Impeachment Juror Susan Collins Has Lunch With Donald Trump

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

Maine’s senior senator will be one of the Republicans to meet with President Donald Trump this week as impeachment inquiry hearings continue.
….

Collins, whose seat is expected to be one of the most expensive and competitive next year, has refused to comment on the impeachment hearings, citing her view that she will serve as a juror in the Senate trial, should the House vote that the president should be impeached. How her decision on impeachment affects her re-election — which she hasn’t formally announced — has been a topic of debate.

To read more:

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/11/21/susan-collins-trump-lunch.html

I feel quite certain that Collins will express her deep feelings of concern for Trump's behavior just before she voters to acquit him.

[jberryhill]

1. Susan Collins is very disappointed

[guillaumeb]

7. And that counts for....

nothing, actually, because her concern and disappointment never translate into action.

[mr_lebowski]

43. Lol ... every mention of Collin's hollow missives ..

implies an inherent understanding by the poster ... that, no matter what she SAYS ... she ain't gonna DO ... jack sh*t.

Just sayin

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. It has to be improper for him to bribe the jurors

How does he continue to get away with this? Didn't he call the senators and threaten to take away support if they voted for impeachment?

Now having lunch with them.

[guillaumeb]

8. And this should be a reason for the House to open an investigation. eom

[doc03]

3. That would be jury tampering in a real court. nt

[bluestarone]

4. Asshole gets away with everything

NO-ONE will stop him.

[mr_lebowski]

44. There aren't charges yet, so I kinda doubt it ...

Once the Articles are Passed by the House, then that sort of legal jeopardy might come into play if he's meeting with Senators privately.

AND ... if the Senate weren't a f***ing joke right now ... something might actually be done if he does do so afterwards.

[MoonRiver]

5. GTH Collins!

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. Did he threaten to campaign for her?

That would be like blackmail.

[2naSalit]

9. They should be disqualified as jurors...nt

[guillaumeb]

10. Graham already stated that he will not even look at the evidence.

So that should disqualify him as well.

And McConnell said the impeachment would go nowhere in the Senate. Another disqualification?

[onenote]

12. Sure, but if that was the case, a lot of Democrats would have been disqualified from acquitting

Clinton. Everyone and their brother knew that there weren't enough Democratic votes to convict Clinton long before the trial was held (and, indeed, before the House impeached Clinton).

My point being, that this is nothing new.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

23. Democrats knew that Clinton's behavior did not THREATEN the National Security

of the United States as Trump's behavior and attitude towards Ukraine has. Trump has virtually violated the US Constitution in so many ways as to allow Putin and his cronies in Ukraine to threaten us so to speak. To the point that Trump is now considering having the US pull out of NATO. Another feather in Putin's cap.

[2naSalit]

18. And that was after he

wrote and passed around a resolution objecting to the impeachment hearings and most of them signed it. Regardless of it's power as a proclamation, it's power now is proof that all those reprobates have agreed that they don't want to participate. Therefore, they should not be included in the process. The legal verbage refers to two thirds of members present shall hold trial and render yea or nay for removal from office.

So. I think some legal eagles should look into whether they have disqualified themselves.

[guillaumeb]

21. Agreed.

That means that the jury already agreed to do nothing.

[2naSalit]

25. Exactly...

on fucking paper. So they should not have the power to vote in the process as they have already proclaimed that they have other plans than what is Constitutionally mandated of them.

That would leave the Senate with an overwhelming majority of Democratic "members present" when it comes to that. I think they had no malice of forethought going on there (meaning someone is leading them down this road) they seem to have screwed themselves unless they were looking to create an "out" for themselves out of desperation.

[guillaumeb]

26. We have two things here.

1) What the GOP should do, and
2) what they will do.

