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
(112,204 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
(47,107 posts)unblock
(52,241 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
(49,002 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
(33,347 posts)unblock
(52,241 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
(1,535 posts)LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,586 posts)BobTheSubgenius
(11,563 posts)I like it!
RussellCattle
(1,535 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,706 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
(34,456 posts)so none can be unbiased. I think it will be interesting to see what GQPers do on record.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)The colluders and enablers and cheerleaders are definitely biased.
spooky3
(34,456 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
(36,058 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
(49,002 posts)ancianita
(36,058 posts)Wring every bit of compensation out of them first.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)RockRaven
(14,967 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
(4,844 posts)Just roll the tape if you need their testimony. Speaks for itself. Or are you referring to a defense strategy?
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)oath. Referring to rules for impeachment link in #5.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,563 posts)SWBTATTReg
(22,129 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
(16,733 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,660 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,286 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.