Impeachment Deux: Pelosi should hold the Articles because the “Merrick Garland rule” was fair?
Could there be a second impeachment: Impeachment2
The interlocked role of trials, evidence, and witnesses seems pretty clear, and no amount of GOP illogical reasoning can finesse it.
Since the M.O. of the GOP is to use some procedural wrangling to swiftly move IMPOTUS to brag about exoneration claims, Speaker Pelosi should continue to hold the Articles of Impeachment until there are actual guarantees for witnesses and documents, rather than what is expected to be a swift show trial in the Senate.
Moscow Mitch’s “veto” of Merrick Garland’s SCOTUS nomination for specious reasons looms large since he delayed it 310 days. That should be a symbolic guide for the maximum length for holding on to the articles. And the inconvenience of taking Democratic Senators off the campaign trail becomes moot after the Democratic National Convention in July. It presently seems less likely that the articles will be delivered before the SOTU on 4 February.
What an October Surprise in 2020, even more articles of impeachment following an acquittal.
After all, there could be more documents and evidence for a second impeachment, much like those reports that may have influenced Trump’s decision to assassinate Suleimani as a distraction from the Arms for Dirt scandal.
This extended time could allow John Bolton to be subpoenaed now by House committees since the court processes and appeals will likely make its resolution last until the Fall.
Even if there’s an “acquittal”, and if IMPOTUS* is reelected, there will likely be a second impeachment. It’s as good a bet as when MSM brings up IranAir 655 as a false equivalence to the downing of the Ukrainian jet in Teheran.
— Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) January 9, 2020
<
p class=”is-empty-p”>
“You’re not mopping fast enough. (Laughter) That’s a socialist mop. (Laughter and applause) Grab a mop — let’s get to work.” – Barack Obama (2009); “Soyez réalistes, demandez l’impossible!”
