The Impeachment ‘Kill Switch’: McConnell Dismissal Rule Corners Dems, Blocks Antics as Trial Starts

[OKTexas]

We’ve already heard from the witnesses that Schiff allowed to be heard. Why didn't he get them all?

They refused to testify.

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

See post 201.

.

 

[Bush92]

All aid was delivered within the parameters of the law. That's all that was required.

.

Still incorrect. Haven’t I showed you the testimony that contradicts this? I think I have. Surprising how few people know this.

One of your fellow commies provided an article claiming it wasn't, of course he ignored a paragraph in the article that said congress gave the DOD an extra year to deliver the aid. The article was dated in Nov, and said the remainder would be distributed within a few weeks, meaning all has been delivered at this point and within the parameters of the law.

.

The paragraph wasn’t ignored. The fact that Congress had to pass the same appropriation again is proof that Trump failed to distribute the original appropriation as the law required.

Congress had to pass another law to make up for Trump’s failure.

Riddle me this...when is the last time Congress passed a “true budget.?”

Probably when Newt Gingrich was House Speaker.

“Congress has completed appropriations before the start of the fiscal year only 4 timesin the past 40 years. The last time Congress completed all bills on time was 20 years ago, in 1996.”
-Senate Budget Office
You are correct my man!

 

[Nostra]

So you're saying the house voted on articles that were insufficiently supported?

.

Depends on your definition of sufficiently supported. Many Trump supporters have a far higher definition since they are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt to a somewhat extreme degree.

It's you commies that are demanding more witnesses and documents, evidently you don't think the case has already been proven. Rep Jefferies, one of the house managers, said on TV yesterday that the facts haven't been disputed, which is an outright lie. The call transcript disputes them. But hey feel free to keep pushing the commie talking points, that's all you've been doing thorough out this thread.

.

Lol. Commies. Get a grip.

Why don’t you want to hear from these witnesses or see these documents? Worried about what they have to say or something else?

The house proved they aren't relevant, otherwise they would have gone to court to secure them. Don't waste my time with irrelevant crap. Let them prove the case they voted to proceed with.

.

They’re entirely relevant to the case. That’s what you’re scared of.

Why? Dimwingers told America their case was overwhelming? Why are they asking for a do over now?

 

[Bush92]

All aid was delivered within the parameters of the law. That's all that was required.

.

Still incorrect. Haven’t I showed you the testimony that contradicts this? I think I have. Surprising how few people know this.

One of your fellow commies provided an article claiming it wasn't, of course he ignored a paragraph in the article that said congress gave the DOD an extra year to deliver the aid. The article was dated in Nov, and said the remainder would be distributed within a few weeks, meaning all has been delivered at this point and within the parameters of the law.

.

The paragraph wasn’t ignored. The fact that Congress had to pass the same appropriation again is proof that Trump failed to distribute the original appropriation as the law required.

Congress had to pass another law to make up for Trump’s failure.

They had to pass it again because the government is running on temporary spending measures.

They had to pass it again because Trump stopped it from being spent the first time around.

Government moves slow. Not Trump’s fault.

 

[The Original Tree]

Still incorrect. Haven’t I showed you the testimony that contradicts this? I think I have. Surprising how few people know this.

One of your fellow commies provided an article claiming it wasn't, of course he ignored a paragraph in the article that said congress gave the DOD an extra year to deliver the aid. The article was dated in Nov, and said the remainder would be distributed within a few weeks, meaning all has been delivered at this point and within the parameters of the law.

.

The paragraph wasn’t ignored. The fact that Congress had to pass the same appropriation again is proof that Trump failed to distribute the original appropriation as the law required.

Congress had to pass another law to make up for Trump’s failure.

Riddle me this...when is the last time Congress passed a “true budget.?”

Probably when Newt Gingrich was House Speaker.

“Congress has completed appropriations before the start of the fiscal year only 4 timesin the past 40 years. The last time Congress completed all bills on time was 20 years ago, in 1996.”
-Senate Budget Office
You are correct my man!

Nancy Pelosi isn't fit to wash Newt's Dirty Underwear. She's an awful House Speaker.

