Trump has been EXONERATED of all charges.

[Dr Grump]

I'm laughing......

Tonight, would you rather be a GOP guy.....or a DUM?

Neither. But if you put a gun to my head, any party that doesn't have an Orange Buffoon in it....

 

[the other mike]

the Democrats admitted was the 1st politically partisan impeachment..

RATFLMOA!!!! Clinton wasn't politically motivated??? I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn....

Clinton was at the end of his second term. Huge difference.

 

[Faun]

And again, I never said any such thing. You're hallucinating again.

Yes you did. You are claiming the presumption of innocence doesn't apply to impeachment, right?

That's a yes or no question.

I am not responsible for your delusions, dumbfuck. I never said what you falsely attributed to me. But no harm done, it's not like the forum doesn't already know you're batshit crazy.

Can I assume from your post that a simple yes or no question is beyond your cognitive abilities?

If not, let me try again.............

Does the presumption of innocence apply to impeachments?

Yes, or no?

Simple question dumbed down for a simpleton. I hope it isn't still over your head. Ask for help if you need it.

No, it doesn't. Again, for the reading impaired, presumption of innocence applies to criminal cases. How many more times need I say that until it penetrates your armor of ignorance?

So you admit the presumption of innocence doesn’t apply to impeachments, in your warped mind.

once again you are back to “guilty until you prove your innocence”.

Aaaaaand you will now try to deny that is your position....in 3....2.....

LOL

I don't deny you're fucked in the head. Which you are because your limited binary thinking assumes it has to be either presumed innocent or presumed guilty; when in fact, it's neither.

 

[Faun]

Both chambers call witnesses.

The Senate used the same rules as the Clinton impeachment.

Your whining is irrelevant.

Poor, lying ******* moron. The Clinton impeachment allowed witnesses in the trial. This one didn't.

Poor lying little yellow coward. There were NO new witnesses allowed in the Clinton impeachment.case. The ONLY witnesses heard from had already testified in the House. You know, where they’re SUPPOSED to. Epic fail.

But there were witnesses who were called in to testify, Twinky. There were none in Impeached Trump's trial.

Other than 13....

None of whom were called in to testify during the trial.

Try harder.

 

[Faun]

Regardless of their excuses, for the first time in U.S. history, the Senate held an impeachment trial and refused to let witnesses testify.

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

Man, it’s amazing you continue to think anyone is buying your bullshit. Do you wonder why not a single one of the other Dimwingers are in this thread trying to defend your idiocy?

And yet, this still remains the only impeachment trial in U.S. history where not a single witness was called in to testify.

 

[Faun]

The voted against ADDING ADDITIONAL WITNESSES, Dummy. To ADD witnesses there has to already BE witnesses.

You lose again...............

WASHINGTON – A razor-thin majority of Senate Republicans on Friday voted against a Democratic proposal to admit additional witnesses and documents into President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.


Senate votes against calling new witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial

I'm LMFAO at how Faun has ignored this post about ADDITIONAL WITNESSES.

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

 

[bluzman61]

I'm LMFAO at how Faun has ignored this post about ADDITIONAL WITNESSES.

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Thanks AGAIN for professing your deep love of our president and his wonderful exoneration.

 

[bripat9643]

t

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

You also don't know anything about how lawyers defend their client. Boy, you'd be poor if you were a lawyer.

An innocent man does not block witnesses that can prove his innocence. Your excuses don't work.

Those aren't the witnesses Adolph Schiffler wanted to call, moron.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm LMFAO at how Faun has ignored this post about ADDITIONAL WITNESSES.

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

The Dims called 18 witnesses, moron.

 

[bripat9643]

You are lying again. They didn't make a claim of blanket executive immunity.

The subpoenas were challenged on the basis they were invalid due to the refusal of Nazi Pelousy to hold a vote to initiate impeachment proceedings.

That lie won't fly. Get a new one.

The Executive Branch has no standing in the process the House uses to initiate impeachment proceeding and the argument lacks merit. Witnesses can choose to plead the 5th and the Executive can claim privileged over specific answers and documents.

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

They subpoenas were invalid. Your legal theories are pure horseshit. If the Dims had a case, they wouldn't need any more witnesses.

