truthful and, if it isn't, that we can show that its not truthful?

[oldsoftie]

68. I agree with you. They may wait on some other votes to be made, but this wont wait long.

Pelosi is the smartest one up there & I think she's going to do what she knows will be the best for the future

[Mersky]

49. Yes! Don't let him run a show trial to protect the pResident

from facing justice. If mcconnell can’t abide his oaths, then don’t let him abuse his office by denying Americans a fair election.

[SayItLoud]

52. Step by step. First get the impeachment vote

Then with that Pelosi is in control of the next step. My personal preference is to let tRUMP swing in the impeachment wind. Twist, turn, melt down, suffer, dig himself deeper into the corrupt hole that exists already. The rePUBICS can only gripe about the "process" on every F**k Fox show whereas the Dems can just keep hammering away the two articles. (even the morons on the Right can't deny that Obstruction didn't happen that's a fact everyone can see). Sorry for the rant.

[stuffmatters]

53. Pheeeeew!

[riversedge]

55. Dems can not trust #moscowmitch--what ever he says. IMHO

[House of Roberts]

72. Right. He'll renege on any deal with Pelosi.

Even if he says he'll allow witnesses, etc., he'll ram through a vote and declare Trump acquitted.

[LiberalLovinLug]

59. False headline. I can find no quote that Pelosi is even considering this.

She didn't want the impeachment to begin with. And from what I've read, she wants it all done and over quickly.
If anything she is the biggest force behind rushing the process through.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-05/pelosi-puts-house-on-quick-timetable-for-impeaching-trump-k3tgyeie

Pelosi Puts House on Quick Timetable for Impeaching Trump

And The Guardian for one thinks she's making a grave mistake too

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/nancy-pelosi-impeachment-inquiry-trump

Nancy Pelosi is bungling the impeachment inquiry into Trump

By rushing the impeachment process – and keeping the focus narrow – Pelosi may be making a grave political miscalculation

Nancy Pelosi is rushing to conclude the impeachment inquiry against President Trump. On Thursday, just over two months after the inquiry was launched, Pelosi announced she was instructing investigators to draft articles of impeachment. These will be voted on by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives as soon as this month.

......

I really hope she is considering delaying. But it goes against everything she has shown so far.

[crickets]

61. Great news! Keep investigating and keep Mitch over a barrel. nt

[bluevoter4life]

62. Claiming ignorance here

But how does delaying transmission to the Senate help the Dems? Just reading it at first glance, I seem to think this plays right into Moscow Mitch's hand. McConnell will never agree to a fair trial and the Dems know this. What does the Senate have to lose by not getting the Articles of Impeachment?

[Marthe48]

64. Yes! Let it hang

because all of this hard work to oust a traitor will come to nothing if we send it to a treasonous senate.

[Amimnoch]

65. Should go Garland on their asses, we won't pass it up to them in

An election year.

We’ll impeach, but send it to the senate after the new congress is seated.

[democrank]

67. Even John Dean says DO I T!

Forget the knife fight butter knives, bring a 2-foot cleaver!

[smb]

69. Until Moscow Mitch "Agrees"?

he calls on Democrats to delay sending impeachment articles to the Senate until McConnell agrees to run a fairer process

Just one problem -- anybody who pays a dime for Moscow Mitch's word should get eleven cents change.

[mjvpi]

70. This is the move.

The house should continue to collect info though the courts. Trump is officially on notice. The shoe should stay in the air.

[shanti]

71. The great Laurence Tribe backs this too!

[usaf-vet]

74. Drag it out. Make Trump face the Impeachment every day WITHOUT being able to say he was acquitted.

[Danascot]

75. Per Seth Abramson

1. Dems keep investigating.

2. Dems keep negotiating trial rules with McConnell.

3. Dems can bring new articles.

4. Angers Trump by denying him a fake exoneration.

5. If McConnell isn't reasonable and Trump is reelected, Democrats might get a Democratic Senate in 2021.

6. All the good arguments would be on Pelosi's side:
a) we're still investigating;
b) we're negotiating trial rules in good faith;
c) America wants a *real* trial;
d) McConnell and Graham have already said they'll violate their oath to be impartial;
e) there's no rush.

7. Smart folks (@tribelaw) who've tracked impeachment historically back this.

8. McConnell won't suddenly say "Nope! Not accepting them now," as that'll never really fly—nor would he be inclined to do so, as he can *always* do a show-trial.

9. Democrats regain leverage.


10. Even if the delay is *only* to negotiate fair trial terms, there's no harm to Democrats to do this closer to the election *and* at a time when additional damning revelations have arisen—or new court decisions/evidence encouraging Mueller content to be re-considered.

11. If America grows tired of languishing articles, Democrats have the option of saying, "OK, we won't send them over, the process has ended"—and then moving on. (While still able to reopen the issue if/when huge news lands). What would they have lost? A fake trial?

[onenote]

84. Point 11 is as bad an option as I can imagine

"If America grows tired of languishing articles, Democrats have the option of saying, "OK, we won't send them over, the process has ended"—and then moving on."

If that was to happen, the Democrats would be torn apart for having wasted time and abused the Constitutional process. Never mind that the Republicans also abused the process -- you don't start an impeachment inquiry, have your members vote for articles (only third time in US history) and the say "never mind."

[live love laugh]

76. 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

[gab13by13]

77. Man oh man,

I miss Al Franken.

[ffr]

78. Tonight begins the task of convicting and removal.

Pence too!

[mzmolly]

79. .

[Nitram]

80. There was a column in the Post that suggested this strategy. I say go for it!

If nothing else, it will be fun watching Republican heads explode.

[DeminPennswoods]

81. Ball's in McConnell's court now

He can agree to fair rules or he can have impeachment hanging over Trump's head for months with the attendant pressure from Trump to clear him. I could see Trump turning on McConnell the same way he turned on Sessions and that could make McConnell's re-election problematic.

[Demsrule86]

82. It is a great move. McConnell can't exonerate the bastard president if there is no articles sent

over...so he either has a trial with reasonable witnesses which gets the story out or Nancy ET AL says the Senate won't do their job and never sends the articles over...brilliant.

[lpbk2713]

85. Trump is a traitor.

And anyone who defends him is just as much a traitor.

[mdbl]

86. Maybe they can come up with new Articles in Jan to Impeach again

is that possible? This pig trump is a traitor - there has to be plenty more out there to add to his charges.

[Rstrstx]

87. I have no doubt if he's let off the hook he'll try the same sh!t again

Or worse. Heck I think they're still trying to pull the same basic crap in Ukraine right now.

[mdbl]

97. sure looks that way with Ghouliani

What a bunch of goons in that White House.

[Aussie105]

91. Pelosi can stall as much as she likes

under the guise of establishing appropriate rules with Mitch for the senate hearing.

In the meantime, investigations can continue. Emoluments clause, nepotism, tax returns, financial irregularities, etc, are all fair game for further articles of impeachment.

Next move is up to Nancy, could be very interesting!

[Recursion]

95. It's still a terrible idea

There's zero leverage to actually pressure McConnell to change anything, and not submitting the articles turns the whole thing into even more of a farce.

[KayF]

98. then why are they considering it?

I assume if they are considering it, there must be at least some potential upside.

[Recursion]

99. They aren't

The article gets ahead of its reporting. The actual story is that they won't decide on the management team until the Senate tells them the trial rules.