McConnell gives Pelosi some advice on the word “leverage”
Yesterday I wrote, concerning Nancy Pelosi’s decision to hold back on sending articles of impeahment to the Senate: “This is the Democrats’ idea of “leverage”? Why would the Republicans care if Democrats never send the articles to the Senate?”
Now Mitch McConnell weighs in:
McConnell said Schumer wanted “a special pretrial guarantee” that “House Democrats themselves did not bother to pursue as they assembled their case.”
McConnell also criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for taking the “highly unusual step” of waiting to transmit the approved House articles of impeachment against Trump to the Senate.
McConnell said he didn’t understand the move by Pelosi and said, while cracking a smile, that he didn’t agree with the idea that delaying the transmission might give her leverage in dictating the rules of the Senate trial.
“I admit, I’m not sure what leverage there is from refraining from sending us something we do not want,” McConnell said. “But alas, if they can figure that out, they can explain it.”
Impeachment has jumped the shark.
This was precisely my thought as well. Why would McConnell give an inch if this is their plan? This is definitely a “don’t throw me in that briar patch moment”.
I watched McConnell’s speech on CSPAN. It was brilliant, very tongue in cheek. Merry Christmas Nancy,Shiff,Nadler, and the entire democratic party
I think it’s smart of McConnell to argue against “leverage” but he knows and Pelosi knows it’s not really about Pelosi setting terms for the Senate impeachment.
It’s about talking points in the national debate, amplified by the MSM of course, with an eye to invalidating anything Trump does (especially with regard to the Supreme Court) because he is an impeached president.
It’s the same asterisk strategy Democrats ran against Kavanaugh — that every Kavanaugh vote will have an asterisk for Kavanaugh’s stain as an accused serial rapist.
Democrats set great store on their asterisks. Perhaps too much, but if nothing else it makes their base happy.
“This is definitely a “don’t throw me in that briar patch moment”.’
You know….that phrase is entirely meaningless unless someone knows the story, which in this day and age is practically prohibited.
Fortunately, it seems to me that most of those who read and participate in Neo’s blog are old enough to get the reference. Too bad for those who come after.
This is about gaining control of the narrative, which was slipping from Democrats– evidenced by the declining polls favoring impeachment.
They fall back on their go to narrative of “fairness”, which usually will have some leverage with independents. After all, independents think of themselves as the gatekeepers of fairness– otherwise they would just announce their partisanship and cast that rubric aside. So they are susceptible to the narrative and fairness is critically important to them. They were swinging away from the Democrat narrative, and this is the best chance the Democrats have to regain control.
Will it succeed? Will it peel off a few voters when McConnell refuses to bite? This is going to be an election of tactically draining a few voters on each issue, wearing down voters enthusiasm.
Pelosi may not realize that Mitch can simply file an Emergency Writ of Mandamus with the USSC and force the two articles to be transmitted. Once they are voted on by The House, on a Constitutional level, the dye has been cast. As far as Pelosi playing for the “fairness” angle hoping to glean Independents, the Schiff and Nadler Hearings, combined with the Kavanaugh Fiasco and the Mueller Hearings Debacle, precludes that entirely. Mitch is simply savoring the moment.
Democrats and other partisans, including apparently Justice Ginsberg*, are complaining that there won’t be a fair trial in the Senate because McConnell and other Republicans have already declared they will support President Trump’s right to a fair trial by not being impartial judges (still trying to parse that one).
However, the Admirable Turley makes a certain point that might harsh their mellow.
https://jonathanturley.org/2019/12/20/democratic-senators-line-up-in-declarations-of-guilt-before-the-senate-impeachment-trial/
*
https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2019/12/18/ginsburg-hints-senators-cant-impartial-trumps-trial-disqualified/
https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/12/20/whats-real-reason-house-democrats-will-wait-long-takes-send-articles-impeachment-senate-eric-ciaramella/
Nancy knows how to take an impeachment… She just doesn’t know how to hold an impeachment… (Channeling Sienfield at the car rental desk)
Democrats set great store on their asterisks. Perhaps too much, but if nothing else it makes their base happy.
And how many divisions do those asterisks have at their command?
Those asterisks have the effect of blue pills … not only inducing the comfortable numbness of The Matrix blue pill … but facilitating arousal like that other blue pill, even where there is not enough substance to support the desire.
(ADVICE: if your impotent rage lasts more than four hours, consult reality by taking my advice below).
OTOH, I took the red pill a long time ago. I’d recommend Trump’s opponents do the same; it helps prevent symptoms such as:
> Screaming at the sky.
> Straining at gnats.
> Flinging poo in the hopes that it will stick.
> Much like Flounder, f____ing up and trusting “leaders” who CAN’T be counted upon to deliver on their Utopian promises, because they lack the omniscience and infallibility to do so.
> Generally fooling themselves.
Take the red pill. You won’t get fooled again.
According to Noah Feldman the very constitutional law prof that Dems called as a witness at the start of the impeachment “inquiry” Trump isn’t impeached under the Constitution UNTIL the Articles are conveyed to the Senate by the House impeachment managers.
