Moscow Mitch plans to dismiss the whole impeachment charge without even bother looking at the evidence. Is that treason to his oath?
@durango joe - Wrong. There was a trial in Senate for Bill Clinton impeachment. The trial started in January 1999 and Senate voted on both counts on February 12. Neither count got more than 50% of the votes and the charges were dismissed as a result.
Just the facts
- 1 month ago
He can't. You cannot just dismiss impeachment charges. He plans to call no witnesses...which of course the prosecution side can still do.
- David SLv 71 month ago
No, it's not treason. It's his right as SML.
- Little PrincessLv 71 month ago
The indictment against Clinton in the house was bipartisan and was for an offense that pretty much everyone agreed that he committed. The senate just determined that it didn't rise to the level for removal from office.
None of the Republicans in the house have shown signs of voting for impeachment. The Democrats have even had trouble deciding upon what charge to charge him with.
Senator McConnell would be right to limit the proceedings to a few hours and then get back to the business of the senate rather than playing along with what everyone perceives as political shenanigans.
He could also have it drag out for six to eight weeks to showcase what the democrats have been doing in congress, not to mention holding all the various democrat senators wishing to run for president hostage in the senate chamber attending the hearings rather than out campaigning. Their presence is required by senate rules. Bennet, Booker, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Warren would have to run their campaigns via surrogates or only attend events close to DC.
- out2lunch4now2Lv 71 month ago
Learn the meaning of "treason".
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 month ago
WHAT EVIDENCE.. The Dems HAVE NO EVIDENCE.. They are all playing with hearsay and opinions NO EVIDENCE at all has been or will be submitted.
- durango joeLv 71 month ago
The last thing I heard is that if the House voted to impeach he would allow the rial.
But to answer the question you asked, no it is not.
When the House voted to impeach then President Clinton the Senate refused to hold the trial.
So apparently the Senate can decide that it is not worth wasting their time if they feel that the decision to impeach was based on flawed evidence or groundless charges.
- StephenWeinsteinLv 71 month ago
No. The oath is an oath to the Constitution, and the Constitution intentionally defines "treason" very narrowly, as things like "making war", specifically to prevent the overreaching use of the word in which you are now engaging.
- linkus86Lv 71 month ago
That is hard to believe. Mitch's MO is to not bring the impeachment to trial until after the election.
- Anonymous1 month ago
It’s par for the course in the GOP.
- DavidLv 41 month ago
No , to much time and money has been spent on this outrage