[mr_lebowski]

46. And never the twain shall meet (nt)

[onenote]

30. There is no process for disqualifying a Senator

It's all empty formality. Always has been. Lindsay Graham says he won't read the evidence. Well, there is no requirement that he do so and no way of ascertaining whether any Senator has read, or listened to anything. Indeed, there is no rule that the Senate trial can only be held if 100 percent of the Senators are present. A Senator can skip the trial and still vote. In the Clinton impeachment, the trial began with the submission of written pre-trial statements and then oral opening statements. Then, after some questioning of the prosecution and defense lawyers, but before any witnesses were called (and indeed before it was decided whether any witnesses would be called), motions to dismiss the articles of impeachment were made by Robert Byrd and were voted down on what was essentially a strict party line vote, with every Democrat except Feingold voting to dismiss at that early stage of the proceedings. The actual vote on whether or not to convict did not occur for another two weeks.

So, there is nothing any "legal eagles" can do about the way a Senate impeachment trial is conducted.

[onenote]

11. A bit of history and law.

Trump hasn't been impeached yet so there is no way it is improper for him to meet with members of the Senate. And as for history, as was reported at the time, just a month before the House formally commenced the Clinton impeachment inquiry, Clinton had lunch with several Democratic lawmakers, including Senators Kennedy and Kerry.

[guillaumeb]

14. Understood.

But the GOP members of Congress have made it quite clear that they will do nothing,

[Lochloosa]

17. They said the same thing about Nixon. It changed.

There is no telling what may come out before it goes to the Senate.

[guillaumeb]

20. Which is one reason that the House should continue the investigation. eom

[Lochloosa]

22. They can start another at anytime. There's nothing in the Constitution stopping them.

[struggle4progress]

13. "I'm very concerned! ... Well ... actually ... not all that concerned ..."

[guillaumeb]

15. She is concerned.....

about her re-election campaign for 2020.

[Lochloosa]

16. Impeachment is a political act, not a legal act.

It would be a hard argument to disqualify anyone.

But, this should cost her votes.

[guillaumeb]

19. Lindsay Graham already announced he would not look at any evidence.

And he is a lawyer.

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. Country is over, done. Democracy done, over. rule of law gone.

What we do now is up to us, will we have violence or just roll over and let putin come in and take over...?

[guillaumeb]

31. There was a blue wave in 2018.

We need a blue tidal wave in 2020.

[Eliot Rosewater]

32. Putin will decide if we even have power that day, let alone count votes. I wanna be wrong, I do.

[guillaumeb]

33. If he could, he would have done it in 2018. eom

[Eliot Rosewater]

42. He did, no way Rump won those 4 states

[mr_lebowski]

48. Trump wasn't on the ballot in 2018 ;) (nt)

[Eliot Rosewater]

49. oops , i meant 16...and i misread

[jpak]

24. bye felicia

:yeoldeDUmiddlefingersmilie:

[Eliot Rosewater]

27. the women who will die in illegal abortions alone should haunt her till her miserable life is over

[guillaumeb]

29. That might be possible, if she had any conscience. eom

[Raftergirl]

34. Susan Collins

is going to lose her Senate seat a year from now - regardless of how she votes in the trial. I, for one will be glad she will vote to acquit and end up on the wrong side of history. It will be her legacy.

[Firestorm49]

35. Outrageous. Ethics be damned.

Trying to buy one?

[guillaumeb]

38. Openly trying.

He knows the GOP is his personal battalion of shock troops.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

36. Somebody please refresh me

Did Clinton lunch with Democratic Senators while in the midst of his Impeachment/Trial? And let's imagine what the Republicans would have said/done if he had?

[DFW]

37. If Susan Collins were to attend an execution by firing squad

She would first reassure the condemned prisoner that she was very concerned about gun violence in America.

[guillaumeb]

39. Well said. eom

[UniteFightBack]

40. More quid pro quo....back me or I'll pull the funding. nt

[guillaumeb]

41. True.

The current version of the GOP has no shame.

[JDC]

45. Well I can only hope that Trump promised

To make a campaign rally stop and endorsement for Sen Collins. That way her fate is sealed.

[Orangepeel]

47. I hope her opponent got a picture

the campaign ad writes itself