Schumer's pipe dream, a trial with.....you know.....evidence.

[MeBelle]

It's a troll thread about a bullshit hoax. The corruption of the FBI is far more relevant in relation to the persecution of a sitting president.

.

You're trolling the thread, mate. Start a thread on the FBI if you want to discuss it so badly.
I think the American people deserve to hear a full trial of Trump. Not doing so is nakedly abandoning their constitutional duties.

They've already heard the best the prosecution has, so the only new evidence would be from the defense. Is that what you want, to see the charges be reduced to shreds and lying in the dust?

But..........that's not true at all. Trump's illegal obstruction prevented a lot of pertinent testimony and access to documents the Dems want to have placed in evidence.

If it was so illegal, and if they are guaranteed to be the smoking gun, why then didn't Schiff take it to court and force them into evidence? Answer, this is a political proceeding and not related to justice. Another answer, they would not be detrimental to the president and Schiff wanted to grandstand about them instead of doing the dirty work necessary to get them into the light.

Simple. Such a court process would take, literally, years.

Your 'years' claim is incorrect.

The courts would literally throw Schiff OUT!!


lol

 

[MeBelle]

Judiciary Committee impeachment report alleges Trump committed 'multiple federal crimes'
Judiciary Committee impeachment report alleges Trump committed 'multiple federal crimes'



“Although President Trump’s actions need not rise to the level of a criminal violation to justify impeachment, his conduct here was criminal,” the panel’s Democrats argue, labeling Trump’s behavior “both constitutional and criminal in character” and contending that the president “betrayed the people of this nation” and should be removed from office.

The staff report, which was filed to the House Rules Committee just after midnight Monday, argues that Trump directed a months-long scheme to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election, the allegation that forms the core of the two articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — approved by the Judiciary Committee last week. Democrats emphasized that proving a criminal violation is not required to justify impeachment.

Yet not a one of these "multiple federal crimes" is spelled out with specificity in the articles of impeachment.

But....

View attachment 295047

And therein lies the rub. The usual suspect will run around from now until the sun burns out screeching that Trump committed all of these crimes, yet the people with the power to actually charge him with them refuse to do. I wonder which group has the most insider information, the House democrats or the internet keyboard jockeys who read something someone wrote about it?

The 'people' to charge Trump is the House of Representatives.

 

[MeBelle]

They've already heard the best the prosecution has, so the only new evidence would be from the defense. Is that what you want, to see the charges be reduced to shreds and lying in the dust?

But..........that's not true at all. Trump's illegal obstruction prevented a lot of pertinent testimony and access to documents the Dems want to have placed in evidence.

If it was so illegal, and if they are guaranteed to be the smoking gun, why then didn't Schiff take it to court and force them into evidence? Answer, this is a political proceeding and not related to justice. Another answer, they would not be detrimental to the president and Schiff wanted to grandstand about them instead of doing the dirty work necessary to get them into the light.

Simple. Such a court process would take, literally, years.

1. Not if the justices wanted to streamline the process.
2. If it's really about justice, what's the problem? It's not, it's about getting something to use on the campaign trail, and Trump knew that Schiff wouldn't do anything that would take any amount of time at all because of that.

There's no reason to believe that it would make it through three rounds of court cases within the next year, and that puts them entirely at the mercy of the justice system. It took 6 months just to get an initial decision against McGhan.

I think the voter deserves to know this information. I support whatever mechanism gets the information to the voter before the election.

What information??

There is no information!

 

[colfax_m]

You're trolling the thread, mate. Start a thread on the FBI if you want to discuss it so badly.
I think the American people deserve to hear a full trial of Trump. Not doing so is nakedly abandoning their constitutional duties.

They've already heard the best the prosecution has, so the only new evidence would be from the defense. Is that what you want, to see the charges be reduced to shreds and lying in the dust?

What makes you think that they can't call witnesses and subpoena documents that were obstructed from reaching the House?

They can, if the Republicans in charge allow them to.

Don't you think Republicans should be in favor of getting all the facts? If not for impeachment, but for the voters?

The Senate is not 'Republicans'.

Impeachment is supposed to be non-partisan

I agree. Which is why I'm so dismayed at the Republican's behavior.

