Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[Rye Catcher]

How many witnesses were called by Republicans?

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

 

[BS Filter]

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

Yep, no different than Democrat sheep.

 

[jc456]

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

You think anyone takes that garbage seriously? You act like a baby . And, you can’t even see the irony for such a post.

 

[jc456]

From NYT yesterday.

View attachment 304008

My question is, should this be acquittal, or case dismissal?

It will be an acquittal, if dismissed the possibility if the Senate changes hands in Jan 2001, and trump wins only because of the Electoral College, he will once again be impeached, and that time convicted of Obstruction of Justice.

Does a president get elected any other way? It’s why it exists

 

[Nostra]

From NYT yesterday.

View attachment 304008

My question is, should this be acquittal, or case dismissal?

It will be an acquittal, if dismissed the possibility if the Senate changes hands in Jan 2001, and trump wins only because of the Electoral College, he will once again be impeached, and that time convicted of Obstruction of Justice.

Does a president get elected any other way? It’s why it exists

That idiot has no clue how our govt works.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Franklin Delano Quid Pro Quo | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

 

[P@triot]

How embarrassing for the Dumbocrat Party...

Retired Senate Dem leader tells Glenn Beck: If I were still in office, I'd vote to acquit President Trump

 

[hunarcy]

Why? Biddable fools like you believe what you've been told over and over by Trump&Co. A Big F'n Lie.

Manager Schiff explained in detail the reason, and the reason if you hadn't had your head in the sand, is the hearing was put off until Dec. 10th. Well after the Election this year.



See: House Democrats pull subpoena for ex-Trump national security official

Manager Schiff explained in detail the reason, and the reason if you hadn't had your head in the sand, is the hearing was put off until Dec. 10th. Well after the Election this year.

So, because it wouldn't keep Trump off the ballot, they dropped it?​

This ^^^ is an unsubstantiated opinion, and IMO a Conspiracy Theory.

Well if you believe my comment is funny, I would expect you to provide evidence of your question, which was one, IMO, more of a statement, than a question.

Unless you believe the accused actions to withhold money from Ukraine, was because trump is opposed to corruption, one must wonder why he didn't bring this up in 2017 and 2018? Why he went after the Biden's when the former VP was leading in polls? And why he has obstructed subpoenas by ordering material witnesses to ignore them, and his staff to ignore documents of relevance.

Because Biden didn't brag about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor publically until January, 2018, which brought it to Trump's attention, silly one.

Wasn’t there also an election in Ukraine?

There was...but I think Biden's public statements were what caught his attention.

 

[Olde Europe]

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

If that were all there is, you'd be lucky.

What you see is Senate Republicans, in near-perfect unanimity, giving everyone a good dose of what mob rule looks like - trampling all over the rule of law and the Constitution in their cynical quest for power. They are not "sheep", they are complicit, hench(wo)men, having indicated previously that whatever Mueller unearthed is nothing, thereby reassuring Trump that whatever he does to keep them in power is okay with them, and encouraging more of same.

 

[Auld Phart]

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

If that were all there is, you'd be lucky.

What you see is Senate Republicans, in near-perfect unanimity, giving everyone a good dose of what mob rule looks like - trampling all over the rule of law and the Constitution in their cynical quest for power. They are not "sheep", they are complicit, hench(wo)men, having indicated previously that whatever Mueller unearthed is nothing, thereby reassuring Trump that whatever he does to keep them in power is okay with them, and encouraging more of same.

What you see is Senate Republicans, in near-perfect unanimity, giving everyone a good dose of what mob rule looks like - trampling all over the rule of law and the Constitution in their cynical quest for power.

How are they any different than House Democrats, or, for that matter, Senate Democrats?

They pretty much marched in lockstep on halfbaked information.

 

[Zorro!]

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

You think anyone takes that garbage seriously? You act like a baby . And, you can’t even see the irony for such a post.

Whenever they lose they attack the Constitutional system involved in their loss.

 

[Zorro!]

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

If that were all there is, you'd be lucky.

What you see is Senate Republicans, in near-perfect unanimity, giving everyone a good dose of what mob rule looks like - trampling all over the rule of law and the Constitution in their cynical quest for power. They are not "sheep", they are complicit, hench(wo)men, having indicated previously that whatever Mueller unearthed is nothing, thereby reassuring Trump that whatever he does to keep them in power is okay with them, and encouraging more of same.

What you see is Senate Republicans, in near-perfect unanimity, giving everyone a good dose of what mob rule looks like - trampling all over the rule of law and the Constitution in their cynical quest for power.

How are they any different than House Democrats, or, for that matter, Senate Democrats?

They pretty much marched in lockstep on halfbaked information.

I was proud of the GOP, except for Romney, for once, standing up to the tantrums of the crazed Left and the Fake News Media.

 

[Zorro!]

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

They stood tall and strong for The Constitution and did not let tantruming Dems and the Fake News media bully them!

Nice to see the GOP finally stand up to the cry-bullies!​

 

[jc456]

So, because it wouldn't keep Trump off the ballot, they dropped it?​

This ^^^ is an unsubstantiated opinion, and IMO a Conspiracy Theory.

