Impeachment Trial... Questions phase

[DJT for Life]

Let me add something for the thread, as a whole.

This Philbin for the President's legal team, is the most effective speaker and very believable.
I didn't particularly care for him during the presentation stage, but he fields questions in
a very accurate and organized manner. He has the most credibility of anybody answering
questions.

 

[bripat9643]

Best Line of the day came from Hakeem Bin What’s His Name:

When asked why The House did not challenge The President on his assertions of Executive Privilege!

“We didn’t challenge executive privilege because the President never exerted executive privilege!”

LMAO!

These people are both stupid, dishonest, desperate and despicable!

Then this Hitler Demings ***** tries to explain why Obama made Ukraine give up its nuclear arsenal right before Obama gave Putin a wink and a nod to take over Crimea and invade Ukraine.

They didn't, dope. Trump's legal team made up excuses for them not to comply with subpoenas. EP was not one of them.

You mean excuses like the constitution you hopeless, lame brained moron?

That's exactly what he means.

 

[bripat9643]

Best Line of the day came from Hakeem Bin What’s His Name:

When asked why The House did not challenge The President on his assertions of Executive Privilege!

“We didn’t challenge executive privilege because the President never exerted executive privilege!”

LMAO!

These people are both stupid, dishonest, desperate and despicable!

Then this Hitler Demings ***** tries to explain why Obama made Ukraine give up its nuclear arsenal right before Obama gave Putin a wink and a nod to take over Crimea and invade Ukraine.

They didn't, dope. Trump's legal team made up excuses for them not to comply with subpoenas. EP was not one of them.

"Making excuses" means showing the reason the subpoenas weren't legal. Laws are just "excuses" if they get in the way of the Dim agenda.

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

Yes there is, turd. I have already quoted it

Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;​

That is not a law, dope.

From your link:
"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

You left this part out, moron:

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;
​

Why should anyone believe the first part is binding if the second part isn't?

 

[The Original Tree]

I have eaten a lot of chili over the last week and every time The Loathsome House Managers get up to speak I am able to fart at Will As they approach The Mic.

Makes watching this bearable.

Your case is circling the toilet.

Are you talking about Bolton being asked to testify? Are you following along, do you want us to slow it down for you?

You're confused in your own conversation, dope.

Democrats asked for Bolton as a witness
His lawyer said I will sue you

democrats didn’t follow up

WHOS FAULT IS THAT?

It was a strategy... months in court or pursue in the senate. Bolton went from suing to willing to comply. Looking like a smart move at this point. Wouldn’t you agree?

he would have talked earlier ,, to late now

You’re not following... he was asked to talk earlier and he said he would sue... he is now offering to comply. Get it?

what are you scared of... he’s a conservative do you really think he will lie to the senate and risk his freedom for the opposite party? Or are you scared he will tell the truth?

 

[The Original Tree]

Winner Chicken Dinner!

They didn't, dope. Trump's legal team made up excuses for them not to comply with subpoenas. EP was not one of them.

"Making excuses" means showing the reason the subpoenas weren't legal. Laws are just "excuses" if they get in the way of the Dim agenda.

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

Yes there is, turd. I have already quoted it

Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;​

That is not a law, dope.

From your link:
"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

You left this part out, moron:

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;
​

Why should anyone believe the first part is binding if the second part isn't?

 

[bripat9643]

Graham/Cruz - good question... would obama have the right to investigate Mitts son if he had evidence that he was engaged in corruption in Russia.

Schiff - good answer... the DOJ should control and conduct that investigation through their normal process. The president shouldn’t engage in pushing investigations into political rivals.

So if you file to run for office, that makes you immune from investigation?

You're kidding, right?

 

[bripat9643]

Best Line of the day came from Hakeem Bin What’s His Name:

When asked why The House did not challenge The President on his assertions of Executive Privilege!

“We didn’t challenge executive privilege because the President never exerted executive privilege!”

LMAO!

These people are both stupid, dishonest, desperate and despicable!

Then this Hitler Demings ***** tries to explain why Obama made Ukraine give up its nuclear arsenal right before Obama gave Putin a wink and a nod to take over Crimea and invade Ukraine.

They didn't, dope. Trump's legal team made up excuses for them not to comply with subpoenas. EP was not one of them.