 

[colfax_m]

But..........that's not true at all. Trump's illegal obstruction prevented a lot of pertinent testimony and access to documents the Dems want to have placed in evidence.

If it was so illegal, and if they are guaranteed to be the smoking gun, why then didn't Schiff take it to court and force them into evidence? Answer, this is a political proceeding and not related to justice. Another answer, they would not be detrimental to the president and Schiff wanted to grandstand about them instead of doing the dirty work necessary to get them into the light.

Simple. Such a court process would take, literally, years.

1. Not if the justices wanted to streamline the process.
2. If it's really about justice, what's the problem? It's not, it's about getting something to use on the campaign trail, and Trump knew that Schiff wouldn't do anything that would take any amount of time at all because of that.

There's no reason to believe that it would make it through three rounds of court cases within the next year, and that puts them entirely at the mercy of the justice system. It took 6 months just to get an initial decision against McGhan.

I think the voter deserves to know this information. I support whatever mechanism gets the information to the voter before the election.

What information??

There is no information!

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

 

[MeBelle]

You understand the OLC guideline prevents the DoJ from indicting a prez, right? It's the opinion that prevented Mueller from indicting Individual 1 for obstruction.
The Judiciary report makes clear Trump violated the law but while they can include the evidence of such in the articles he can't formally be charged with a crime by Congress. You get all that, right?

LMAO!!!

keep digging

 

[colfax_m]

You're trolling the thread, mate. Start a thread on the FBI if you want to discuss it so badly.
I think the American people deserve to hear a full trial of Trump. Not doing so is nakedly abandoning their constitutional duties.

They've already heard the best the prosecution has, so the only new evidence would be from the defense. Is that what you want, to see the charges be reduced to shreds and lying in the dust?

But..........that's not true at all. Trump's illegal obstruction prevented a lot of pertinent testimony and access to documents the Dems want to have placed in evidence.

If it was so illegal, and if they are guaranteed to be the smoking gun, why then didn't Schiff take it to court and force them into evidence? Answer, this is a political proceeding and not related to justice. Another answer, they would not be detrimental to the president and Schiff wanted to grandstand about them instead of doing the dirty work necessary to get them into the light.

Simple. Such a court process would take, literally, years.

Your 'years' claim is incorrect.

The courts would literally throw Schiff OUT!!


lol

They would throw "Schiff" out? That doesn't even make sense. If you think they'd throw the case out, on what grounds?

 

[The Original Tree]

Why are you people feeding another Troll Thread and giving these American Hating Buffoons legitimacy?

 

[MeBelle]

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

 

[colfax_m]

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

Trump has refused all requests at documents and witnesses. I can’t believe you aren’t aware of that.

 

[MeBelle]

They would throw "Schiff" out? That doesn't even make sense. If you think they'd throw the case out, on what grounds?

Sure it makes sense, you can pretend it doesn't.

On what grounds???

No evidence

You're a drone

carry-on

 

[MeBelle]

They've already heard the best the prosecution has, so the only new evidence would be from the defense. Is that what you want, to see the charges be reduced to shreds and lying in the dust?

What makes you think that they can't call witnesses and subpoena documents that were obstructed from reaching the House?

They can, if the Republicans in charge allow them to.

Don't you think Republicans should be in favor of getting all the facts? If not for impeachment, but for the voters?

The Senate is not 'Republicans'.

Impeachment is supposed to be non-partisan

I agree. Which is why I'm so dismayed at the Republican's behavior.

The Republicans haven't DONE anything yet!!

You should be ashamed of your Democrats who didn't 'hold' a lawful impeachment query.

 

[MeBelle]

Why are you people feeding another Troll Thread and giving these American Hating Buffoons legitimacy?

TROLLS R FUN

 

[colfax_m]

They would throw "Schiff" out? That doesn't even make sense. If you think they'd throw the case out, on what grounds?

Sure it makes sense, you can pretend it doesn't.

On what grounds???

No evidence

You're a drone

carry-on

You’re confused, try not to lose the thread here. We are discussing the process at getting a court to approve the subpoenas from the House.

They are subpoenas for evidence and the House has every right to oversee the Executive.

 

[colfax_m]

What makes you think that they can't call witnesses and subpoena documents that were obstructed from reaching the House?

