McConnell prepares for votes on five judicial nominees after impeachment trial wraps up

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., holds a news conference after the impeachment acquittal of President Donald Trump, at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 6:54 AM PT — Thursday, February 6, 2020

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is ready to move forward, following the end of the impeachment trial. Just minutes after the final impeachment vote Wednesday, Sen. McConnell (R-Ky.) filed motions to hold votes on five of the president’s judicial nominees.

The move included Andrew Brasher to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. This shows McConnell and the president remain committed to judicial confirmations, which is something the president reaffirmed during his State of the Union address on Tuesday.

“Working with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, thank you Mitch, and his colleagues in the Senate we have confirmed a record number of 187 new federal judges to uphold our Constitution as written,” stated President Trump. “This includes two brilliant new Supreme Court justices; Neil Gorsuch andBbrett Kavanaugh.”

The Republican-led chamber is expected to begin with the confirmation process of Brasher on February 10th before moving on to four District Court nominees.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla, questions constitutional scholars during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on the constitutional grounds for the impeachment of President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2019. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Meanwhile, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) filed an ethics complaint against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over her actions during Tuesday’s State of the Union address. He filed the charges with the House Ethics Committee Wednesday.

The Florida congressman has argued that Pelosi’s conduct was beneath the dignity of the House of Representatives and was a potential violation of the law. His complaint refers to Pelosi’s actions when she ripped up the president’s speech.

Rep. Gaetz added, the law does not allow the House speaker to destroy official records. He said “nobody is above the law” and urged that Pelsoi be held accountable for her behavior.

RELATED: House Speaker Pelosi under fire for behavior during the president’s State of the Union address

Original Article

Senate votes against witnesses, documents in trial

In this image from video, the final vote total on the motion to subpoena and allow additional witnesses and documents, during the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Friday, Jan. 31, 2020. The motion failed by a vote of 51-49. (Senate Television via AP)

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 4:37 PM PT — Friday, January 31, 2020

The Senate has moved to block additional witnesses and documents in the impeachment trial. Senators voted 51-to-49 on Thursday afternoon, shutting down any attempts to introduce more evidence in the case.

Senators Lisa Murkowski and Lamar Alexander, among a few others, were considered key swing votes in deciding if the trial would be prolonged.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell previously predicted the outcome of the vote and has since weighed in with a new statement.

Tally for vote to subpoena witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.

“There is no need for the Senate to re-open the investigation, which the House Democratic majority chose to conclude and which the Managers themselves continue to describe as ‘overwhelming’ and ‘beyond any doubt.’ Never in Senate history has this body paused an impeachment trial to pursue additional witnesses with unresolved questions of executive privilege that would require protracted litigation. We have no interest in establishing such a new precedent, particularly for individuals whom the House expressly chose not to pursue.” – Mitch McConnell, U.S. Senator

The upper chamber is now in its very final stages of the trial. A vote on the two articles of impeachment is expected next week.

Republicans have signaled they want to get the trial over with as quickly as possible and added it’s very likely senators will vote to acquit President Trump.

President Donald Trump, accompanied by first lady Melania Trump, waves as they walk on the South Lawn as they depart the White House, Friday, Jan. 31, 2020, in Washington. Trump is en route to his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Following the vote, the president reacted to the news on Twitter.

He added, “No matter what you give to the Democrats, in the end, they will never be satisfied.”

He earlier stated that they were “scamming America.”

Democrats reacted to vote by condemning the move as a “grand tragedy.”

“America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to its responsibilities, turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial,” stated Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. “If the president is acquitted with no witnesses, no documents, the acquittal will have no value, because Americans will know that this trial was not a real trial.”

RELATED: McConnell Has Support Needed To Kill Impeachment Witness Vote

Original Article

Reports: Senate Republicans lack votes to block witnesses from testifying in impeachment trial

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., walks to the chamber for President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 29, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 11:48 AM PT — Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Senate Republicans have reached a roadblock in their efforts to stop witnesses from testifying in the impeachment trial. According to reports Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell fears he does not have enough votes to block witnesses, such as former National Security Advisor John Bolton, from taking the stand.