 

[The Original Tree]

Depends on your definition of sufficiently supported. Many Trump supporters have a far higher definition since they are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt to a somewhat extreme degree.

It's you commies that are demanding more witnesses and documents, evidently you don't think the case has already been proven. Rep Jefferies, one of the house managers, said on TV yesterday that the facts haven't been disputed, which is an outright lie. The call transcript disputes them. But hey feel free to keep pushing the commie talking points, that's all you've been doing thorough out this thread.

.

Lol. Commies. Get a grip.

Why don’t you want to hear from these witnesses or see these documents? Worried about what they have to say or something else?

The house proved they aren't relevant, otherwise they would have gone to court to secure them. Don't waste my time with irrelevant crap. Let them prove the case they voted to proceed with.

.

They’re entirely relevant to the case. That’s what you’re scared of.

Why? Dimwingers told America their case was overwhelming? Why are they asking for a do over now?

Air Tight, Overwhelming, and Irrefutable and Incontrovertible.
They had "So much evidence" that they could abandon their other subpoenas, and had no choice but to impeach.


Their own words, not mine.

 

[HenryBHough]

Anything out a dems mouth.

And with damn good reason.

 

[colfax_m]

Still incorrect. Haven’t I showed you the testimony that contradicts this? I think I have. Surprising how few people know this.

One of your fellow commies provided an article claiming it wasn't, of course he ignored a paragraph in the article that said congress gave the DOD an extra year to deliver the aid. The article was dated in Nov, and said the remainder would be distributed within a few weeks, meaning all has been delivered at this point and within the parameters of the law.

.

The paragraph wasn’t ignored. The fact that Congress had to pass the same appropriation again is proof that Trump failed to distribute the original appropriation as the law required.

Congress had to pass another law to make up for Trump’s failure.

They had to pass it again because the government is running on temporary spending measures.

They had to pass it again because Trump stopped it from being spent the first time around.

Government moves slow. Not Trump’s fault.

No. The government was ready to go. Trump stopped them. It is his fault.

 

[bluzman61]

I wonder what they consider a “dishonest, crooked stunt”?

ANYTHING a DIM DEM would attempt...........

Like calling witnesses...

How many witnesses testified publicly during the Clinton trial?

Zero sound about right?

People don’t like to discuss blow jobs in public

Well, your buddy Bubba GOT THEM in public. You can be a real knucklehead, Old (F)Art Carney.

 

[hadit]

We’ve already heard from the witnesses that Schiff allowed to be heard. Why didn't he get them all?

They refused to testify.

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

 

[Indeependent]

I wonder what they consider a “dishonest, crooked stunt”?

ANYTHING a DIM DEM would attempt...........

Like calling witnesses...

How many witnesses testified publicly during the Clinton trial?

Zero sound about right?

People don’t like to discuss blow jobs in public

Well, your buddy Bubba GOT THEM in public. You can be a real knucklehead, Old (F)Art Carney.

Link?
Or is this simply another "more useless than dog shit" post?

 

[Indeependent]

They refused to testify.

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

It's called mental illness.

 

[colfax_m]

They refused to testify.

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

 

[hadit]

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

If that's your big beef, Trump and McConnell can drag this out as long as they want, and ultimately the democrats will cave because they need to get on the campaign trail. The bottom line remains, if the House really wanted the testimony, it could have gotten it the same way the Senate can get it. They didn't want it that bad.

And you, being the sycophant, excuse the House while demanding the Senate make up for their blunder.

 

[Nostra]

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

Lies. They rushed and didn't use the system as laid out in the Constitution.


That's on them, not Trump.........not the Senate.

 

[colfax_m]

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

If that's your big beef, Trump and McConnell can drag this out as long as they want, and ultimately the democrats will cave because they need to get on the campaign trail. The bottom line remains, if the House really wanted the testimony, it could have gotten it the same way the Senate can get it. They didn't want it that bad.

And you, being the sycophant, excuse the House while demanding the Senate make up for their blunder.

