Pelosi Leaves Open Impeaching Trump Over SCOTUS Pick: “We have our options”
“We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now”
Democrats have completely lost their minds over President Trump filling the SCOTUS vacancy left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Case in point: on This Week, George Stephanopoulos claims that “some” are talking about impeaching President Trump (or AG Barr) as a way of stalling the nomination process and asks Nancy Pelosi if that’s possible.
Instead of pointing out that this is absolutely ludicrous, she hedges.
UNHINGED: Former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos floats impeaching @realDonaldTrump or AG Bill Barr to Nancy Pelosi to prevent Trump from filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court.
Pelosi: "We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss…" pic.twitter.com/YHLx6j0T13
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) September 20, 2020
[Featured image via YouTube]
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Botox Poisoning……
What are the procedures for removing an insane Congress member?
Of course San Franciscans can start recall procedures also.
Unfortunately the procedure closely mirrors that for dealing with a rabid dog so not likely.
You mean. 22LR, 22Mag, 223, 9mm? That sort of thing?
A noticed that a very typical San Francisco resident already filmed himself making a very appropriate response – he live streamed himself dropping his drawers and taking a giant steaming dump in Nancy Pelosi’s driveway.
A few hours late was when Nancy went public saying that now protests had gotten way out of hand and needed to be suppressed. Killing people didn’t bother her, but this guy did.
Grizzly,
Metaphor not a rally to actual violence….I am not a progressive d.
Her district reveres her. She has a tighter lock on her office than Maxine Waters.
Even after HairdresserGate, and her sniveling about being set up? I’m not so sure.
84.6 % of the vote in 2018
Oops
86.4 %
They can’t be impeachment. That’s only for “officers of the United States.”
They can be voted out of course, but that can only occur every 2 (House) or 6 (Senate) years.
Over the years some states has tried recall measures. But there constitutional issues with states setting qualifications for federal office. Besides, the process is cumbersome, and in the case of a House Member his/her term comes up before the process ends.
Death will take them out, but that one can’t be scheduled (unless you know someone from the Mafia).
Resignation will work, but only if the Member has a sense of shame for what he/she might have done, so that’s pretty much a never-gonna-happen for a Democrat.
They can be expelled. It has happened, but it’s pretty rare. Censure’s a poor cousin to expulsion, but it doesn’t hit the target of getting rid of the Member.
Basically, once they’re in, you’re stuck.
We need a version of the 25th Amendment that applies to batty, decrepit, and/or senile members of Congress.
Heck, might as well extend it to SCOTUS too while we’re at it.
We’ve had more than our fair share of nitwits and half wits in the Legislative and Judicial Branches.
2/3 of the house can expel a member. That’s easier than the 25th amendment, which requires 2/3 of both houses, as well as the VP and the majority of the cabinet.
There are no such procedures. The only way a member can involuntarily lose her seat is by being expelled by a 2/3 vote of the house.
No, they can’t. There is no such thing as recall in the US constitution. One a US official has been elected the voters have no say until his term expires.
She’s taken a lot of money over the years, don’t try to say it would be too hard to nail her for accepting bribes.
Desperation is an unattractive option. Is she trying to talk Stephanopoulos off the ledge with this impeachment talk?
Honestly, I kind of hope they do. It’s not like Congress is getting anything done anyway, and I think that Joe Q Citizen is getting heartily sick of Impeachment Theater™. In my opinion, it would just help shift the center more in the President’s direction.
Poor Nancy. Always trying to negotiate from a position of weakness. There is going to be a massive meltdown when Trump is elected and the Republicans retake the House.
Come on Madame Speaker. Somewhere on the grief scale, you will reach the acceptance level.
I would not bet on Republicans retaking the House. If mail in fraud does not work for President, it is much more likely to work for Congressional districts here and there. After all, it apparently worked in the Al Franken race for the Senate.
How is impeaching anyone gonna stop Trump from making the appointment? Nancy is completely off the rails
The idea is that one an impeachment reaches the Senate doors, all other business of the Senate for whatever purpose, including judicial nominations must halt while the impeachment trial takes place.