If allowed to testify, Bolton is expected to say the president froze military aid to Ukraine in order to push Ukrainian officials to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden’s business ties. With the 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer believes he can attract votes from the other side of the aisle.

“I hope that we have just four Republicans, all we need is four, who rise to the occasion and say we need to find out the truth,” he stated.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to media at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Jan.28, 2020. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is remaining optimistic that Republicans will not vote in favor of witnesses. However, he suggested that he would will call more than just Bolton. Sen. Graham claimed he would also subpoena Hunter Biden and call him to the stand.

The Senate is expected to vote Friday on whether to call witnesses.

RELATED: President Trump’s defense team set up their final defense in the impeachment trial

Original Article

Impeachment stalls until 2020: Hoyer announces no more House votes this year, as Pelosi quotes Shakespeare

closeSen. Lindsey Graham on impeachment delay: Nancy Pelosi has buyer's remorseVideo

Sen. Lindsey Graham on impeachment delay: Nancy Pelosi has buyer's remorse

Democrats are denying President Trump his day in court because 'they know their case sucks,' says South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., announced Thursday afternoon that there will be no more House votes until Jan. 7, prompting cheers from his Democratic colleagues in the chamber.

The announcement is confirmation that the House will not approve impeachment managers or send the two articles of impeachment to the Senate until the beginning of the new year.

The decision has drawn the ire of Republicans, who control the Senate where the trial against Trump — which includes charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — will occur.

MCCARTHY MOCKS PELOSI FOR SHOOTING DOWN IMPEACHMENT QUESTIONS FROM REPORTERS

"It’s beyond me how the Speaker and Democratic Leader in the Senate think withholding the articles of impeachment and not sending them over gives them leverage," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters on Thursday. "Frankly, I’m not anxious to have the trial… If she [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] thinks her case is so weak she doesn’t want to send it over, throw me into that briar patch."

Articles of impeachment will sit in House until 2020 as lawmakers leave Washington for holiday recessVideo

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., met with McConnell Thursday afternoon and told him that Democrats would like to introduce new witnesses and documents in the next phase of the impeachment process.

“Sen. Schumer asked Sen. McConnell to consider Sen. Schumer’s proposal over the holidays because Sen. Schumer and his caucus believe the witnesses and documents are essential to a fair Senate trial,” Justin Goodman, a spokesman for Schumer, said in a statement.

MCCONNELL: 'IMPASSE' OVER TRUMP IMPEACHMENT TRIAL, DEMS HAVE 'COLD FEET'

McConnell, in a statement, called the conversation between him and Schumer "cordial" but said that the two parties remain at an "impasse," accusing Schumer of continuing to "demand a new and different set of rules" for the trial.

Pelosi sent a letter to House Democrats late Thursday calling the previous days' vote "an important day for the Constitution of the United States and a somber day for America."

Sen. Mitch McConnell addresses Senate's January scheduleVideo

She also thanked her caucus “for the outstanding moral courage that has been demonstrated, not only yesterday but every day of this prayerful process.”

“We have defended democracy for the people: honoring the vision of our founders for a Republic, the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform to defend it, and the aspirations of our children to live freely within it,” she said.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Signaling unity within her party, Pelosi went on to quote the St. Crispin’s Day Speech, from Shakespeare's "Henry V," best known for using the terminology “band of brothers.”

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; for he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother," the quote said in part.

Original Article

Trump blasts Carolyn Maloney after NY Democrat votes for impeachment: ‘Give me back the damn money’

closeTrump blasts Rep. Maloney, D-N.Y., for supporting impeachmentVideo

Trump blasts Rep. Maloney, D-N.Y., for supporting impeachment

Trump blasts Rep. Maloney, D-N.Y., for supporting impeachment

President Trump criticized his former U.S. congresswoman, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., telling the crowd at his Michigan rally he was stunned to see her speak out and vote in support of his impeachment.

