Please correct me if I am wrong about the application of this amendment, but it appears to be unconstitutional for the House to stall the legal preceding against the president in the Senate- or it may be unconstitutional for the Senate to wait for the House!
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.“
Well, they didn't charge him with the violation of any law, so it could probably be argued that no actual crime has been committed.
The senate could easily dismiss this whole sham. Witholding the articles from the senate has, as I see it, two outward goals. If we consider that the dems really want the senate to dismiss it.
Three if you count the propaganda gain in.
First, This would allow dems to give schumer an excuse for another investigation by excuse of conspiracy to obstruction of congressional impeachment trial blabla yadda yadda. Something they can twist in a way that the populace believes that congress somehow is above the senate. Per usual.
Second, this leads to a lenghty investigation which will cripple the gouvernments ability to, you know, gouvern. Impeachment will be halted until the dems purged the senate in rigged trials. Flynn, Stone, Manafort where their "Beta-Test". The implication of this is horrifying. If not stopped, this will result in a total take over by the uniparty and the deepstate. This is how Communism takes over a state, by the book.
EDIT
Forgot:
THANK GOD FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP
any lesser man would have shot himself already
The only thing that matters is that whats left of their base and their MSM propagandists will now be primed with, yet, another false talking point which they will spout non stop like gospel.
It was an outstanding move, really. She definately bluffs, but you can not be too sure what/whom she is willing to sacrifice for this debacle.
Well I know one thing she is willing to sacrifice: the voting decision of over 60 million people?
That might be, but ask yourself what IT is she bargains them for, what is her game plan.
It's not a criminal trial, it's a political one.