Here-Here!The role of the House is as that of a Grand Jury.
They investigate, define where crime may be exist, and present articles of indictment. The evidence for the trial, of one occurs, must be evident in the presentation. Only if a trial is actually appropriate does anything proceed, and it is at this point where that trial can only proceed if the indictment and evidence presented meets the presiding justice's standard for trial. A clear and obvious crime must be evident.
There is no vote necessary, just some guts residing in the seat of Justice John Roberts. What he does defines whether we live under the rule of law or the rule of personal opinion. I have very little faith in that man, but I would love to be proven incorrect.
In this case it is not clear that any crime occurred; there are just accusations and vague definitions that conform only to the wild imaginations of delusional bigots.
If there is to be a trial, no useful purpose can be served by parading alleged witnesses. Hearsay is not admissible in a Court of Law.
Nothing need be proved by the Senate. The burden of that proof is on the House, and that proof must be contained in the indictment. And that has already been submitted, and is lacking of anything other than hearsay and innuendo.
Some are saying that this all is very entertaining.
No.
This is despicable and tragic. It contains within itself the seed of a dying Republic, and a trammeled Constitution. This is the act of treason cloaked in sanctimonious hypocrisy.
Someone should pay; many someones. Pay hard.
Greg
Far and Wide, and from the ROOFTOPS.