In that case, should the Democrats take the manifestly unconstitutional act of impeaching the president or the AG for the sole purpose of stopping a judicial nomination (regardless of what “high crimes and misdemeanors they allege in the impeachment charges), McConnell will have no choice: he’ll have to call for an immediate vote without a trial, and even if the weak sisters in the Senate vote removal, there still won’t be 67 votes in favor.
That’s just not true. There’s nothing to stop the senate prioritizing the confirmation over the impeachment trial.
Well, she hasn’t got her hair done in a long time. And due to rolling blackouts all her ice cream has melted – so what do you expect???
Like her mansion EVER suffers from any blackouts…
Not her mansion. Her.
Her mouth is writing checks that her ass can’t cover.
Yes. I was wondering this too. They can impeach Trump, Pence, Barr, and every other member of the cabinet, but none of that can hold up the nomination if Trump and McConnell are determined to bring it to a vote.
Pelosi screams, “impeach!” to everything, like Bart screams, “I didn’t do it!”
https://comicallyincorrect.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/no-crime-dt-600a.jpg
Well ok then. Yes sending the Senate an article of impeachment would gum up approval of a nominee. The impeachment supersedes a confirmation.
However, the r Senate majority could simply vote to convene for a trial at 0900, let the d house managers present their case and then vote to dismiss.
Should the d in the HoR actually do that? Maybe and if so they would then have to keep generating new articles to send to the Senate. How many d members would be willing to do that? Some for sure but Pelosi and AOC need to remember that not every d held district is 75% or better d.
That would be a huge price.
The other tactical option in the Senate would be to vote to adjourn. Then Trump can simply fill the SCOTUS vacancy and EVERY other current judicial or executive branch vacancy by recess appointment.
Personally I think Pelosi and Schumer are talking out their ass. They don’t have the stones for this and even if they did they would lose.
IMO this is another reason to move rapidly to nominate and approve the nomination BEFORE the election. Hell, before the next two weeks are over.
This removes the d election hype of ‘vote for us to stop Trump replacing Ginsburg’. Get it done BEFORE the election and all the d can do is threaten to pack the court, create two states out of DC and PR. None of which will help them in appealing to independent/centrist voters.
IMO, these normal non-beltway voters will reject an extreme plan such as this. So Pelosi do your worst and you still lose.
Since when? Where is this written? The senate is the master of its own agenda, and can set it any way it likes.
Nope. The senate can’t adjourn for more than 3 days without the house’s permission, while recess appointments need an adjournment of at least 10 days, and probably longer.
Milhouse,
Current Senate rules raise impeachment over other actions. Obviously a vote can change that.
Recess – and then we get into the POTUS ability to intervene with a.dispute between HoR and Senate about adjournment.
Lots of ways to skin the.cat. Including going full Andrew Jackson and telling the Judiciary to shut up and enforce their ruling if they can.
Marques of Queensbury rules are all very well when everyone agrees to be bound by them. When your opponent refuses to abide by norms then, IMO, one is abysmally stupid to follow norms.
They can and will. An appointment during a fake recess will simply not be admitted to the court. The court will unanimously instruct the court officers to forcibly bar the nominee from the premises.
The recess/adjournment won’t be ‘fake’. If the use of a pro forma session means the body isn’t in recess then the purposeful omission of a pro forma session means the body is in recess.
Conflicts between HoR and Senate about adjournment/recess are not exactly as clear cut as you insist. The POTUS has a.role in the dispute between the two bodies. The HoR does not have the absolute power to tell the Senate when that body can adjourn.
No one wants recess appointments but they exist. Crass? Partisan? Naked use of power? Sure no question. Will it work? Why not try? Frankly I don’t think we will get there unless the d start a bs impeachment.
At that point norms should be put to the side until the d start behaving like adults. The d will have to reap the whirlwind they created.
As to the CT refusing entry ….that would be a very sad and tragic day for the nation.
McConnell should announce in response that if there is no justification for allowing a Supreme Court nomination to go forward with an election just 6 weeks away, there’s no justification for an impeachment to go forward with an election just 6 weeks away.
