Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[ChrisL]

Schiff was absolutely awful. He is a lying piece of garbage. He faked crying even. He is the worst.

Schiff was honest and forceful. History is on his side. When the Aenate acquits Trump, which they will, Schiff and oThers in the Hosue will be seen as the patriots who sought to save the nation from itself.

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

Be careful of asskissers ^^^. They are always the first to start shit.

An ass kisser is someone who constantly prostrates themselves to another. Like you do for Trump.

You mean like you do. You can keep demonstrating for us, though, if you wish.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Schiff was absolutely awful. He is a lying piece of garbage. He faked crying even. He is the worst.

Schiff was honest and forceful. History is on his side. When the Aenate acquits Trump, which they will, Schiff and oThers in the Hosue will be seen as the patriots who sought to save the nation from itself.

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

Be careful of asskissers ^^^. They are always the first to start shit.

An ass kisser is someone who constantly prostrates themselves to another. Like you do for Trump.

Was Bill Clinton NOT GUILTY OF COMMITTING perjury to a grand jury?

 

[JLW]

Schiff was honest and forceful. History is on his side. When the Aenate acquits Trump, which they will, Schiff and oThers in the Hosue will be seen as the patriots who sought to save the nation from itself.

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Republic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

 

[JLW]

Schiff was honest and forceful. History is on his side. When the Aenate acquits Trump, which they will, Schiff and oThers in the Hosue will be seen as the patriots who sought to save the nation from itself.

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

Be careful of asskissers ^^^. They are always the first to start shit.

An ass kisser is someone who constantly prostrates themselves to another. Like you do for Trump.

Was Bill Clinton NOT GUILTY OF COMMITTING perjury to a grand jury?

And Clinton told his staff to comply and cooperate with Congress. Clinton and Even Nixon, respected our system. Trump doesn’t.

 

[JLW]

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

That is pure deflection. Repubs controlled the House they found nothing. Get over it.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Did BIll Clinton lie to a grand jury?

Why did 55 Senate Democrats vote not guilty?

 

[task0778]

For 3 days the Dems have been saying the same things over and over...with no evidence.

Tomorrow the WH Counsel will destroy their case, expose their lies, and make Schiff and Nadler wish they were never part of this.

There will be no need for witnesses.

What time does it start

I heard it will be a short day tomorrow. The Trump starts at 10 am ET and ends around 12-1 pm. Nothing on Sunday, then back to work on Monday.

Trump team to present case for about two hours on Saturday

For three days, every time I turned on the TV it was either Schiff talking and still saying the same stupid crap over and over, or some Zoe Lofgren, in uncombed hair with split ends wearing a Walmart suit. So now Trump's team finally gets 2 hours on a Saturday?

Trump's team gets 24 hours to state their case, just like the Dems did. Doesn't mean they'll use all of it. It's possible they want make sure they are coordinated with whatever Guiliani is going to reveal in the coming days. From what I've been reading today, there's been some serious corruption going on in Ukraine and the Bidens are probably involved in it. And, it appears that despite what the Dems have been saying, Ukraine was involved to some extent in our 2016 election. Didja know for example, that Ukraine’s ambassador in Washington wrote an op-ed for The Hill skewering Trump for some of his comments on Russia? Didja know that a paid contractor of the DNC solicited the Ukraine government’s help to find dirt on Trump that could sway the 2016 election? Whether the Ukraine gov't did anything about that is unknown. So far.

Ukrainian Embassy confirms DNC contractor solicited Trump dirt in 2016

Didja know that in January 2016, the Obama White House summoned Ukrainian authorities to Washington to coordinate ongoing anti-corruption efforts inside Russia’s most critical neighbor.

The meeting, confirmed by multiple participants and contemporaneous memos, brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with members of former President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ).

The agenda suggested the purpose was training and coordination. But Ukrainian participants said it didn’t take long — during the meetings and afterward — to realize the Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.

U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united,” said Andrii Telizhenko, then a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington tasked with organizing the meeting.
.
.
Nazar Kholodnytskyy, Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor, said he attended some but not all of the January 2016 Washington meetings and couldn’t remember the specific cases, if any, that were discussed. But he said he soon saw evidence in Ukraine of political meddling in the U.S. election. Kholodnytskyy said the key evidence against Manafort — a ledger showing payments from the Party of Regions — was known to Ukrainian authorities since 2014 but was suddenly released in May 2016 by the U.S.-friendly NABU, after Manafort was named Trump’s campaign chairman: “Somebody kept this black ledger secret for two years and then showed it to the public and the U.S. media. It was extremely suspicious.”
.
Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Ukraine prosecutor general’s international affairs office, said that, shortly after Ukrainian authorities returned from the Washington meeting, there was a clear message about helping the Americans.
.
Kulyk said Ukrainian authorities had evidence that other Western figures, such as former Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig, also received money from Yanukovych’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested: “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else.”
.
Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Ukraine prosecutor general’s international affairs office, said that, shortly after Ukrainian authorities returned from the Washington meeting, there was a clear message about helping the Americans with the Party of the Regions case.