 

[bripat9643]

If the court lacked information it was because the prosecution failed to provide it.
Neither the court nor the defense provides it for the nor allows more time to see if something can fall in their lap

No, it was because trump blocked witnesses and documents. The motherfuckers is guilty as sure as my name here is IM2. We all know it. You know it. The only reason you are using this infantile argument is that he has an R beside his name.

The House had testimony from 13 of their witnesses, and submitted thousands of documents. They got witnesses.

They showed up with what they claimed was an "overwhelming" case, and immediately cried that the Senate needed to do the job of the House by starting another investigation. That isn't the Senate's job, Dopey. The Senate votes on the case the House brings.

The trial wasn't a sham, they used the same rules as they used in the Clinton trial. The only part that was a sham was the bullshit case YOUR House Clowns showed up with.

You lost. Deal with it, Loser.

EXONERATED FOREVER!

The trial was a sham. Clinton had witnesses. Clinton di8d not bl0ock all information. So just face the fact that you will be getting this in your face until trumps ass is gone. I don't care when it is, the mother ****** is guilty, he scammed the system with McConnell and the senate trial was a sham with an outcome that was determined before the house was done with its inquiry. I didn't lose anything. And you didn't win anything.

Your house had 18 witnesses, presented testimony of 13 of them at trail.

Your lie won't fly. Get a new one, liar.

INNOCENT!

If trump was innocent he doesn't block witnesses and documents.

Period.

GUILTY!

Saying that 10,000 times won't make it true.

 

[bripat9643]

e

H

Trump may have been exonerated by the GOP senate, but he is still an incompetent asshole. He always will be.

Incompetent? I doubt you even know the definition of the word. Maybe you should look it up so you don't display your ignorance in future.

Well, at least we agree that he is an asshole.

He's arrogant but he's no asshole and you should be an expert on assholes because you have vast personal experience.

Making the thread about me, Dick, is a very lame diversionary tactic that is used by amateurs. Try to stay on topic. Trump's guilt or innocence is strictly controlled by how many senators are in his party, and has absolutely nothing to do with the charges of the impeachment.

In other words, the charges are irrelevant. Thanks for admitting that.

 

[bripat9643]

The best part is now the House has the time to hand out all those subpoenas even if they are challenged in court.

They still need to take a vote of the entire Congress.

 

[bripat9643]

The official verdict is in: not guilty.

No crime.
No evidence.
No witnesses.
'No Constitutional Violation'
'No Broken Laws'
'No Abuse of Power'
'No Impeachable Offense'
'Admitted political partisan Impeachment'

Pelosi, Schiff, & Nadler should be indicted for:
Conspiracy
Perjury
Obstruction
Providing False/Fake Evidence
Sedition
Espionage
Treason

At the very least they should be brought up on and found guilty of Ethics violations.

Trump refused to allow witnesses and documents. You try that and see if you haven't broken any laws.

You are such a mentally-twisted, reality-denying, Democrat traitor lie-parroting, toxic snowflake dwarf there is almost no use even acknowledging your continued led.

There were 17 witnesses called by the Democrats...
- NONE of them witnessed anything, and NONE of them could name a crime or Impeachable offense when directly asked to do so.

President Trump claimed the same Executive Privilege Barak Obama did during his Fast and Furious scandal.
- The Democrats refused to acknowledge it and refused to take it up in the Judicial Branch's court system, thereby - according to Democrat Constitutional law expert Jonathon Turley - denying the President of his Constitutional Right to DUE PROCESS.

THIS, according to Turley, is only ONE example of how the DEMOCRATS abused THEIR power.

Instead of referencing actual Constitutional experts, established precedence and arguments, you ignorantly parrot the debunked false claims made by the very proven liars and criminals who attempted and failed to carry out this coup.

It is over.

The Senate dismissed the illegitimate Un-Constitutional Impeachment the Democrats admitted was the 1st politically partisan, crimeless Impeachment in IS history.

Accept it or not - what you do or do not choose to accept is insignificant to the fact that the Impeachment failed ... that Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler face possible Censure and / or ethics violations for their dishonorable criminal misconduct...and Pelosi will probably be forced to vacate the Speaker position.

This was one massive historic embarrassing failure for the Democrats...

....followed immediately by the DNC's disastrous Iowa Caucus scandal / meltdown.

Bwuhahaha!

it's entertaining to watch the petulant temper tantrums these America hating TDS morons are throwing over the failure of their coup against Trump.

