The Democrats have been treating its avalanche of hear-say that has engulfed the House as if the Representatives were just members of a grand-jury. Sit still and listen to Adam Schiff present evidence (sic) to indict. The flaw in this logic is that a vote to impeach is not a cursory finding to send to the Senate but a real trial and finding of fact. Evidence was so strong with Nixon that resignation occurred before the trial finished. Clinton had committed crimes that eventually cost him his law license. Treating the Congress like a grand-jury; results in an outcome that is so well known that it joked about in the phrase “you can get a grand-jury to indict a ham sandwich.” Congress will soon be voting on whether Donald J Trump is a ham, not whether he committed an impeachable crime. Pelosi et al. are doing this in order to influence the next election, which ironically is what they are charging the President.
The Senate does not hold a new trial; that is the House of Representatives’ job to do before they vote for impeachment. The Senate is like an appellate court reviewing a lower court’s decision. Minority leader Chuck Schumer recognizes the thinness of the impeachment articles and the lack of a proper trial. That is why he wants to broaden the Senate’s roll. He wants to call new witnesses and hold another trial because Schiff and Nadler fouled up the first trial and morphed it into a process similar to a grand jury.. However, the senate’s roll is appellate. The Senate needs to determine whether the house procedures were fair and whether the findings of the house warrant removal from office based on the case presented by the house. The Senate majority seems to think that the House has not held a trial nor made a case