General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThere has been speculation that Cruz and Hawley---perhaps other senators---may be called as
witnesses in Trump's trial.
If this happens, how can they then "sit on the jury" and vote?
TexasTowelie
(113,032 posts)sweat bullets while being interrogated. However, he should have to testify for over 11 hours to show that he can keep up Hillary.
Besides which, he has the most annoying voice....
Irish_Dem
(48,999 posts)unblock
(52,630 posts)The voters are not meant to be impartial or unfamiliar with the impeached official or their conduct.
It's more like a jobs review panel, which similarly might include people who know the employee or the incident which brought them to that point.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,150 posts)... if tRump wants to dominate headlines and tie it up in knots of litigation, per his usual style.
Or Roberts might say "The Senate can set the rule, by simple majority".
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,767 posts)unblock
(52,630 posts)when it comes to impeachment trials. The senate can basically have a vote at any point to overrule him or to require the trial proceed in a different manner.
RussellCattle
(1,542 posts)LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,610 posts)BobTheSubgenius
(11,592 posts)I like it!
RussellCattle
(1,542 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(116,210 posts)The rules for court trials don't apply, and there's nothing in the Senate's rules that would prohibit this. However, it would appear that objections could be made and submitted to the Presiding Officer. Here are the rules: https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/3_1986SenatesImpeachmentRules.pdf
spooky3
(34,590 posts)so none can be unbiased. I think it will be interesting to see what GQPers do on record.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,150 posts)The colluders and enablers and cheerleaders are definitely biased.
spooky3
(34,590 posts)exclude people who are allegedly biased in this situation, because all of them are directly involved (compared to jurors). Of course if anyone is charged as a perpetrator, I hope the Dems take steps to exclude them.
ancianita
(36,275 posts)As they help build the House case, they might see that a vote to convict might on some level exonerate them as accomplices.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,150 posts)ancianita
(36,275 posts)Wring every bit of compensation out of them first.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)RockRaven
(15,168 posts)So he should be called as a witness too.
As for "how can they..." the Senate makes its own rules, so unless the Senate forbids it, they will do it without consideration of anyone else's thoughts or standards.
Raven123
(5,023 posts)Just roll the tape if you need their testimony. Speaks for itself. Or are you referring to a defense strategy?
Pepsidog
(6,255 posts)oath. Referring to rules for impeachment link in #5.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,592 posts)SWBTATTReg
(22,376 posts)They are going to have a lot of little fires going on I suspect in the Congressional Chambers if they're not too careful...
Evolve Dammit
(16,922 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,861 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,311 posts)While it's not a trial in the usual sense, witness testimony will be under oath. And this time there won't be McConnell blocking the truth from coming out.
I want to hear what Barr, Cippilone, Hawley, Cruz, Biggs, Gosar, Clark, Scott Perry and the rest have to say about their roles.