 

[bripat9643]

No - the Senate determined that there was no need for ADDITIONAL witnesses. They brought a weak ass case in which they claimed they had overwhelming evidence. Please think about that real hard. It's easy to see why the senate said no more witnesses are needed. The dem's said they had overwhelming evidence, they reviewed it, found it to be lacking merit and voila - Exonerated forever.

Regardless of their excuses, for the first time in U.S. history, the Senate held an impeachment trial and refused to let witnesses testify.

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

Adolph Schiffler called 18 witnesses in the House inquiry, and Nadless said they had an ironclad case. Trump got to call zero witnesses.

 

[skookerasbil]

It was a good speech today ......no prompters just a few notes. It was hilarious when he referred to firing "sleaze-bag" James Coney.

Just brilliant stuff.....finally we have a guy who does the poke in the eye.....hard! Will be remembered as the classic spike the football week if you are on the right! And it's a slaughter too.....a social media crayon- fest for the DUMS.

And now the Senate has Hunter Bidens bank records!

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

Man, it’s amazing you continue to think anyone is buying your bullshit. Do you wonder why not a single one of the other Dimwingers are in this thread trying to defend your idiocy?

And yet, this still remains the only impeachment trial in U.S. history where not a single witness was called in to testify.

That infuriates you losers, nice [emoji106]!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Care4all]

The people have the final decision here. I just hope everybody else is not as dumb as you trump supporters.

People did make the decision. We voted for our senators they voted for us. You just did not agree with the outcome and now resort to calling half the country dumb. But keep going comments like yours and Hillary's are what put Trump in office in the first place.

Not really so.... imho

The senators, with each State getting 2, no matter a Wyoming having 575000 citizens and a California having 30,000,000 citizens, represent the State governments..... not we the people, equally... the House of Representatives, represents we the people, and are appropriated by the number of people within each state... I believe it is something like 1 congressman for every 750000 people within each state....

So, we the people impeached Trump in the House, and the Senators, two representing each State, did not remove him from office, by acquittal.

And I would argue that 1 person in Wyoming worth 1 million in California. California for as much as it wastes and costs the US should have negative representation. The senate is a better representation of the people that matter.

quite democratic of you! So much for 1 man, one vote!

 

[Ken Mac]

The people have the final decision here. I just hope everybody else is not as dumb as you trump supporters.

People did make the decision. We voted for our senators they voted for us. You just did not agree with the outcome and now resort to calling half the country dumb. But keep going comments like yours and Hillary's are what put Trump in office in the first place.

Not really so.... imho

The senators, with each State getting 2, no matter a Wyoming having 575000 citizens and a California having 30,000,000 citizens, represent the State governments..... not we the people, equally or proportionately... the House of Representatives, represents we the people, and are appropriated by the number of people within each state... I believe it is something like 1 congressman for every 750000 people within each state....

So, we the people impeached Trump in the House, and the Senators, two representing each State, did not remove him from office, by acquitting him.

We are a democratic REPUBLIC. Not a democratic Democracy. Go read the federalist papers and sone history PLEASE. The union would NEVER have taken place if the minority didn't have adequate representation The reason we are a Republic is that so the majority can't overrun the rights of the minority. It's not Mob rule here. Get a ******* clue.

 

[Care4all]

The people have the final decision here. I just hope everybody else is not as dumb as you trump supporters.

People did make the decision. We voted for our senators they voted for us. You just did not agree with the outcome and now resort to calling half the country dumb. But keep going comments like yours and Hillary's are what put Trump in office in the first place.

Not really so.... imho

The senators, with each State getting 2, no matter a Wyoming having 575000 citizens and a California having 30,000,000 citizens, represent the State governments..... not we the people, equally or proportionately... the House of Representatives, represents we the people, and are appropriated by the number of people within each state... I believe it is something like 1 congressman for every 750000 people within each state....

So, we the people impeached Trump in the House, and the Senators, two representing each State, did not remove him from office, by acquitting him.

We are a democratic REPUBLIC. Not a democratic Democracy. Go read the federalist papers and sone history PLEASE. The union would NEVER have taken place if the minority didn't have adequate representation The reason we are a Republic is that so the majority can't overrun the rights of the minority. It's not Mob rule here. Get a ******* clue.

I know we are democratic Republic....

And it is still, ONE MAN, ONE VOTE...