Maloney, who represents the part of New York City where Trump Tower sits, on Fifth Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, said Wednesday in her floor remarks that Trump "abused the power of his office for his own personal and political gain at the expense of our national security."

Later, while speaking in a packed arena in Battle Creek, Mich., Trump called Maloney's remarks disappointing and claimed he had in the past helped her in her reelection bids.

LINDSEY GRAHAM ON IMPEACHMENT: 'THE MOB TOOK OVER THE HOUSE

"It's so disappointing," he said. "I see a woman — Carolyn Maloney — she's a longtime 'nothing-much'. She's a congresswoman from Manhattan, [the] East Side."

"I was with her [for] her first race, I helped her. She was always so nice," he added. "I made lots of contributions over the years."

U.S. ​​​​​​​Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, both New York Democrats, address reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Oct. 31, 2019.(Associated Press)

U.S. ​​​​​​​Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, both New York Democrats, address reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Oct. 31, 2019.(Associated Press)

Trump remarked that Maloney, who first won congressional office in 1992 — defeating then-Rep. Bill Green, R-N.Y. — could have considered his past support for her candidacies.

"New York — if you're not in it — it's purely Democrat — especially Manhattan," he said.

"I made lots of contributions — years and years and years … the first person I see: Carolyn Maloney — 'I raise my hand to impeach' — Well give me back the damn money that I've been paying her for so many years."

"I made lots of contributions — years and years and years … the first person I see: Carolyn Maloney — 'I raise my hand to impeach' — Well give me back the damn money that I've been paying her for so many years."

— President Trump

In her remarks on the House floor, Maloney defended her vote in favor of impeaching her former constituent — as the president recently announced he has made his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida his main home address — saying that she takes her role as Oversight Committee chairman seriously and that that role is what led her to think critically about the impeachment inquiry. (Maloney was elected to lead the panel in November, following the death of Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., in October.)

"In an attempt to cover up his abuse of power, he ordered the entire executive branch not to participate in the inquiry, and directed it to defy lawful subpoenas from Congress," she said.

"As chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, I find this obstruction particularly offensive. Even President Nixon accepted Congress' impeachment authority and allowed his aides and advisers to produce the documents to Congress. And President Nixon allowed current and former staff to testify in both the House impeachment and the Senate Watergate investigations…," the New York lawmaker continued.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"By contrast, President Trump — without any legal basis — directed current and former officials not to cooperate with the House's inquiry."

"President Trump's wholesale obstruction of Congress is unprecedented, indisputable, and impeachable," she also said.

Original Article

2020 Dem candidates react to impeachment votes: ‘A sad moment’

closeNancy Pelosi speaks after House votes to impeach President TrumpVideo

Nancy Pelosi speaks after House votes to impeach President Trump

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives on Wednesday night adopted two articles of impeachment against President Trump, advancing them both to the Senate for a future trial, but one notable 2020 Democratic presidential contender voted "present" — rather than yay or nay.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, was the only member of Congress who voted "present", shirking her party's almost unanimous vote to move the impeachment articles forward.

"Throughout my life, whether through serving in the military or in Congress, I’ve always worked to do what is in the best interest of our country. Not what’s best for me politically or what’s best for my political party," Gabbard said in a statement following the vote. "After doing my due diligence in reviewing the 658-page impeachment report, I came to the conclusion that I could not in good conscience vote either yes or no."

Meanwhile, other presidential hopefuls called the votes a "solemn moment" and a "sad day" for the country.

TULSI GABBARD VOTES 'PRESENT' ON TRUMP IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES, BREAKS WITH DEMS

Former vice president Joe Biden, whose family has been the target of Trump's alleged quid pro quo deal with the leader of Ukraine to open an investigation into their family, called the vote a "solemn moment for our country."

"President Trump abused his power, violated his oath of office, and betrayed our nation," Biden said. "This is a solemn moment for our country. But in the United States of America, no one is above the law — not even the President."

