POLL: Would board Dimwingers be happy with these rules for the Senate Impeachment Trial?

[Paulie]

Fair is irrelevant.

The House has the constitutional authority to conduct the impeachment as they see fit. Period.

The Senate has the constitutional authority to conduct the trial as they see fit. Period.

End of lesson.

Exactly. Why are we even discussing what the “house managers” are doing? What business do they even have at this point? They have no involvement in the senate trial process and nobody seems to be asking that question

 

[Nostra]

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

How is it unfair? Be specific.

Think about a trial where

• The Prosecution is not allowed to call its own relevant witnesses.
• The Prosecution can't bring forward relevant evidence.

This wouldn't be accepted in a tin pot dictatorship....

Where did I say they couldn't bring forward relevant evidence?

3 witnesses, behind closed doors. What's wrong with that?

Why not 6 or 9?

Why closed doors? These are public servants... Why the secrecy? what are they hiding?

Are you saying this wouldn't be fair?

 

[bripat9643]

What do you think I'm hiding?

Not you personally...

Congress conducted the inquiry and were clearly obstructed illegally by the WH.
They were prevented from getting evidence and having the witnesses they wanted.
This was an investigation.

Now we get to the trial. The prosecution should be allowed to call witnesses and present evidence OR this is not a trial.

You can try and sell anything to US public but don't claim that this is transparent. The GOP Senate is covering up for what looks like a more and more guilty President.

Innocent people want transparency and shed light on things, guilty want to hide things...

The House should have gone to court and followed the normal process laid out in our Constitution when their subpoenas were challenged in court.

That was a delay tactic. They have no basis in law and know they could not be forced by a court order like normal people.

Trump was taking advantage of a position which he was trusted with...

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

They didn't break any laws, and McConnell wouldn't be breaking any laws if he didn't allow the Dims to call any witnesses.

 

[bripat9643]

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

How is it unfair? Be specific.

Think about a trial where

• The Prosecution is not allowed to call its own relevant witnesses.
• The Prosecution can't bring forward relevant evidence.

This wouldn't be accepted in a tin pot dictatorship....

Where did I say they couldn't bring forward relevant evidence?

3 witnesses, behind closed doors. What's wrong with that?

Why not 6 or 9?

Why closed doors? These are public servants... Why the secrecy? what are they hiding?

Think about that when you review the impeachment process.

 

[bripat9643]

The House should have gone to court and followed the normal process laid out in our Constitution when their subpoenas were challenged in court.

That was a delay tactic. They have no basis in law and know they could not be forced by a court order like normal people.

Trump was taking advantage of a position which he was trusted with...

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

How is it unfair? Be specific.

Think about a trial where

• The Prosecution is not allowed to call its own relevant witnesses.
• The Prosecution can't bring forward relevant evidence.

This wouldn't be accepted in a tin pot dictatorship....

We don't give a flying **** whether you "accept" it. It would still be totally legal, just like Piglosi's impeachment.

 

[Nostra]

That was a delay tactic. They have no basis in law and know they could not be forced by a court order like normal people.

Trump was taking advantage of a position which he was trusted with...

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

How is it unfair? Be specific.

Think about a trial where

• The Prosecution is not allowed to call its own relevant witnesses.
• The Prosecution can't bring forward relevant evidence.

This wouldn't be accepted in a tin pot dictatorship....

We don't give a flying **** whether you "accept" it. It would still be totally legal, just like Piglosi's impeachment.

I don't thing CowgirlTed knows why he doesn't like the rules I laid out.

 

[Nostra]

Your opinion means nothing.

Nazi and her gang of idiots didn't want to follow our system. That's on them, not Trump.

Back to the OP: Are you saying following the rules outlined in the OP wouldn't be fair?

What laws did Congress break when investigating.

Back to the OP... How is that a fair trail..

How is it unfair? Be specific.

Think about a trial where

• The Prosecution is not allowed to call its own relevant witnesses.
• The Prosecution can't bring forward relevant evidence.

This wouldn't be accepted in a tin pot dictatorship....

Where did I say they couldn't bring forward relevant evidence?

3 witnesses, behind closed doors. What's wrong with that?

Why not 6 or 9?

Why closed doors? These are public servants... Why the secrecy? what are they hiding?

You tell me.

 

[Nostra]

It's official: Board Dimwingers don't like the rules the Dimwinger Senate used during the Clinton impeachment trial.

Those laid out in the OP are exactly what happened then.