Moscow Mitch: His Week is Getting Off to a Very Bad Start!

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I'll believe that when it happens.

Congresscriminal Pelosi has a very clear motive for holding them back, and little motive to do otherwise. She surely knows damn well what will happen if they reach the Senate, and a proper trial follows, and it will not be good for her nor any of her accomplices.

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

The real problem. Even Republicans know Trump is guilty... they just can't sweep it under the rug.

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

Yeah, the Dems really fucked that up, eh?

How did the Democrats "fuck up"?

The antics were all provided by the Republican Committee members whose over the top anger became tedious and at the same time comical. Not one defended the president, they attack the process but never once did anyone of them offer anything exculpatory.

How do defend against charges that make no sense and are not illegal?

The second article is so laughable as to be pathetic. Where is this "contempt of Congress" written in any law? It isn't! The system of checks and balances built into our Constitution does not give Congress any supremacy over the Executive branch when it comes to disagreements between the two branches. The Judicial Branch decides who wins, and the Democraps ignored that option. If the Chief Justice has any balls, he will throw that out day one.

Oh, so to direct someone to ignore a subpoena to testify under oath, or to refuse to release documents, is not a crime?

If these behaviors were to have occurred before a Grand Jury, each member given immunity to appear or to provide documents would be taken to jail until they acquiesce. The only reason a Grand Jury was not called is because the Attorney General was hand picked by the Defendant, and would never have the integrity to recuse himself.

It is called "Executive Privilege". Perhaps you have heard of it? Even most libtards know what it means.

 

[JoeB131]

Trump refused to let witnesses testify...

And so did Democrats.

Um, nope. Nobody who could have cleared Trump was volunteering to speak. They were all claiming executive privilege.

Is Ukrainian corruption unrelated to Trump's call?
Is the trigger to the investigation, the "whistleblower", unrelated to the investigation?

yes, and yes.

It wasn't about Ukrainian corruption, it was about smearing Joe Biden. Who called him out on it is irrelevant.

 

[JoeB131]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

 

[hadit]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

The stage was set a long time ago. Any result other than conviction is automatically assumed to be a cover up. So what do you think is still covered up that the House failed to find, and don't you think you'd better let Pelosi know you have evidence she needs?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trump refused to let witnesses testify...

And so did Democrats.

Um, nope. Nobody who could have cleared Trump was volunteering to speak. They were all claiming executive privilege.

Is Ukrainian corruption unrelated to Trump's call?
Is the trigger to the investigation, the "whistleblower", unrelated to the investigation?

yes, and yes.

It wasn't about Ukrainian corruption, it was about smearing Joe Biden. Who called him out on it is irrelevant.

Um, nope.

Dems let every Republican witness testify? Link?

yes, and yes.

Then the Dems should have let the whistleblower testify. And Hunter Biden.
What were they afraid of?

Who called him out on it is irrelevant.

So let Trump's accuser testify.

 

[hadit]

Trump refused to let witnesses testify...

And so did Democrats.

Um, nope. Nobody who could have cleared Trump was volunteering to speak. They were all claiming executive privilege.

Is Ukrainian corruption unrelated to Trump's call?
Is the trigger to the investigation, the "whistleblower", unrelated to the investigation?

yes, and yes.

It wasn't about Ukrainian corruption, it was about smearing Joe Biden. Who called him out on it is irrelevant.

Um, nope.

Dems let every Republican witness testify? Link?

yes, and yes.

Then the Dems should have let the whistleblower testify. And Hunter Biden.
What were they afraid of?

Who called him out on it is irrelevant.

So let Trump's accuser testify.

And since the WB wasn't a first hand witness, let's find out who thought they were authorized to divulge the contents of a phone call between the president and a foreign head of state without the president's approval.

 

[Rye Catcher]

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

The real problem. Even Republicans know Trump is guilty... they just can't sweep it under the rug.

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

Yeah, the Dems really fucked that up, eh?

How did the Democrats "fuck up"?

The antics were all provided by the Republican Committee members whose over the top anger became tedious and at the same time comical. Not one defended the president, they attack the process but never once did anyone of them offer anything exculpatory.

How do defend against charges that make no sense and are not illegal?

The second article is so laughable as to be pathetic. Where is this "contempt of Congress" written in any law? It isn't! The system of checks and balances built into our Constitution does not give Congress any supremacy over the Executive branch when it comes to disagreements between the two branches. The Judicial Branch decides who wins, and the Democraps ignored that option. If the Chief Justice has any balls, he will throw that out day one.