He should immediately bring any such articles to the Senate floor without a trial, call for an immediate vote. There aren’t 67 votes for removal on spurious grounds, so they the Senate could continue on. Better yet, he could ask for the proxy of 34 relatively safe Republican senators (Pelosi set the precedent for this earlier this year), and if the Democrats adopt the tactic of passing articles of impeachment around the clock, have the chair announce with each one that by proxy, there are not enough votes to remove, and proceed with Senate business.
But I don’t think it will come to that. I think the required 4 or 7 Republican senators will cave, and prevent the nomination from coming to the floor.
All the things that Comrade Schumer threatened will be done if Trump appoints someone are things that they will do anyway if they win.
Anything Comrade Pelosi threatens, such as impeachment, will be done anyway if they lose.
That’s right, impeaching a President for actually doing what the constitution says he is supposed to do.
As I understand it, the idea is to impeach him for something else, not for nominating a replacement for RBG (which he clearly has the right to do.)
Shifty Schiff probably has a few “whistleblowers” already lined up. It won’t matter that all they have is hearsay, the point is to tie up the Senate and prevent them from proceeding to a vote to confirm the SCOTUS nominee.
Correction: That’s right, impeaching a President for actually doing what the constitution says he is supposed to do…. again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfd0fFdSeoo
The video link is a leftist having a complete meltdown tantrum over rbg’s passing.
nancy pelosi and chuck schumer are those horrible parent who try to placate these emotional infants instead of dealing with their bad behavior head on. That tactic usually ends up in an emotionally stunted person who can’t accept the realities of the world. They are unfamiliar with the concept of “Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. If you lose, work harder and keep doing your best.
These people are too far gone. Getting their way every time while growing up, receiving participation trophies even when they sucked, time-outs vs. a swat on the azz, safe spaces and all the rest of the lefty BS parenting has resulted in narcissistic, unstable tyrants. Most blm/antifa types were likely raised this way, now they want the world handed to them on a silver platter.
nancy and chuck painted themselves into a corner they can’t get out of.
We’re dealing with supposed grownups who think that there’s nothing wrong with having a screaming tantrum. And even more disgusting, they film their tantrums and post them to the internet for everyone to see as if they’re something to be proud of.
Democrats have got the shits because they know they can’t stop the coming confirmation.
Even with the three Democrats, Mittens, Collins and China girl that just means Pence casts the deciding vote.
Confirmation of a new Justice, and, then, a decisive re-election victory, for POTUS. It’s going to be a fun fall season. Warm up some cocoa and get some chestnuts to roast.
Vile crone, Pelosi, hints at impeaching the President for exercising his Constitutional prerogative to nominate a candidate for SCOTUS, to fill a vacancy.
This statement demonstrates three things that have become glaringly clear, over the past decade:
1) The Dhimmi-crats are goose-stepping, thuggish totalitarians who believe in one-party rule;
2) The Dhimmi-crats are infantile and obnoxious bullies;
3) The Dhimmi-crats are stupid.
The left has literally lost their minds….clinically, certifiably lost their minds
Governing by threats is no way to operate. Doesn’t work for 8 Year olds, shouldn’t for 80 Year olds either
CA may put an end to her Speakership in November by regaining the seats that were stolen in 2016 plus a few more. I get the idea that Trump has ample coattails here and is much more popular than people realize.
So soono-to-be Speaker McCarthy should weigh in on this threat right now. The thought of facing his fury next January should deter enough Dems from any talk of impeachment. McCarthy laid out the case for a House victory last week on Mark “Slash” Levin’s radio show. The ballot harvesting game will be played differently this time.
With all due respect, expecting an honest vote count in California is beyond rational consideration.
Subotai Bahadur
If Republicans work as hard as the Democrats to collect the ballots, those are ballots that the Dems are getting. It matters. They can only cheat if it is close and in 2016, the Dems barely stole 6 seats from massive fraud that McCarthy swears will be stopped this time. It’s up to the Republicans to get off of their duffs and do something for a change.