No, the House does not have the same options as the Senate. If that were true, Bolton would have showed up when requested. Instead, he’s waiting for Senate to call him. No one has ever tried executive privilege in an impeachment trial. These are facts.

No, McConnell can’t string this out as long as he wants. He doesn’t have any more power over the proceedings as any other Senator.

 

[The Original Tree]

There's a process to address that, why didn't the house use it? Evidently they weren't necessary to the case, because the house voted on the articles without them.

.

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

Nah, you have dragged out your harassment of Trump for 4 years and blown Millions of dollars and have gotten nothing done in The House.

I think we just drag this thing through the Election and start digging in to leaks of classified information. The two whistle blowers who went in to hiding and their attorney ZAID, who announced the beginning of a COUP during The Inauguration. Then we bring in Joe and Hunter Biden a couple months before The Election and expose their corruption, and also dig in to what Brennan, Manafort, Gates, Biden, Clinton and Podesta and The US Embassy were doing in The Ukraine pouring money in to Ukraine elections to stop The Anti-Corruption Government from being elected..

 

[hadit]

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

If that's your big beef, Trump and McConnell can drag this out as long as they want, and ultimately the democrats will cave because they need to get on the campaign trail. The bottom line remains, if the House really wanted the testimony, it could have gotten it the same way the Senate can get it. They didn't want it that bad.

And you, being the sycophant, excuse the House while demanding the Senate make up for their blunder.

No, the House does not have the same options as the Senate. If that were true, Bolton would have showed up when requested. Instead, he’s waiting for Senate to call him. No one has ever tried executive privilege in an impeachment trial. These are facts.

No, McConnell can’t string this out as long as he wants. He doesn’t have any more power over the proceedings as any other Senator.

You could outline the legal authority the Senate has that the House does not. And yes, McConnell can drag this out. He's the head of the Senate and directs the majority party. All he has to do is make a request that someone testify, Trump deny it, launch a court case at the lowest level and watch it wind its long, lonely way up through all the appeal courts until it finally makes it to the SC, just in time for them to decide to pick it up next year, all the while keeping all the Senators in session 6 days a week when they're desperate to campaign. That's the leverage he has, and likely will peel off some democrats because of it. The idiots running for president are already sweating the arrival of Super Tuesday, desperate to gain and keep momentum they'll lose if they have to stay in session. It's obvious that the DNC wants Biden as the nominee, so preventing some of the clown car from campaigning is a gain for them.

 

[Shawnee_b]

[QUOTE="hadit, post: 23901976, member: 44342"
It's called mental illness.

You just pegged all democrats with that one

 

[hadit]

Yes. There is a process to handle that. It’s called a trial. Why shouldn’t the Senate call them?

As I said they house didn't find them necessary for their case, they should't be needed now for them to prove it. Are you dense or just stupid?
.

Since when do y’all give a damn what the House thinks? If you’re unimpressed with the case they present, why wouldn’t you want more information?

Why do you so adamantly refuse to hold the House accountable to their responsibility to gather the information? You keep going on about how there's apparently a treasure trove of new information that the Senate can easily get hold of if they just wanted to, but somehow the House is excused because the information was just so hard to get despite their desperate yearnings to get it, and stuff.

You know full well the House did very little to even try to get the information and now the useful idiots are demanding that the Senate make up for the House's failings, all while excusing the House for failing.

They gathered as much information as was feasible. It’s important we figure this out before the election, don’t you think?

Nah, you have dragged out your harassment of Trump for 4 years and blown Millions of dollars and have gotten nothing done in The House.

I think we just drag this thing through the Election and start digging in to leaks of classified information. The two whistle blowers who went in to hiding and their attorney ZAID, who announced the beginning of a COUP during The Inauguration. Then we bring in Joe and Hunter Biden a couple months before The Election and expose their corruption, and also dig in to what Brennan, Manafort, Gates, Biden, Clinton and Podesta and The US Embassy were doing in The Ukraine pouring money in to Ukraine elections to stop The Anti-Corruption Government from being elected..

You know they'd scream bloody murder about it being a political hit job if anyone went after a democrat in an election year.