At the time, White House lawyers were focused on the delay issue when they should have been focused on her conditions for the conduct of any Senate trial. Such conditions were clearly beyond her powers under the Constitution once the impeachment process in the House was concluded.
On Monday of this week (January 6, 2020), the Washington Times reported that Senate Leader Mitch McConnell was co-sponsoring a resolution to do as I predicted. It will dismiss the Articles for Lack of Prosecution.
Although, as pointed out, timeliness was not as important as the usurpation of power, the resolution should be approved even if Pelosi relents and submits the Articles belatedly. Again this is because she has already sabotaged a legitimate impeachment process.
In a later article in the Washington Post (Opinion), it was urged that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the court as a whole might weigh in on the proposed resolution. But the Constitution makes clear that its only role in the impeachment process is to “preside.” It has no authority to act as an appeals court as well.
That would raise more problematic issues of appellate bias given the participation of its chief justice at the trial level. Nowhere in the Constitution does it authorize the Chief Justice or the Supreme Court to interfere with the Senate’s exclusive authority to vote on any removal of the president.
The decision in Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 (1803) regarding Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution is unavailing because the operative provision here is a direct prohibition on any decisional substitution. Yes folks, this is getting real interesting. Stayed tunes to see if it does not all go as I am predicting again today.
Supreme Court interference also raises the bias issues I presented in a motion for disqualification of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in August, 2016. It was accepted but never ruled upon, see the on-line docket record at Koziol v United States District Court, 15-1519 (2016). It was based on Ginsburg’s news conferences from chambers condemning Donald Trump as a private citizen and candidate prior to his election as president.
I discussed the motion with Trump’s attorney at the time, Michael Cohen. Prior to the election, he asked me to keep him informed. After the election he informed me that he had no time for my case. Now in prison, Mike has lots of free time.
I filed the motion to preserve my right to impartiality in a case then being considered by the Supreme Court. It involved pro-Trump website postings that were impaired by a family court gag order removed after I challenged it in New York Supreme Court.
How ironic, as predicted then, that her extra-judicial conduct, condemned even by the liberal media, might come back to haunt her in what may be the most publicized vote during her long tenure on the bench. At the very least, it can be seen how the impeachment weapon exploited by Pelosi has led to all kinds of ominous repercussions to the people being served.
Trump’s acts of war in the Middle East were likely intended to distract from this impeachment process much like Nixon and Bill Clinton tried to do. It might now lead America from peace time not seen in a long while to full scale war on a potentially global scale. Yes, it’s real scary politics my friends, and regardless of your views or sides, the divisiveness must stop lest we all regret our apathy when it’s too late.