Oh, so to direct someone to ignore a subpoena to testify under oath, or to refuse to release documents, is not a crime?

If these behaviors were to have occurred before a Grand Jury, each member given immunity to appear or to provide documents would be taken to jail until they acquiesce. The only reason a Grand Jury was not called is because the Attorney General was hand picked by the Defendant, and would never have the integrity to recuse himself.

It is called "Executive Privilege". Perhaps you have heard of it? Even most libtards know what it means.

It appears you don't understand that EP is not sacrosanct:

Executive privilege - Wikipedia

 

[westwall]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

Really?
Watchdog Says Trump Administration Broke Law in Withholding Ukraine Aid

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration violated the law in withholding security assistance aid to Ukraine, a nonpartisan federal watchdog agency said on Thursday, weighing in on a decision by President Trump that is at the heart of the impeachment case against him.

The Government Accountability Office said the White House’s Office of Management and Budget violated the Impoundment Control Act when it withheld nearly $400 million for “a policy reason,” even though the funds had been allocated by Congress. The decision was directed by the president himself, and during the House impeachment inquiry, administration officials testified that they had raised concerns about its legality to no avail.

 

[westwall]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

Really?
Watchdog Says Trump Administration Broke Law in Withholding Ukraine Aid

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration violated the law in withholding security assistance aid to Ukraine, a nonpartisan federal watchdog agency said on Thursday, weighing in on a decision by President Trump that is at the heart of the impeachment case against him.

The Government Accountability Office said the White House’s Office of Management and Budget violated the Impoundment Control Act when it withheld nearly $400 million for “a policy reason,” even though the funds had been allocated by Congress. The decision was directed by the president himself, and during the House impeachment inquiry, administration officials testified that they had raised concerns about its legality to no avail.

Wow, one whole group out of dozens. Your own link says the OMB believes differently.

Once again, instead of evidence of wrongdoing. you present opinion.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, yesterday the dam broke when Parnas had his interview with Rachel Maddow. What's even funnier is the paper trail that is being uncovered, it leads directly back to Trump.

 

[westwall]

Well, yesterday the dam broke when Parnas had his interview with Rachel Maddow. What's even funnier is the paper trail that is being uncovered, it leads directly back to Trump.

Suuuuuure it is. You would think that after 3 years of being lied to by the MSM you would have figured it out. But no, back on the Clueless Express you go.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

The GOA just announced the crime. What they are looking at is the intent. And the intent is even worse. So don't go on and on about no crime. There is enough there to at least call for impeachment even if it doesn't result in removal from office.

 

[westwall]

hat's not how the Constitution reads. The Senate can run the trial any way they want to.

Sure they could... but engaging in a cover up doesn't really help. It will obviously be a cover up.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

The GOA just announced the crime. What they are looking at is the intent. And the intent is even worse. So don't go on and on about no crime. There is enough there to at least call for impeachment even if it doesn't result in removal from office.

Yeah, the GAO has a history of being wrong. Many, many times their opinions have been proven wrong in Court.

This is another in the long line of them being in error.

 

[elongobardi]

First we have this:

Mitch McConnell hit with formal ethics complaint over Trump impeachment: Statements ‘directly contradict his oath of impartiality’

The advocacy group Public Citizen on Monday filed a formal ethics complaint against Senate Majority Mitch McConnell, accusing the powerful Republican of betraying his oath of office by signaling overt bias in favor of President Donald Trump even before his looming impeachment trial begins.

And then:

McConnell afraid GOP doesn’t have enough votes to dismiss impeachment charges against Trump

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was once confident he could get rid of the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. As more information becomes available, however, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

A CNN report explained Monday that despite Trump’s urging, forcing senators to vote against a fair trial would put Republicans up for reelection in danger of losing their seats.

Turtle McConnel is circling the drain and seems to be headed for a legacy as the worst and most partisan majority leader in the history of the Senate

If McConnell was smart he’d ensure a fair and comprehensive trial be conducted.

Why? The House did nothing of the sort and they still couldn't come up with a crime.

Like the Demtards did in The House.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yarddog]

I'll believe that when it happens.

Congresscriminal Pelosi has a very clear motive for holding them back, and little motive to do otherwise. She surely knows damn well what will happen if they reach the Senate, and a proper trial follows, and it will not be good for her nor any of her accomplices.

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

The real problem. Even Republicans know Trump is guilty... they just can't sweep it under the rug.

A proper trial is calling witnesses and finding out what happened.

Yeah, the Dems really fucked that up, eh?

How did the Democrats "fuck up"?