They can, if the Republicans in charge allow them to.

Don't you think Republicans should be in favor of getting all the facts? If not for impeachment, but for the voters?

The Senate is not 'Republicans'.

Impeachment is supposed to be non-partisan

I agree. Which is why I'm so dismayed at the Republican's behavior.

The Republicans haven't DONE anything yet!!

You should be ashamed of your Democrats who didn't 'hold' a lawful impeachment query.

They’ve drug their heels rather than participate and find the truth. The impeachment inquiry has been perfectly lawful.

 

[berg80]

LOL...reality? Interesting coming from a dipshit still unable to deal with the reality of the 2016 election.

“The first Article of Impeachment charged President Trump with an abuse of power as that constitutional offense has long been understood,” the report says. “While there is no need for a crime to be proven in order for impeachment to be warranted, here, President Trump’s scheme or course of conduct also encompassed other offenses, both constitutional and criminal in character, and it is appropriate for the Committee to recognize such offenses in assessing the question of impeachment.”

Translation
He did things we don't like, and while we don't have prove he actually did them, we can accuse him of them, they were bad, he did them, and he's bad.

My apologies for being redundant, but since you folks keep making the erroneous assertion Trump only "did things we don't like" I am compelled to point out he broke the law.

House Judiciary Says Trump Committed ‘Multiple Federal Crimes’ In Report On Impeachment
House Judiciary Says Trump Committed 'Multiple Federal Crimes' In Report On Impeachment

“Put simply, President Trump’s own words reveal that he solicited a foreign government to investigate his political rival. The President did so for his own political gain, rather than for foreign policy reasons,” the report says. “The testimony of experienced, expert officials in his own administration—including several of his own appointees—reveal that the President used his official powers as leverage to pressure a vulnerable strategic partner to do his bidding. And every indication, every piece of evidence, supports that the President will abuse his power again.”

As the House impeachment inquiry continues to uncover substantial evidence of Trump’s abuses of power, one thing has become clear: President Donald Trump illegally withheld military aid to Ukraine.

.............................................................................................................................................................................
No one from the Trump administration has been able to point to any legal authority that allowed Trump to withhold the funding for the length of time and in the manner that he did. Even Trump’s defenders in the House, who have speciously claimed that the president had reasons for holding the aid other than pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rivals, have not provided justifications that are legal. Instead, they’ve offered justifications that are more politically palatable. Moreover, Trump’s own White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was told that his actions were illegal, and appears to have tacitly acknowledged that fact, but continued to hold up the funding anyway.

The illegality of the funding hold is important to the impeachment inquiry, as it adds further weight to the case that Trump abused his authority as president to pressure Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 U.S. election.
Trump’s Hold on Ukrainian Military Aid was Illegal

..........................................................................................................................................................................
The head of the Federal Election Commission released a statement on Thursday evening reiterating, emphatically, that foreign assistance is illegal in U.S. elections.

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“
‘Let me make something 100% clear’: FEC chair lays down the law on foreign help

 

[MeBelle]

They would throw "Schiff" out? That doesn't even make sense. If you think they'd throw the case out, on what grounds?

Sure it makes sense, you can pretend it doesn't.

On what grounds???

No evidence

You're a drone

carry-on

You’re confused, try not to lose the thread here. We are discussing the process at getting a court to approve the subpoenas from the House.

They are subpoenas for evidence and the House has every right to oversee the Executive.

R U kidding????

You just lost any cred you might have had.

lmao!!!

 

[berg80]

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

You mean the testimony given in the presence of House Repubs..........the transcripts of which have been made public?

Americans still want to hear from Bolton, Pompeo, Mulvaney, and Slimy Rudy........among others. Why is your Orange Messiah blocking their testimony?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Schumer, Pushing McConnell to Negotiate, Lays Out Plan for Impeachment Trial
The Senate Democratic leader wants to seek testimony from Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton and other White House officials, and subpoena documents the White House has withheld.
Schumer, Pushing McConnell to Negotiate, Lays Out Plan for Impeachment Trial

WASHINGTON — As the House prepared to make President Trump only the third president in American history to be impeached, the Senate’s top Democrat on Sunday laid out a detailed proposal for a Senate trial “in which all of the facts can be considered fully and fairly” — including subpoenas for documents the White House has withheld and witnesses it has prevented from testifying.