Under Feldman’s opinion, unless and until the Articles are given over to the Senate, then defacto & de jure, Trump hasn’t been “impeached”. Furthermore, If the Democrats attempt to hold over the Articles to the next sitting Congres (i.e. Jan 2020) then that would be unconstitutional as well.
Feldman’s position seems strange given that a number of impeachments, including Clinton and Alcee Hastings, have been tried by a different Congress than the one that impeached them. I suppose it hinges on when exactly those Articles were transmitted, since there would have been no reason for delay then, and what you think the Democrat’s real strategy is at this point. I have heard some rumbling that the ‘fair trial’ complaint is a diversion and they really want to deliberately hold the articles until after the election in hopes of having a more favorable Senate. They may also realize they could lose the House in 2020 and be unable to impeach Trump if he’s reelected.
They idiots who thought impeachment=removal are going to be so demoralized and angry (ier) when they find out they’ve been played. More fuel for a landslide next year.
Although I have not studied the matter, I wonder if the articles of impeachment would be considered transmitted in some sense when published in the Congressional Record (CR). Or to frame it differently, once the articles have been published in the CR, can the Senate take official cognizance of them and take them up – adopting rules for the trial and inviting the House to send managers?
In short, the only way to effectively withhold the articles would be not to publish them in the CR.
Mitch McConnell is The BEST Majority Leader in the history of the Senate. Did you see the sparkle on his distinguished chops while addressing the Nancy & her lynch mob ‘Ish-Shoes’?
He loves & lives it!!
My thought on why Pelosi is holding the impeachment from the Senate is this: her – and the Dem’s – plan is to re-open the “inquiry” with more secret testimony etc and to continue to add to the current two-count impeachment so that the delay will be as long as they want and the media will – naturally – shout all the new allegations to the world. Think of this as being a Kavenaugh-style impeachment with seemingly endless allegations proffered without evidence for their impact on the voters. Second thought, Dems will subsequently pull another impeachment against VP Pence this time and then forward both to the Senate after the 2020 election. Why? The Dems believe they will regain the Senate by hook or crook in that election, will find both the President and Vice President guilty, remove them from office, thereby making Pelosi President. Yes, I recognize that both of those thoughts are quite “Road Runner & Wiley Coyote” in as much as the Dems are likely incompetent to execute one or more critical parts of such plans properly. And probably will have more than one Dem politician boasting of the purpose in a public way, thereby defeating their ability to retake the Senate or the Presidency in 2020.
But, it is amusing to speculate about what such a collection of incompetents, fools and communists might have in their minds.
So is Pelosi seeking a quid pro quo. Or is this some type of solicitation of a bribe. Hmmm…I believe that both are impeachable offenses under the new democrat interpretation of law. Kick her out of public office.
ChristopherB, 5 minutes with Wikipedia would have shown you you were wrong. For example, WaPo on Alcee Hastings:
“Four senators did not vote yesterday because they were members of the House when it voted 413 to 3 in August 1988 to impeach Hastings. ”
The House voted to impeach and transmitted the impeachment to the Senate. They did not wait until there was a new House. Had Pelosi transmitted the articles on President Trump, that would have transferred the whole business to the Senate for action and the Senate could have taken months as it has in the past.
There is no required procedure for transmitting Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, so the Senate could indeed simply read the Congressional Record.
They could also adopt the same rules used to try Clinton, which were originally approved 100-0. Set a date for the trial, if the Speaker fails to name managers, well, that would be like the prosecution failing to show up for a trial.
“…would be unconstitutional as well.”
This assumes that Pelosi and her accomplices seriously CARE about what is constitutional and what isn’t.
Remember (for example): they lost the 2016 elections; therefore, the Electoral College must be tossed into the dustbin of history.
In the same spirit, it’s only a matter of time before Pelosi starts ranting about how the Republicans (and their deplorable supporters, e.g., Dershowitz and Turley) are using the Constitution to support their unsupportable, dishonest, deplorable, etc. claims, devilishly manipulated merely to block and subvert the freedom-fighting patriots in the Democratic Party.
The upshot, of course, is that the Constitution will also have to be tossed into the dustbin of history (or at least altered sufficiently to support Democratic Party positions and policies).
Such a pathetic absurdity would seem to grace the next round of Pelosi vs. McConnell (aka Democratic Party vs. Trump; which in this case translates into Democratic Party vs. the USA).
Barry Meislin on December 21, 2019 at 12:56 pm said:
“…would be unconstitutional as well.”
This assumes that Pelosi and her accomplices seriously CARE about what is constitutional and what isn’t.
* * *
“Are you serious? Are you serious?”
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/64547-pelosi-to-reporter-are-you-serious
10/23/09 06:14 PM EDT
The fun thing is that, despite Justice Roberts’ punt on Obamacare & the tax/penalty, the courts may now be on their way to declaring all or part of it unconstitutional.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/court-strikes-down-obamacare-s-individual-mandate-unconstitutional-n1104476