Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??

[AzogtheDefiler]

Gotcha. So, you think the republicans are correct. So, not all theater.

An executive branch can obstruct congress by refusing to comply with their subpoenas, of course. From where are you drawing your legal opinion, considering that precedent contradicts you?

Your stupidity is expected lifelong loser. The Dims had the option to go to court to attempt to compel testimony. Trump used the legal remedy of the courts to back up executive privilege. They declined to do so. Thus any “obstruction” that occurred was brought on by the Dims themselves. So eager to rush this through that they wouldn’t even try to compel witnesses to appear. So you’re charging Trump with something YOU caused. Talk about. brain dead.....

That's exactly right.

I'm not a high priced legal expert by any stretch of the imagination. But I know its a LEGAL question as to whether exec privilege applies.

And this has to meander its way through the courts. If Congress wins, they can compel these fellas to testify. If they don't, tough shit.

That's the American way.

Precedent has already been set on this, everyone who is subpoenaed, HAS TO SHOW UP.

Trumps order to not show up, is OBSTRUCTION of congress.

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

 

[georgephillip]

Your stupidity is expected lifelong loser. The Dims had the option to go to court to attempt to compel testimony. Trump used the legal remedy of the courts to back up executive privilege. They declined to do so. Thus any “obstruction” that occurred was brought on by the Dims themselves. So eager to rush this through that they wouldn’t even try to compel witnesses to appear. So you’re charging Trump with something YOU caused. Talk about. brain dead.....

That's exactly right.

I'm not a high priced legal expert by any stretch of the imagination. But I know its a LEGAL question as to whether exec privilege applies.

And this has to meander its way through the courts. If Congress wins, they can compel these fellas to testify. If they don't, tough shit.

That's the American way.

Precedent has already been set on this, everyone who is subpoenaed, HAS TO SHOW UP.

Trumps order to not show up, is OBSTRUCTION of congress.

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

He is not

Are you blind and brain-dead?

Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia

 

[RealDave]

Your stupidity is expected lifelong loser. The Dims had the option to go to court to attempt to compel testimony. Trump used the legal remedy of the courts to back up executive privilege. They declined to do so. Thus any “obstruction” that occurred was brought on by the Dims themselves. So eager to rush this through that they wouldn’t even try to compel witnesses to appear. So you’re charging Trump with something YOU caused. Talk about. brain dead.....

That's exactly right.

I'm not a high priced legal expert by any stretch of the imagination. But I know its a LEGAL question as to whether exec privilege applies.

And this has to meander its way through the courts. If Congress wins, they can compel these fellas to testify. If they don't, tough shit.

That's the American way.

Precedent has already been set on this, everyone who is subpoenaed, HAS TO SHOW UP.

Trumps order to not show up, is OBSTRUCTION of congress.

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

 

[Care4all]

Merry Christmas!

The right and just thing to do for the whole Nation and for the President to have his due process, is to have a full trial, with evidence and witnesses from BOTH sides, like with ALL trials we Americans know as fair and just,

with jurors that take in all the evidence, before they make their final decisions.

Any thing LESS of that, is simply a crooked SHAM, and makes a mockery out of our Constitution, the Impeachment trial, the juror's sworn before God oath, and justice in and of itself, and will tear the country apart even further imho.

The president will likely be acquitted because it would take 2/3's voting guilty to get him removed... but at least we the people, will be able to believe the process was not one of, ''THE FIX WAS IN'', but an honest and just decision and verdict.

I don't see how any American could disagree with that...???

 

[RealDave]

How about these statistics, we lost 800,000 jobs in jan & Feb of 2009. Our economy was shrinking at a rate over 6%.

The truth is that Obmsa built a string, growing economy.

Trump's plan was to create jobs through borrowing 1.5 trillion.

Obama was President in January and February 2009.

Just the facts, Dave.

The Bush Recession started in the 4th quarter of 2007 you ******* moron.

The Democrats controlled Congress beginning January 2007. Barney had already had his way.

LOLOL

If you think the causes of the Great Recession began in 2007, then your mental deformity is beyond repair.

Sure, the root causes of the Obama Recession started before 2007. But the Do-nothing 110th Congress did nothing to address those causes, they were satisfied to see a downturn they could blame on Dubya.

List the actions of the Democrat Congress From January of 2007 to September of 2007 that created the Bush Recession?


But hey, I like your arguments that it was the Democrats fault for not stopping the Republicans,

 

[RealDave]

How the **** is a recession in 2008 an Obama recession. He didn't take office until 2009.

You people are so ******* stupid that it makes me sick.

Obama took office in January 2009, and is clearly responsible for everything from that date.

But even before than, businesses saw the upcoming Obama Regime as bad news, and started to cut back as soon as they saw his victory was inevitable during the summer of 2008.

LOLOLOL

So Obama is responsible for the recession that started 14 months before he became president?

Dud ya think the forum really needed more evidence you're a brain-dead cultist?