"Making excuses" means showing the reason the subpoenas weren't legal. Laws are just "excuses" if they get in the way of the Dim agenda.

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

What is the remedy when the Congress and Executive disagree?

They go to court for a ruling. YOUR House Clowns didn’t do that. Why not?

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

 

[Jitss617]

Collins needs to cut the shit .. fake tough questions.. just admit you are a democrat

 

[The Original Tree]

Adolph Schiffler making you Fake Testimony again. Hope America is watching this.

LETS tie Up The Senate for Months with The Clown Show Schiff Show is all they want!

 

[The Original Tree]

They promised Endless Impeachment!

They didn't, dope. Trump's legal team made up excuses for them not to comply with subpoenas. EP was not one of them.

"Making excuses" means showing the reason the subpoenas weren't legal. Laws are just "excuses" if they get in the way of the Dim agenda.

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

What is the remedy when the Congress and Executive disagree?

They go to court for a ruling. YOUR House Clowns didn’t do that. Why not?

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

 

[Jitss617]

For the love of god! Military please arrest democrats for embarrassing America

 

[The Original Tree]

Did you notice all The Democrat House
Managers have written prepared statement to read for every Democrats Question?

 

[bripat9643]

5 questions in and it looks like the Dems are owning the Reps. They called out a blatant lie that Trump tweeted when he claimed the Dems never asked Bolton to testify. Then they used videos of the White House lawyers complaining about lack of facts and lack of first hand witnesses to show their hypocrisy for wanting to block Bolton from talking. Pathetic

WH needs to step it up, they are snoozing

I really like when Schiff stated that Bolton wasn't subpoenaed because his lawyer would sue to keep that from happening, and it could lengthen the impeachment by years.

I thought he wanted the facts?

He does want facts and is closer to getting Bolton to testify in the senate than he would have been if he went to court in the house. Bolton was gonna sue the house subpoena. He has public ally stated he would comply with a senate subpoena.

Post Hoc rationalizing.

I don't think you understand the meaning of post hoc.
What I stated was all true. What about it do you contest?

It means after the fact. That's what your post is: post hoc rationalizing.

 

[The Original Tree]

Obama’s Pen & a Phone will come back to haunt Democrats!

 

[The Original Tree]

You can tell how afraid The Democrats and Corrupt RINOS are of Trump by the questions they ask.

 

[bripat9643]

"Making excuses" means showing the reason the subpoenas weren't legal. Laws are just "excuses" if they get in the way of the Dim agenda.

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

Yes there is, turd. I have already quoted it

Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;​

That is not a law, dope.

From your link:
"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

Who's the dope?
Is the constitution not the supreme law of the land, dope.
There's precedent and under our legal system based on English common law, precedent carries weight under the law.
This ain't France, shitforbrains. And if you need to ask about that, don't you'll just look all the more stupid.

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

You mean like Obama did?

 

[bripat9643]

You can tell how afraid The Democrats and Corrupt RINOS are of Trump by the questions they ask.

Your know that because a number of them made big money from Ukraine corruption that they are desperate to dirty up Trump as much as possible.

 

[bripat9643]

And Cannot Be Delegated To Committees And Other Nonsense Unless By A Vote And Other Nonsense!

Challenging the validity of a subpoena is not obstruction, goofy.

Sure it is. We all know that congress has the authority to issue subpoenas.

And the Executive Branch has the authority to challenge them, Short Bus Rider.

Not all of them in one fell swoop. That has never been done. The authority of congress to issue subpoenas is well established.

And Cannot Be Delegated To Committees And Other Nonsense Unless By A Vote And Other Nonsense!

Says who?

"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

Only if the following is true, numskull:

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;​

 

[The Original Tree]

Romney directly was involved in Burisma

You can tell how afraid The Democrats and Corrupt RINOS are of Trump by the questions they ask.

Your know that because a number of them made big money from Ukraine corruption that they are desperate to dirty up Trump as much as possible.

 

[The Original Tree]

Schiff Lying about The Whistleblower being part of Joe Biden’s Campaign.

Senate should apply The Missing Witness Rule to The AG Transcript and Whistleblower!



BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Anti-Trump CIA ‘Whistleblower’ in Ukraine Hoax Was the Leaker in the Russia Hoax!…