“Yes, there was a lot of talking about needing help and then the ledger just appeared in public,” he recalled.

Kulyk said Ukrainian authorities had evidence that other Western figures, such as former Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig, also received money from Yanukovych’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested: “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else.”
.
The other case raised at the January 2016 meeting involved Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company under investigation in Ukraine for improper foreign transfers of money. At the time, Burisma allegedly was paying then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter as both a board member and a consultant. More than $3 million flowed from Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden in 2014-15, bank records show.

According to Telizhenko, U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over. The Ukrainians did not agree. But then Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Ukraine’s chief prosecutor in March 2016. The Burisma case was then shut down.

How the Obama White House engaged Ukraine to give Russia collusion narrative an early boost

 

[ColonelAngus]

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

That is pure deflection. Repubs controlled the House they found nothing. Get over it.

Obama invoked EP and Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury and was disbarred.

 

[ChrisL]

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Republic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Executive privilege - Wikipedia

Executive privilege is the right of the president of the United States and other members of the executive branch to maintain confidential communications under certain circumstances within the executive branch and to resist some subpoenas and other oversight by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of particular information or personnel relating to those confidential communications. The right comes into effect when revealing information would impair governmental functions. Neither executive privilege nor the oversight power of Congress is explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution.[1] However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[2]

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon in the context of a subpoena emanating from the judiciary, instead of emanating from Congress.[3] The Court held that there is a qualified privilege, which once invoked, creates a presumption of privilege, and the party seeking the documents must then make a "sufficient showing" that the "presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case". Chief Justice Warren Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.[3] Regarding requests from Congress (instead of from the courts) for executive branch information, as of a 2014 study by the Congressional Research Service,[4] only two federal court cases had addressed the merits of executive privilege in such a context, and neither of those cases reached the Supreme Court.[5]

In addition to which branch of government is requesting the information, another characteristic of executive privilege is whether it involves a "presidential communications privilege" or instead a "deliberative process privilege" or some other type of privilege.[4] The deliberative process privilege is often considered to be rooted in common law, whereas the presidential communications privilege is often considered to be rooted in separation of powers, thus making the deliberative process privilege less difficult to overcome.[4][6] Generally speaking, presidents, congresses and courts have historically tended to sidestep open confrontations through compromise and mutual deference in view of previous practice and precedents regarding the exercise of executive privilege.[4]

 

[toobfreak]

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complied with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now subject to some exceptions of course.

Bullshit strawman argument. Watergate was different time, different case, different situation and different persons involved.

 

[JLW]

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

That is pure deflection. Repubs controlled the House they found nothing. Get over it.

Obama invoked EP and Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury and was disbarred.

and if congress thought Obama was obstructing Congress they could have started impeachment proceedings. They did not.

Once again even Clinton cooperated with Congress and obeyed subpoenas.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Is he your father or something?

What specifically did you find compelling?

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Bullshit. The courts are always the proper place to settle disputes between the President and Congress. The Democrats hijacked the House, trashed the Constitution, worked tirelessly to undermine US policies at home and abroad and sought to prevent the implementation of programs that would have benefited all Americans in order to advance their own political ambitions.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Subpoenas can be challenged. Why should POTUS have less rights than any other American?

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

That is pure deflection. Repubs controlled the House they found nothing. Get over it.

Obama invoked EP and Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury and was disbarred.

and if congress thought Obama was obstructing Congress they could have started impeachment proceedings. They did not.

Once again even Clinton cooperated with Congress and obeyed subpoenas.

He committed perjury and was disbarred.

 

[toobfreak]

For 3 days the Dems have been saying the same things over and over...with no evidence.

Tomorrow the WH Counsel will destroy their case, expose their lies, and make Schiff and Nadler wish they were never part of this.

There will be no need for witnesses.

What time does it start

I heard it will be a short day tomorrow. The Trump starts at 10 am ET and ends around 12-1 pm. Nothing on Sunday, then back to work on Monday.

