Common Political Sense Applied to the Impeachment Farce

Sally Zelikovsky:

“…The Senate should change its rules or enact new rules establishing that it will summarily dismiss any impeachment from the House and not hold a trial, when that impeachment is based on any of the following: partisan politics (this can be proven since impeachment has been their clarion call since Election Night 2016);  conduct that falls squarely within the executive’s constitutionally-enumerated powers (among others, the executive’s ability to conduct foreign and national security policy, to protect the homeland, and to fully execute the laws of the United States, including investigating and prosecuting corruption carried out by citizens); hearsay evidence and any other evidence that would be inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence; information protected by executive privilege or that is classified; evidence that has been obtained in violation of the accused’s constitutional guarantees or any other laws; or evidence that was illegally obtained.

The Constitution states that the President shall be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”  That requires that a trial take place, but if the Senate determines, in accordance with Senate rules, that there are no grounds for a trial, it’s hard to see a reason why the Senate cannot “throw out” the impeachment.

Gutsy? You bet.  Likely to rile up the Dems?  Don’t care.  Effective?  Damn right.

Changing existing senate rules or enacting new ones might require deploying Harry Reid’s 2013 nuclear option which allows the Senate to close debate with a simple majority (51 votes) versus 60, or the 67 votes required to amend a Senate rule.

Republicans don’t have 60 votes but can easily meet the 51-vote threshold as long as they employ  Nancy Pelosi-style tactics to muscle every Republican senator to vote with the pack.  They will have to pressure Republicans who threaten to stray with losing committee appointments or chairmanships they might have or want.  They must be made to understand that any legislation they might propose will fall on deaf ears and that the NRSC will withhold funding for their re-election bids and support primary challenges instead.  If some pansy like Romney or Collins insists on voting his or her conscience, they should be pressed by every other Republican to, at the very least, not show up on vote day (remember:  the Constitution requires 2/3 of the members present)…”

Original

Doug Santo