The antics were all provided by the Republican Committee members whose over the top anger became tedious and at the same time comical. Not one defended the president, they attack the process but never once did anyone of them offer anything exculpatory.

How do defend against charges that make no sense and are not illegal?

The second article is so laughable as to be pathetic. Where is this "contempt of Congress" written in any law? It isn't! The system of checks and balances built into our Constitution does not give Congress any supremacy over the Executive branch when it comes to disagreements between the two branches. The Judicial Branch decides who wins, and the Democraps ignored that option. If the Chief Justice has any balls, he will throw that out day one.

Oh, so to direct someone to ignore a subpoena to testify under oath, or to refuse to release documents, is not a crime?

If these behaviors were to have occurred before a Grand Jury, each member given immunity to appear or to provide documents would be taken to jail until they acquiesce. The only reason a Grand Jury was not called is because the Attorney General was hand picked by the Defendant, and would never have the integrity to recuse himself.

A subpoena from the Court? or from some members of the House? its a big difference. Trump has a right to challenge and he did just that. It was the Democrats who refused to take it to the court and call it a crime/obstruction, so they are the ones abusing their power here.

 

[Yarddog]

First we have this:

Mitch McConnell hit with formal ethics complaint over Trump impeachment: Statements ‘directly contradict his oath of impartiality’

The advocacy group Public Citizen on Monday filed a formal ethics complaint against Senate Majority Mitch McConnell, accusing the powerful Republican of betraying his oath of office by signaling overt bias in favor of President Donald Trump even before his looming impeachment trial begins.

And then:

McConnell afraid GOP doesn’t have enough votes to dismiss impeachment charges against Trump

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was once confident he could get rid of the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. As more information becomes available, however, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

A CNN report explained Monday that despite Trump’s urging, forcing senators to vote against a fair trial would put Republicans up for reelection in danger of losing their seats.

Turtle McConnel is circling the drain and seems to be headed for a legacy as the worst and most partisan majority leader in the history of the Senate

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

You need to lose the Moscow Mitch moniker you know? if your looking for a road that leads to Moscow, no one has traveled down that road more than the Democrats. And they have never paid the price for their sins.

 

[BULLDOG]

If McConnell was smart he’d ensure a fair and comprehensive trial be conducted.

Why? The House did nothing of the sort and they still couldn't come up with a crime.

It seems that you don’t understand much about impeachment


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems that you don’t understand much about impeachment

Impeachment in the House is a political, not a criminal, proceeding.

Acquittal in the Senate will be a political, not a criminal, proceeding.

Impeachment is not criminal and should not be political. It is constitutional . It is a remedy for an abuse of power that undermines the constitution and endangers the democracy. That has clearly happened here

And it is obvious to anyone with a functional brain that he hasn't abused his power.

Obummer though, we have clear evidence that he most certainly did.

Serious question here. What is the longest you have ever gone without posting a "But Hillary" or "But Obama", or a "But Somebody" remark? A few minutes? An hour? A couple of hours? A day? The subject of this thread is turtle boy's bad week. Your "But Obama" crap is off subject. Try to keep up.

 

[westwall]

Why? The House did nothing of the sort and they still couldn't come up with a crime.

It seems that you don’t understand much about impeachment


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems that you don’t understand much about impeachment

Impeachment in the House is a political, not a criminal, proceeding.

Acquittal in the Senate will be a political, not a criminal, proceeding.

Impeachment is not criminal and should not be political. It is constitutional . It is a remedy for an abuse of power that undermines the constitution and endangers the democracy. That has clearly happened here

And it is obvious to anyone with a functional brain that he hasn't abused his power.

Obummer though, we have clear evidence that he most certainly did.

Serious question here. What is the longest you have ever gone without posting a "But Hillary" or "But Obama", or a "But Somebody" remark? A few minutes? An hour? A couple of hours? A day? The subject of this thread is turtle boy's bad week. Your "But Obama" crap is off subject. Try to keep up.

Who cares. What was good for them, is good for everyone.

 

[JoeB131]

The stage was set a long time ago. Any result other than conviction is automatically assumed to be a cover up. So what do you think is still covered up that the House failed to find, and don't you think you'd better let Pelosi know you have evidence she needs?

Oh, the house made a slam dunk case, even with the witnesses they had.... But Trump is trying to hide people who might shed more light on this.

Innocent people call witnesses to confirm their innocence. Guilty people try to hide witnesses.

What's funny is you morons claiming a coverup, but you could find no crime. So the dems had to pull nonsense out of their asses.

Again, the same people who claimed a blow job was an impeachable offense think that trying to use government funds to rig an election is just fine.