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. — who will likely be a juror when the articles move to a Senate trial — said on Twitter: "Today is a sad but necessary day for American democracy. The U.S. House has voted to impeach President Trump, and that is the right thing to do."

"No individual in this country, certainly not the president of the United States, is above the law, is above the Constitution," Sanders continued in a video statement. "Now the process moves to the U.S. Senate where there'll be a trial."

"We cannot have a pathological liar in the White House," he added.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., also called the vote on impeachment a "sad moment for our country."

"The three-month House impeachment process has uncovered alarming evidence that an American president used his official power for personal gain, put our national security at risk, and obstructed the investigation," he said.

"As this process heads to the Senate for trial, I'll uphold my sacred oath to protect & defend the Constitution," Booker added. "This trial demands an impartial & thorough review of the evidence. We must be presented with relevant witnesses & documents, and follow the evidence where it leads."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., echoed the oath of her fellow Democratic colleagues in the Senate, saying she is braced for the inevitable trial.

"Donald Trump has abused our diplomatic relationships and undermined our national security for his own personal, political gain. By voting to impeach him, the House has taken an important step to hold him accountable. I'm ready to fulfill my constitutional duty in the Senate," Warren tweeted.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Mayor Pete Buttigieg, from South Bend, Indiana, also reacted to the House votes.

"Our lawmakers take an oath not to party but to country," he tweeted. "That oath is all the more important in the most difficult of times. Today it required Congress to defend the rule of law, our national security, and our democracy from a president who puts his own interests above America's."

"But this is not just about this moment or this president," he added. "It's about our democracy itself. It's about the era to come after this president leaves office. More than ever, we need leadership to pick up the pieces and move our nation forward."

Original Article

Tulsi Gabbard votes ‘present’ on Trump impeachment articles, breaks with Dems

closeFox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 18Video

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 18

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 18 are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com

Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard declined to vote in favor of two articles of impeachment against President Trump after a contentious debate Wednesday, choosing to vote "present" instead.

The House voted 230 to 197 to impeach Trump for abuse of power, mostly along party lines. Lawmakers also voted to impeach the president on a second article, obstruction of Congress, in a 229-198 vote.

Gabbard, a 2020 presidential hopeful, released a lengthy statement following the votes.

"Throughout my life, whether through serving in the military or in Congress, I’ve always worked to do what is in the best interests of our country. Not what’s best for me politically or what’s best for my political part," Gabbard said. "After doing my due diligence in reviewing the 658-page impeachment report, I came to the conclusion that I could not in good conscience vote either yes or no."

Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii speaks to Democrats gathered at the Spratt Issues Conference in Greenville, S.C., Saturday, Dec. 14, 2019. Gabbard voted "present" on both articles of impeachment against President Trump on Wednesday. (AP Photo/Meg Kinnard)

Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii speaks to Democrats gathered at the Spratt Issues Conference in Greenville, S.C., Saturday, Dec. 14, 2019. Gabbard voted "present" on both articles of impeachment against President Trump on Wednesday. (AP Photo/Meg Kinnard)

She said she believes Trump is guilty of wrongdoing but that she could not vote in favor of impeachment, saying the process must not be a "culmination of a partisan process."

"When I cast my vote in support of the impeachment inquiry nearly three months ago, I said that in order to maintain the integrity of this solemn undertaking, it must not be a partisan endeavor," Gabbard said. "Tragically, that’s what it has been. "

The Hawaiian congresswoman's break from her party makes her the only White House contender to not favor impeachment.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The impeachment now heads to the GOP-controlled Senate, where Trump is expected to be acquitted.

Original Article

Some moderate Democrats expected to defect when full House votes on impeachment: reports

closeFox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 13Video

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 13

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 13 are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com

House leaders reportedly expect to lose as many as a half-dozen votes from moderate Democrats representing swing districts or those that backed President Trump in 2016 when the full House votes on impeachment next week.

Two Democrats — Reps. Collin Peterson of Minnesota and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey — opposed the impeachment rules package in September but multiple officials told the Washington Post on condition of anonymity that they expect more.

