REASON AND JUSTICE vs THE DEMAGOGUE AND FASCISM. PART 2.

Continued from part 1...

The following is taken from the STANDING RULES AND PROCEDURES OF THE U.S. SENATE. 
This deals specifically with IMPEACHMENT OF THE U.S. PRESIDENT.

"...And the Presiding Officer on the trial may rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate, unless some member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote be taken thereon, in which case it shall be submitted to the Senate for decision without debate; or he may at his option, in the first instance, submit any such question to a vote of the members of the Senate. Upon all such questions the vote shall be taken in accordance with the Standing Rules of the Senate." 

PRESIDING OFFICER ON THE TRIAL- In the case of the U.S. PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDING OFFICER IS THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT. In this case it is JOHN ROBERTS.

In the above,you can also read the following; "...And the Presiding Officer on the trial may rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate..."

Now, if you were to stop here, CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS job, as the PRESIDING JUDGE, is pretty much the same as in any other COURTROOM.

AH, NO.

"...unless some member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote be taken thereon, in which case it shall be submitted to the Senate for decision without debate; or he may at his option, in the first instance, submit any such question to a vote of the members of the Senate. Upon all such questions the vote shall be taken in accordance with the Standing Rules of the Senate." 

What does all this mean? That, in what could be the most important TRIAL THAT MOST AMERICANS WILL EVER SEE IN THEIR LIFETIME, EVIDENCE CAN, AND IN THIS CASE QUITE PROBABLY WILL BE, ADMITTED BY...

...MAJORITY RULE. YOU SEE, IF A SENATOR DISAGREES WITH JUSTICE ROBERTS DECISION, HE CAN 
CALL FOR A VOTE, WITH NO DEBATE, WITH THE MAJORITY DECIDING ON WHETHER OR NOT THE DECISION SHOULD BE ADOPTED.

Since the REPUBLICAN PARTY HOLDS A Majority in the Senate, and their sycophantic worship of DONALD TRUMP seems to bind them to protecting him, NO MATTER WHAT, the willingness to sell out the country they took an oath to serve, does not seem to bother many GOP MEMBERS. So, it will be interesting to see how many times his decisions will be overruled.

NOW, COULD THIS IDIOTIC RULE, (AND I DO MEAN THAT LITERALLY), BE CHALLENGED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL? Yes, but that would require SENATE DEMOCRATS TO ACTUALLY STAND UP TO THE SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, (WHO NOW SETS POLICY FOR THE OTHER 49 STATES), BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A MORAL AND INTELLECTUAL BACKBONE. IF THEY WERE WILLING TO LET A FRAUDULENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION GO BY WITHOUT SAYING A WORD, WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL HAPPEN NOW?

GOOD TIMES...GOOD TIMES.