Trump team to present case for about two hours on Saturday

For three days, every time I turned on the TV it was either Schiff talking and still saying the same stupid crap over and over, or some Zoe Lofgren, in uncombed hair with split ends wearing a Walmart suit. So now Trump's team finally gets 2 hours on a Saturday?

Trump's team gets 24 hours to state their case, just like the Dems did. Doesn't mean they'll use all of it. It's possible they want make sure they are coordinated with whatever Guiliani is going to reveal in the coming days. From what I've been reading today, there's been some serious corruption going on in Ukraine and the Bidens are probably involved in it. And, it appears that despite what the Dems have been saying, Ukraine was involved to some extent in our 2016 election. Didja know for example, that Ukraine’s ambassador in Washington wrote an op-ed for The Hill skewering Trump for some of his comments on Russia? Didja know that a paid contractor of the DNC solicited the Ukraine government’s help to find dirt on Trump that could sway the 2016 election? Whether the Ukraine gov't did anything about that is unknown. So far.

Ukrainian Embassy confirms DNC contractor solicited Trump dirt in 2016

Makers a lot of sense. Like Adam said, Ukraine would do ANYTHING we asked. That applies back in 2015-2016 too.

 

[JLW]

His speech was well organized and impeccably logical. He made a compelling argument. He laid out his case brilliantly.

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Bullshit. The courts are always the proper place to settle disputes between the President and Congress. The Democrats hijacked the House, trashed the Constitution, worked tirelessly to undermine US policies at home and abroad and sought to prevent the implementation of programs that would have benefited all Americans in order to advance their own political ambitions.

Trashing the constitution is not treating Congress as a co-equal branch of government.

 

[JLW]

Even Nixon complies with congressional subpoenas. Schiff dealt with that issue nicely quoting Judge Sirica on that issue. I don’t know if you were watching Fox or a real news network that carried his closing argument, but the executive branch has routinely complied till now.

Obama should have been impeached for Fast and Furious for invoking Executive Privilege?

That is pure deflection. Repubs controlled the House they found nothing. Get over it.

Obama invoked EP and Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury and was disbarred.

and if congress thought Obama was obstructing Congress they could have started impeachment proceedings. They did not.

Once again even Clinton cooperated with Congress and obeyed subpoenas.

He committed perjury and was disbarred.

You can be disbarred without committing a crime.

His perjury was for lying about an affair which is not exactly like extorting a national state for political gain.

 

[toobfreak]

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Bullshit. The courts are always the proper place to settle disputes between the President and Congress. The Democrats hijacked the House, trashed the Constitution, worked tirelessly to undermine US policies at home and abroad and sought to prevent the implementation of programs that would have benefited all Americans in order to advance their own political ambitions.

Trashing the constitution is not treating Congress as a co-equal branch of government.

Is that why the Supreme Court had to slap down Obumma 13 times for violating the Constitution and exceeding his presidential powers?

Wouldn't Abuse of Power be exceeding them? Yet, number of times SCOTUS has censured Trump?

ZERO.

 

[ColonelAngus]

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Bullshit. The courts are always the proper place to settle disputes between the President and Congress. The Democrats hijacked the House, trashed the Constitution, worked tirelessly to undermine US policies at home and abroad and sought to prevent the implementation of programs that would have benefited all Americans in order to advance their own political ambitions.

Trashing the constitution is not treating Congress as a co-equal branch of government.

Clinton was convicted of lying to a Grand Jury and 55 Senate Dems voted not guilty.

Doesn’t sound like respect for the Constitution.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You just said nothing.

It is hard to put into a few sentences a two hour argument. His argument was right on the money when Talking about obstruction. Failure to deal with Trump’s failure to comply with Congress’ subpoenas will hollow out the impeachment power. If Congress can’t reign the president, then Presidential power will be unlimited and Congress will fall into irrelevance.

Nonsense. If the President doesn't comply with a subpoena, then the proper course of action is to take the issue to the courts. This is how it has always been done and there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress when a President cites executive privilege.

Impeachment is of a different nature. It is political. As Judge Sirica wrote we are dealing with issues going to the foundation of the Repiblic. The courts should not interfere. The executive branch has to comply.

Bullshit. The courts are always the proper place to settle disputes between the President and Congress. The Democrats hijacked the House, trashed the Constitution, worked tirelessly to undermine US policies at home and abroad and sought to prevent the implementation of programs that would have benefited all Americans in order to advance their own political ambitions.

Trashing the constitution is not treating Congress as a co-equal branch of government.

No, trashing the Constitution is not treating the President as a co-equal branch of the government which is exactly what the Democrats are doing with their obstruction of Congress bullshit.