I am having trouble understanding Speaker Pelosi's point of view in delaying transmission of the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. It has been well established that the process drawing Articles of Impeachment is the exclusive province of the House of Representatives. This means that the house committees (usually the Judiciary Committee but in this case mostly the House Intelligence Committee) investigate the allegations and call witnesses as they see fit. It would seem reasonable that the President should have had an opportunity to be represented by counsel in these hearings and to have the opportunity to confront his accusers and cross-examine them - that would be basic Due Process - which was notably absent in the House proceedings. And then, Articles of Impeachment having been drawn and voted on by the House of Representatives, the Speaker is required to assign the task to managers of her choice to present the case for the House before the Senate and to send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for trial.
The Judiciary Committee has drawn up two Articles of Impeachment - one alleging that President Trump has abused the power of his office in the Ukraine telephone conversation affair. And two, that President Trump has obstructed Congress in that he has, after not invoking executive privilege in the entire Mueller investigation and producing hundreds of thousands of documents and permitting endless witnesses to include his own white house counsel to testify endlessly, now obstructed congress by claiming executive privilege in the most recent investigation. This so-called obstruction of Congress is despite the fact that the witnesses and documents sought were not subpoenaed and proper relief was not sought in the Courts which should be the initial step in challenging the actions of the President, who represents a co-equal branch of our government.
I am not going to elaborate endlessly on my view of the factual basis of the two Articles. But just a few comments - I believe it is a frame-up job and I am shocked and appalled. If either of these Articles passes the Senate, then either party would be able to impeach any future President without regard to facts or requirement of bipartisan support. I did not approve of the attempt to impeach President Clinton and I certainly do not believe that this witch hunt of President Trump meets any of my understanding of the requirements for impeachment. But if any of my readers wish to read the official text of the Articles of Impeachment as approved by the majority of the House (without a single Republican vote), I have a copy available to you (approximately nine pages) at Articles of Impeachment.
But I do not understand why the Speaker of the House thinks she can call any additional new witnesses in the Senate. Her case is complete or she should not have put it to a vote. She has no right to expect the Senate to do her job for her. Her managers should come to the Senate and present their case summarizing their witness testimony that led the House to draw Articles of Impeachment. Then the President should have the opportunity to present his case - and if anyone should be able to call new witnesses it may be the President because he was not permitted to present witnesses in the House star chamber committee hearings. The Senate has the right to determine if they need to hear additional witness testimony from the witnesses who have already been called before the Intelligence or Judiciary Committees but, in my view, that is all. Their case is complete at this point and they should not be able to add new witnesses that they have not called as a part of their investigation before the House committees.
I realize that Impeachment is a political process but it is also a legal process with serious consequences that will not only Impeach the President, removing him from office if convicted in the Senate but also will nullify the almost sixty-three million votes of the citizens who properly elected President Trump. I believe that any official, to include the President, who is subjected to impeachment in the House and a trial in the Senate should be entitled to the presumption of innocence, should expect due process of law under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments and should expect the Federal Rules of Evidence to be applied to the process. The attempted removal of a President in this country should follow rules of law and fundamental fairness and, whatever you may think about President Trump as an individual, he is entitled to a fair hearing and the chance to defend himself.
I will be glad to answer any questions in the comments on the Articles of Impeachment if anybody wants to discuss the actual facts of the case as put forth by the House of Representatives.