Is a second impeachment still on the table?

[MoonRiver]

My understanding is it could considerably slow down McTrash's SCOTUS hearing.

[dware]

1. How would it slow down the SCOTUS hearings? nt

[MoonRiver]

13. Apparently impeachment takes precedence over any other legislation, including confirmation of judges

The turtle couldn't proceed until impeachment was done in the Senate.

[dware]

15. That's not true at all,

the Senate Maj. Leader sets the agenda and the Turtle can put it off until he wants to bring it to the floor.

[sfstaxprep]

2. No

Nobody is getting impeached.

[Codeine]

3. Wouldn't slow down anything.

Hell, McTurtle could simply bypass hearings altogether.

[Statistical]

4. It should move to the top of the calender on the Senate ahead of all other business.

However
a) that assumes Mitch cares about rules
b) Mitch doesn't just call an immediate vote it goes by party lines and then moves on to the confirmation.

[kentuck]

5. If the Democrats had the votes, they could impeach....

for example, AG Barr.

They could hold hearings on why he is being impeached? There are plenty enough reasons. Nancy could pass the Articles over to the Senate whenever she felt it was appropriate, even if it was after the election.

Once an impeachment process has begun, it is my understanding that the Senate cannot pass anything else until the impeachment is resolved? Is that correct?

[dware]

9. No, that is not correct,

the Senate Maj. Leader sets the agenda and he can bring up the impeachment hearings whenever he wants to.

[jimfields33]

6. They'd have to announce them soon

Saturday trump announces pick. Mcconnell releases schedule Monday. Judicial panel starts next Friday, October 2nd. Floor vote October 23rd. Just guessing but I predict these dates are close. The house would have to announce by October 2nd at least.

[Pantagruel]

7. Now?

I wanted another impeachment brought hours after the first failed.
We should /could be going into the election with Trump under that cloud and the press discussing his criminal behavior.

[Demsrule86]

8. No impeachment before the election. Do you want to hand Trump another four years...

[Azathoth]

10. Wouldn't slow him a bit. The Senate sets its own schedule

If it wants to vote on a judicial confirmation before it takes up an impeachment trial, no one can say otherwise.

[TwilightZone]

11. Nope, wouldn't matter.

The claims otherwise are just wishful thinking. We really should know by now that McConnell is going to do whatever he wants. He's not about to allow anything to stand in the way. Why so many seem to believe otherwise is a little odd.

[PTWB]

12. It wouldn't slow anything down.

The senate rules allow Mitch to conduct regular business on the same calendar days as an impeachment trial, just has to before or after.

Impeaching again is in essence saying “Stop doing that! If you don’t stop I’ll tell you to stop again!”

Impeachment has no teeth.

[CrispyQ]

14. I have no idea what arrows Pelosi was talking about.

It seems like the only Plan A we have is GOTV and there is no Plan B.

[TheRealNorth]

17. If Pelosi has anything

I don't want to know until she is ready to unleash it. Why give the Republicans time to plan/respond.

[CrispyQ]

19. Oh, I completely agree.

I just can't imagine what arrows she's talking about. McConnell is going to do whatever the hell he wants. Everyday the situation gets more dire.

[DonaldsRump]

16. Trump and the Reputincans are handing us this election

Why would we want to hand it back?

The Reputincans have the votes to shove Trump's SCOTUS appointee through, and there is nothing WE can do about. However, this is causing them to lose votes, be seen as hypocrites, and POSSIBLY lose other R Senators if there is damaging stuff coming about the appointee. AFAIK, we can't stop them. However, it will hurt them dearly.

There is absolutely no need to talk about impeachment, which will then get Trump/Reputincans some votes.

Let's get the White House and Senate back and then we can play our cards.

[Dr. Jack]

18. I don't think it was ever a serious suggestion

I think it was more of a not so subtle hint that the Dems are going willing to take extreme measures in response to the Supreme Court fight but beyond that it is not a serious suggestion. In reality it would do nothing but cause a huge distraction from the other issues going on, issues which damage Trump and the Republicans far more than impeachment.