Well if you believe my comment is funny, I would expect you to provide evidence of your question, which was one, IMO, more of a statement, than a question.

Unless you believe the accused actions to withhold money from Ukraine, was because trump is opposed to corruption, one must wonder why he didn't bring this up in 2017 and 2018? Why he went after the Biden's when the former VP was leading in polls? And why he has obstructed subpoenas by ordering material witnesses to ignore them, and his staff to ignore documents of relevance.

Because Biden didn't brag about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor publically until January, 2018, which brought it to Trump's attention, silly one.

Wasn’t there also an election in Ukraine?

There was...but I think Biden's public statements were what caught his attention.

It’s called corruption and it’s his job!to fix it. I don’t give a rats ass of your opinion either

 

[Zorro!]

How many witnesses were called by Republicans?

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

‘Walls Are Closing In’ on the Democrats.

The alleged abuse of power charge stemmed from President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Zelinsky. Trump suggested Zelinsky look into Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and allegations that Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden, who is campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, was knee-deep in corrupt activities.

“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son,” President Trump said, “that [Joe] Biden stopped the prosecution [of Burisma, the corrupt company on whose Board Hunter sat and from which he collected more than $50,000 a month] and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great.”

Joe Biden “bragged” he had stopped the prosecution of Burisma. He did so, and was gracious enough to be filmed doing it.

As Peter Schweizer has shown in meticulous detail in his new book, the Bidens’ corruption dishonesty is gross open and palpable. This was not an abuse of power. Far from it. Ted Cruz was right: President Trump, confronted with credible allegations of Hunter Biden’s corruption, had a “responsibility” to investigate Biden’s activities.

So much for “abuse of power.” What about “obstruction of Congress”? Don’t worry if you’ve never heard of that. No one had, it's a fiction crime that does not exist. The House alleged that President Trump was guilty of this made up "crime" because, rather than instantly capitulating to their demands, he asked the court to review the case. In other words, he asked for the same due process that protects you and me to protect him.

Not much to build an impeachment case on is it? No treason. No bribery. No high crimes or even misdemeanors.

But according to the Constitution (Article II, Section IV) those are the only impeachable offenses: “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Those are the reasons, and the only reasons, for which a president may be impeached.

Going forward to discourage such frivolous, wholly partisan efforts to overturn the results of a free, open, and democratic election, people who have committed felonies by leaking classified material or lying under oath should be prosecuted. A dozen or so indictments would have a clarifying and salutary effect.

Review a few of the women who perjured themselves when lying about Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings. Follow up with some people involved in the “Russian collusion” hoax. Finish by looking into Representative Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) and Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman’s claim that they did not know the “whistleblower” (Eric Ciaramella) and also into who leaked information from John Bolton’s memoir and revenge drama.

When U.S. Attorney John Durham begins handing down indictments in the “Russian collusion” ruse we may have hard evidence that the attempted coup against Donald Trump was an explicit creature of Obama’s Administration.

 

[Ame®icano]

From NYT yesterday.

View attachment 304008

My question is, should this be acquittal, or case dismissal?

It will be an acquittal, if dismissed the possibility if the Senate changes hands in Jan 2001, and trump wins only because of the Electoral College, he will once again be impeached, and that time convicted of Obstruction of Justice.

Does a president get elected any other way? It’s why it exists

If I was leftist moron, I would tell you that Hillary won the election by nearly 3 million votes.

 

[The Original Tree]

How many did they Republicans subpoena?

How many of the subpoenas were ignored by the order of the Defendant?

Nobody is so stupid to believe trump was denied due process. He and his pettifogger lawyers were incompetent, and the only reason he got 51 votes is because he would have NINE MONTHS to attack a Republican Senator who didn't bend over and kiss his ass.

The fact is, if witnesses and documents existed to provide probative exculpatory evidence the defense would have been different. The fact that it doesn't exist, is telling.

If they don't need witnesses, why call them?

Exactly. As Lamar Alexander said when he announced his opposition to more witnesses, he believes that Trump did it but his wrong-doing did not rise to the level of impeachment. There were many Repubs that agree with him, so there was no point in continuing to drag out the trial.

There's a reason why it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. It ought to be so egregious that a bipartisan effort to impeach and remove him would be made, bolstered by a strong public opinion that favors such an action. Which of course didn't happen, so the issue should be left to the voters to decide. That's how it's supposed to work if the 67 votes for removal aren't there. And BTW the Senate as well as the House will also answer to the voters for their decisions and what they did too.

Democrats were trying to undo a past election and strip a sitting President from the ballot on all 50 states. So much for all their "count every vote" crap. They support elections that they win, and no others.

Again, not one house republican voted to impeach. 192.and the demofks thought one out 53 would in the senate? Now you know why they’re demofks! Odds weren’t on their side. Zero times any number is,...... zero?

Congressional Republicans are sheep, they will do what ever the wolf in the White House or on the Golf Course tells them what to do. Otherwise they will be eaten alive.

Bloomberg will save you!

 

[Nostra]

Does anyone know if the House Clown talking now ever served in the military?

 

[Nostra]

New clown...........she says they presented "unconverted" evidence. Is that good or bad?

 

[Auld Phart]

Does anyone know if the House Clown talking now ever served in the military?

Former Army Ranger