Only one chamber impeaches. Senators have no vote on impeachment. The process was completed by the Senate with the trial of the President. They are like the jury in the trial.
Why did Schiff keep the political bias information from Trump's defense? Because this was all politically biased.
Impeachment is a Constitutional Process. Nor does it end with criminal liability. That would be left up to the Courts. The only coup we've seen was when Benedict Donald tried to fraudulently switch forged slates of electors into the Jan 6th count of the states certified EC votes. Wouldn't you like to see Jack Smith have his day in court to finish the case against Benedict Donald and his cohorts?
Asked and answered. You just edited out the answer.
Right, the fat rapist tried to extort an entire country for personal, political gain.
That's been the case in all impeachments. The decision was always based on provisions of politics, not the law. That's where you have an impartial judge and jury.
It shows whether or not the source is politically motivated. 6th amendment doesn't apply here?
You haven't a clue on who Ciaramella is do you?
Coup is a word used to describe illegal means to remove an incumbent. But in our case, we have Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 of the constitution, for the house. And then Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6-7 for the senate. This makes it a legal process.
The whistleblower isn’t the source. Just someone who provided a tip that started the investigation.
He’s the embodiment of you’re delusional double standard.
He was the source of the information.
Republicans argued the House hadn't proved their case, therefore, additional testimony wasn't needed. The dems proved that point.
He wasn’t the source of information. As you said, and I agreed, the whistleblower had no first hand information or direct evidence.
Yes he was.
There was no need for testimony in Senate. Dems screwed up in the House and knew it. The Senate trial is only about the evidence submitted in the impeachment phase, not introducing new evidence.
Either he was a source, or he had nothing other than hearsay and second hand rumors. You. and have it both ways.
Not sure how the House could have compelled testimony. I guess they should have arrested Mark Meadows and kept him in jail until he testified. You’re pretty extreme.
None of your horseshit matters as this has all been referred to DOJ and will be investigated thoroughly.
So you’re in favor of politically motivated investigations when it’s your side doing it.
We got to this point from legal shenanigans by your party.
Is that why your party took anyone they could to court to show us what can happen if you don't play by their rules?
The shenanigans was Trump telling a foreign leader dependent upon us for his very existence to do him a favor and help his campaign.
Who are you talking about?
Well I guess we're going to find out who's right here....
Democrats....there, fixed it for you.