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, presented the proposal in a letter to his Republican counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell, in an opening move to force Republicans to negotiate over the shape and scope of the proceedings. Mr. McConnell had said last week that he was “taking my cues” from the White House, prompting Democrats to accuse him of abandoning his duty to render “impartial justice” in the trial.

In the letter, Mr. Schumer proposed a trial beginning Jan. 7 that would give each side a fixed amount of time to present its case, and called for four top White House officials who have not previously testified — including Mick Mulvaney, Mr. Trump’s acting chief of staff, and John R. Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser — to appear as witnesses.

Mr. Schumer also called for the Senate to subpoena documents that could shed light on the events at the heart of the charges against Mr. Trump: his campaign to enlist Ukraine to investigate his political rivals. And he set forth a specific timetable for each side to present its case, modeled on the one used when President Bill Clinton was tried in 1999. Mr. Clinton’s trial lasted about five weeks.
.....................................................................................................................................
Chuck should know better by now than to think McTurtle has an interest in anything approximating the kind of deliberative trial the Senate is obligated conduct. This is why it was so important for Trump's specious narrative of an unfair process in the House to have been spewed (just as it was equally important to make the similarly, objectively false accusations about the Mueller probe). All the trained seals repeat the sham process lie endlessly and will keep doing so all through the phony process Mitch is about to orchestrate in close consultation with the WH (Mitch has adopted the Trumpian strategy of violating rules, ethics, and law right out in the open). Why does McTreason think he can get away with it? Because he knows from experience The Following will swallow any ball of shit he feeds them. They rather like it.

You have evidence now? Lol

If you ask him if he is Jewish he will squirm, run away and start another thread.

 

[MeBelle]

LOL...reality? Interesting coming from a dipshit still unable to deal with the reality of the 2016 election.

“The first Article of Impeachment charged President Trump with an abuse of power as that constitutional offense has long been understood,” the report says. “While there is no need for a crime to be proven in order for impeachment to be warranted, here, President Trump’s scheme or course of conduct also encompassed other offenses, both constitutional and criminal in character, and it is appropriate for the Committee to recognize such offenses in assessing the question of impeachment.”

Translation
He did things we don't like, and while we don't have prove he actually did them, we can accuse him of them, they were bad, he did them, and he's bad.

My apologies for being redundant, but since you folks keep making the erroneous assertion Trump only "did things we don't like" I am compelled to point out he broke the law.

House Judiciary Says Trump Committed ‘Multiple Federal Crimes’ In Report On Impeachment
House Judiciary Says Trump Committed 'Multiple Federal Crimes' In Report On Impeachment

“Put simply, President Trump’s own words reveal that he solicited a foreign government to investigate his political rival. The President did so for his own political gain, rather than for foreign policy reasons,” the report says. “The testimony of experienced, expert officials in his own administration—including several of his own appointees—reveal that the President used his official powers as leverage to pressure a vulnerable strategic partner to do his bidding. And every indication, every piece of evidence, supports that the President will abuse his power again.”

As the House impeachment inquiry continues to uncover substantial evidence of Trump’s abuses of power, one thing has become clear: President Donald Trump illegally withheld military aid to Ukraine.

.............................................................................................................................................................................
No one from the Trump administration has been able to point to any legal authority that allowed Trump to withhold the funding for the length of time and in the manner that he did. Even Trump’s defenders in the House, who have speciously claimed that the president had reasons for holding the aid other than pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rivals, have not provided justifications that are legal. Instead, they’ve offered justifications that are more politically palatable. Moreover, Trump’s own White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was told that his actions were illegal, and appears to have tacitly acknowledged that fact, but continued to hold up the funding anyway.

The illegality of the funding hold is important to the impeachment inquiry, as it adds further weight to the case that Trump abused his authority as president to pressure Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 U.S. election.
Trump’s Hold on Ukrainian Military Aid was Illegal

..........................................................................................................................................................................
The head of the Federal Election Commission released a statement on Thursday evening reiterating, emphatically, that foreign assistance is illegal in U.S. elections.

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“
‘Let me make something 100% clear’: FEC chair lays down the law on foreign help

let me make this perfectly clear:

Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

Read it

learn something