REPUBLICANS ERUPT AS NADLER SUDDENLY POSTPONES IMPEACHMENT VOTE NEAR MIDNIGHT

Despite the anticipated defections, Democrats should have more than enough votes when impeachment comes to a full House vote following this week's Judiciary Committee hearings. Including the independent vote of former Republican Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, Democrats can afford to lose 17 votes from their side of the aisle.

No Republicans are expected to vote for impeachment.

Van Drew has already said he plans to vote against impeachment.

"I don't see anything there worthy of actually taking a president out of office," he said, according to USA Today. "I'm concerned about splitting our nation apart."

"I don't see anything there worthy of actually taking a president out of office. I'm concerned about splitting our nation apart."

— U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J.

U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J.

U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J.

Rep. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., said she plans to take the weekend to think over her vote.

"I just need to like, get a breath. Take a breath. It’s a serious decision for me," she said, according to Reuters.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday she won’t pressure moderates to vote for impeachment.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., walks to attend a health care event at the Capitol in Washington, Dec. 11, 2019. (Associated Press)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., walks to attend a health care event at the Capitol in Washington, Dec. 11, 2019. (Associated Press)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"I have no message to them. We are not whipping this legislation, nor would we ever with something like this," Pelosi told reporters, according to The Hill. "They'll make their own decisions. I don't say anything to them."

Democrats' two articles of impeachment against Trump are for abuse of power and obstructing Congress.

After a marathon session Thursday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., delayed a vote on the articles until Friday morning.

Original Article

Reporter’s Notebook: House votes on impeachment articles would be monumental decisions

closePelosi requests House Democrats to proceed with articles of impeachment against TrumpVideo

Pelosi requests House Democrats to proceed with articles of impeachment against Trump

Democrats in House Judiciary Committee work through the weekend ahead of impeachment hearing; David Spunt reports.

CAPITOL HILL – There are important roll call votes on Capitol Hill — but votes on articles of impeachment against President Trump would be monumental.

Think about votes cast in 2009 and and 2010 for or against ObamaCare. A failed effort to undo ObamaCare in 2017. Votes in 2008 to salvage the economy with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Votes last Congress on tax reform. Various votes to fund the government and hike the debt ceiling. And, in the Senate, votes to confirm Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

News organizations and political firms have traved major votes on the floors of the House and Senate each year. Some of those votes may define a career. Look at the nay vote cast by the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., to end Republican efforts to unwind ObamaCare. Separately, voters in Maine and Colorado respectively took note of the votes by Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Cory Gardner to confirm Kavanaugh last fall. That vote is sure to resonate in the reelection bids for Collins and Gardner next year.

All of those votes have been major, reverberating throughout a given Congress – and even for decades to come. Despite multiple efforts to gut ObamaCare, it has remained the law of the land. Still, “aye” ballots for ObamaCare proved to help end the congressional careers of many House and Senate Democrats. Republicans weaponized that vote against those Democrats. Some paid with their political lives in 2010 and beyond. Lots of House Republicans lost the House for the same reason last year because of their votes for the tax bill and for trying to repeal ObamaCare.

We won’t know if the votes by Collins and Gardner for Kavanaugh will sway the outcomes of their Senate contests next year. But, barring illness, the 54-year-old Kavanaugh could serve on the high court for decades. The decisions by Collins and Gardner to confirm Kavanaugh are likely to echo in American jurisprudence for years.

Eric Shawn: President Trump's pending impeachment trialVideo

These are all high-profile roll call votes, as weighty as can be. But, there is yet one more, hyper-elite classification of House and Senate votes, more consequential than the rest. These are votes to go to war and to impeach a president.

These momentous votes have filtered through the decades. Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., is still known as the only House member to oppose the war resolution following Sept. 11, 2001. The late Rep. Jeannette Rankin, R-Mont., was the first woman ever elected to Congress, but in addition to her trailblazing for women, historians have recalled her votes opposing U.S. involvement in World War I and World War II.