And besides, Warden Hair Gel has been spooked by Trump’s popularity in CA. It has grown substantially since 2016. It has been reported that more than half of those attending Trump’s rallies are Democrats. It was about 33-35% in 2016. THAT matters. Orange County (especially), San Diego and Riverside should be major surprises.
Like generals, Republicans will be suckered into preparing to fight the previous war. If harvesting is so easily countered, all that means is that harvesting isn’t how the Ds are depending on cheating this time.
So do we.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s formal Supreme Court nomination was sent to the Senate on June 22, 1993. Her confirmation hearing began on July 20, and the Senate voted to confirm her on August 3. The entire process took 42 days.
The time between the formal Supreme Court nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor and her final Senate confirmation was 33 days. (Aug. 19-Sep. 21, 1981).
For John Paul Stevens, the formal process took only 19 days (Nov. 28-Dec. 17, 1975).
There are 46 days until the election.
A total of 61 SCOTUS justices have been nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court since the turn of the last century (1900)
70% of these (43 Justices) were confirmed in *under 46 days* (the amount of time remaining until the Nov 3 Presidential election)
Paraphrasing Chairperson Hillary, “”Ah’mm tahrred, tahrred Ah tell ya of the Democrat’s tantrums.”
The Communists and the Joseph Goebbels media want you dead or enslaved. Act accordingly.
I see sh*t like this and my head almost explodes. Doesn’t this exemplar of San Francisco dumb-assery understand that it is the President’s duty to make an appointment? (U.S. Const, Art II, Sec 2, Cl 2) What the Senate does with it, including the pace of confirmation, is out of POTUS’s control, and the House has no say in the matter. What the heck are they going to impeach him for this time? (Okay, I know they don’t really need a valid reason…they’re the loony party.)
After David Brinkley retired, the show hasn’t been worth watching.
George Stephanopoulos had NO news experience before coming to ABC. How the hell did he get that job?
Surely a rhetorical question!
What is with pelosi and those scarves always wrapped around her neck?
Does it portend a noose?
Or is it hiding a medical device?
It conceals her gills.
I’m wondering if she’s got a trach tube.
Calm down, guys. It’s the mask she uses, called a neck gaiter. There’s a bazillion of them for sale now, in all kinds of fashion, including American flags. (which you will never see on a Democrat in the legislature, for some reason)
Which are practically 100% ineffective. A fitting accessory for Pelosi.
No, that report is actually 100% BS. The study did not find that at all. Immediately upon the press running with this narrative the study’s authors went “WTF? What kind of nonsense are you attributing to us?”
Threatening to impeach over a President exercising an explicit constitutional duty.
If a Republican Speaker of the House made such a remark on national television, they would be hounded out of office.
The always surprised-looking Nancy Pelosi. I think her eyebrow-ist every day draws her eyebrows closer and closer to her hairline. Any bets as to when he gets there?
If she gets one more facelift, she’s going to have a goatee.
Someone off camera must have waved one of Pelosi’s favorite ice cream bars in front of her face, it sure caught Pelosi’s attention and she perked right up.
LIFEHACK: If you are in the middle of a harsh questioning and don’t know an answer just respond with “good morning.” It will confuse all parties involved to the point where they just move on. Works every time.
https://mobile.twitter.com/KateHydeNY/status/1307804918930169864
Quite frankly, why should she concede it? What would she and the Dems gain by ruling out an impeachment bid? Circumstances can change in a heartbeat, or lack of one, as we’ve just discovered this weekend.
How old is Pelosi?
How’s her health? (Apart from her alcoholism)
Liver Cancer might be on the table!
Just saying……..
I’m thinking of taking one of my rare trips back to kali from Tejas.
https://nypost.com/2020/09/14/man-who-pooped-on-pelosis-driveway-calls-it-peaceful-protest/
Just saying.
Bring it on, Nancy Pelosi. This will ASSURE the GOP recaptures the House in November.
Why are the voice of the people, for the people, people, so stark terrified of a Supreme Court that’ll throw legislative issues back to the legislature; you know, where SanFranNan holds court already?
Weird.