“I cannot vote for war,” said Rankin when she opposed the U.S. declaring war against Germany in World War I. Rankin’s words about war were emblazoned on the base of her statue in the U.S. Capitol Visitor’s Center. It’s one of two statues from Montana in the official congressional collection.

Other lawmakers voted against the U.S. entering World War I. But, Rankin was the only member of either body to vote “nay” after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Many prominent members, including future Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, R-Ill., then a congressman, tried to persuade Rankin to vote “aye” so the tally would be unanimous. But, Rankin resisted. Her position was so unpopular that she abstained from voting on future war declarations against Germany and Italy. Her political career ended soon afterwards.

This brings us to present day.

New questions over phone records in House Democrats' impeachment reportVideo

NUNES BLASTS SCHIFF FOR 'BLATANT DISREGARD' OF IMPEACHMENT RULES

The House Judiciary Committee is likely to entertain three to five articles of impeachment for Trump. The House would not simply throw a broad resolution on the floor with members voting up or down to impeach. These articles would be honed and massaged, narrow and concrete. Members would focus on what they accused the president of doing, such as an indictment. It’s then up to the Judiciary Committee to actually approve the articles and send them to the House floor. The House must then vote to adopt or reject those articles.

Without question, these votes on articles of impeachment would be the most critical ballots cast in the 116th Congress. They could be the cardinal votes many lawmakers would make during their congressional tenures. That said, 55 House members who voted on the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton in 1998 have remained in the House.

In 1974, the House Judiciary Committee considered five articles of impeachment and approved three for then-President Richard Nixon. Nixon resigned before the articles went to the House floor. In 1998, the Judiciary Committee prepared four articles of impeachment but the full House okayed only two of them.

Details of the articles would paramount, so members of Congress from both parties would want to evaluate the articles — study them, ponder them, and then, with a deep sigh, decide how to vote.

We always hear an array of TV commercials from upstarts and political neophytes just before each congressional election, boasting about how if you elect them, they’ll head to Washington and have the courage “to take the tough votes.”

Well, congratulations, members of the 116th Congress. You won the lottery.

Pelosi only seems to invoke religion when she attacks Trump -- is that being a good Catholic?Video

Americans are likely to remember how all current 431 members of the House voted, yea or nay, on each article of impeachment.

Think of the vulnerable, freshmen Democrats who helped propel their party to the majority in 2018, representing districts Trump won in 2016. There are 31 such Democrats. Look closely at how freshmen Democrats like Reps. Kendra Horn of Oklahoma, Anthony Brindisi of New York and Joe Cunningham of South Carolina vote.

Republicans wouldn’t be out of the woods yet, either. Consider the challenges of an impeachment vote for swing-district Republicans including Reps. Fred Upton of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Don Bacon of Nebraska.

Potential articles of impeachment have centered on “bribery” — specifically mentioned in Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution — abuse of power, contempt of Congress and obstruction of justice. All such potential articles would be fissionable enough to incinerate many a political career if a lawmaker were to vote the wrong way.

But, one potential article of impeachment would be practically thermonuclear: treason.

Again, Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution mentions “treason” as a defined transgression worthy of impeachment. One could see how House Democrats might try to make a case for treason with President Trump.

The House essentially accused Sen. William Blount of Tennessee of treason in the republic’s first impeachment in 1797. The House argued Blount covertly worked with Britain to acquire territory in the south. The House impeached Federal Judge West Hughes Humphreys in 1862 for supporting the Confederacy. No other House impeachments have ever wandered into treason as possible grounds for impeachment.

This speaks to why the House may impeach President Trump on some articles and not others. That’s why members are so curious to learn what the articles may be and decide how to vote on each individual.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

It’s just a simple question, right? Binary. Yea or nay? Members do this all day long.

But, votes on the impeachment of Trump are likely to be the most momentous of a lawmaker’s career. And, the decisions lawmakers make will pulsate through the American experience like no other ballot they cast before.

Original Article