The ONLY thing that Barack Obama is "responsible" for is his choices once he became President! He "chose" to pursue the Affordable Care Act as his primary legislative goal despite being told that it would retard job creation at a time when millions of Americans were unemployed and desperate for work! He and you progressives "chose" to propose Cap & Trade legislation that would have placed additional costs on American businesses! Barack Obama and the Democratically led Congress "chose" to burden American businesses with record numbers of new regulations that again increased costs on American businesses! Barack Obama "chose" to shut down all oil exploration in the Gulf following a deep water leak...even shallow water drilling operations that had impeccable safety records! Barack Obama "chose" to sign the Paris Accord which once again would have burdened American businesses with costs that it's competitors would not have had to bear! Barack Obama "chose" to reorder who got paid and who didn't in the auto bailouts so as to reward his supporters in the UAW...screwing the other creditors who had invested their capital! ALL of these things were a deterrent to job creation.

Barack Obama isn't responsible for what took place BEFORE he became President but he sure as hell is responsible for the worst recovery from a recession since The Great Depression! THAT is his economic legacy...not the sham graphs that you post to hide how badly his choices affected job creation in this country!

View attachment 296307

What in any of what I've cited falls under the heading of "erased history"? It's what Barack Obama and the left DID with the power they were granted in the 2008 elections...power that was was indeed given to them by the voters...power that they used to push a progressive agenda that put policy before people's lives...an agenda that left millions of private sector Americans twisting in the wind without jobs.

It was the Bush recession that left people twisting in the wind without jobs.

 

[RealDave]

Um, the stock market is not an economic indicator.

Um, actually it is.


The big dip in stock prices in October 1929 foretold the Great Depression. Ditto with the dip in stock prices in 08-09 and the resultant Obama Recession, that fortunately, Trump was able to get us out of.

How the **** is a recession in 2008 an Obama recession. He didn't take office until 2009.

You people are so ******* stupid that it makes me sick.

Obama took office in January 2009, and is clearly responsible for everything from that date.

But even before than, businesses saw the upcoming Obama Regime as bad news, and started to cut back as soon as they saw his victory was inevitable during the summer of 2008.

LOLOLOL

So Obama is responsible for the recession that started 14 months before he became president?

Dud ya think the forum really needed more evidence you're a brain-dead cultist?

The ONLY thing that Barack Obama is "responsible" for is his choices once he became President! He "chose" to pursue the Affordable Care Act as his primary legislative goal despite being told that it would retard job creation at a time when millions of Americans were unemployed and desperate for work! He and you progressives "chose" to propose Cap & Trade legislation that would have placed additional costs on American businesses! Barack Obama and the Democratically led Congress "chose" to burden American businesses with record numbers of new regulations that again increased costs on American businesses! Barack Obama "chose" to shut down all oil exploration in the Gulf following a deep water leak...even shallow water drilling operations that had impeccable safety records! Barack Obama "chose" to sign the Paris Accord which once again would have burdened American businesses with costs that it's competitors would not have had to bear! Barack Obama "chose" to reorder who got paid and who didn't in the auto bailouts so as to reward his supporters in the UAW...screwing the other creditors who had invested their capital! ALL of these things were a deterrent to job creation.

Barack Obama isn't responsible for what took place BEFORE he became President but he sure as hell is responsible for the worst recovery from a recession since The Great Depression! THAT is his economic legacy...not the sham graphs that you post to hide how badly his choices affected job creation in this country!

Since you can't remember shit, the pursuit of the ACA was after the passing of the stimulus act. So Congress already had dobe what they could to help the economy & then went to work on the ACA.

The Deepwater Horizon showed that oil companies were unprepaid and lied about their abilities to deal with such situations.

I realize you Trumpettes hate the environment as much as you hate your own children, but we need to protect our air & water & fight climate change.

I love it how you assfucks take actions to save our auto industry and the efforts to help our police, fire, & education as helping unions.

And the worst recession in 80 years would hasve the "worst" recovery in 80 years, Any ******* idiot knows that.

You, by voting Republican, are to blame to the Bush recession. Youy votred for the people that took us from a balanced budget to the worst recession in 80 years.

Quit blaming those tasked to fix it.

 

[toobfreak]

Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??

Pretty stupid question by someone obviously mired in media misinformation.

• The Senate has nowhere to go, nothing to do when the Impeachment isn't even filed with them yet!
• Without the Impeachment case on file for the Senate to look at, it is impossible for the Senate to say what kind of hearing, who they would or wouldn't call!
• No other House impeachment in history has tried to set conditions or the House tried to manipulate the Senate in this way as a condition of hostage without which they refuse to file the Impeachment they said was so damned urgent. In effect, The House is impeaching the Senate as well in a no vote of confidence, after impeaching the President on the grounds that he too must serve at the House's pleasure in order to remain in office! In effect, a political coup.

So ---- DEADLOCK. No impeachment, no hearing, no witnesses, Nadda. Tough titties for Nancy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems should impeach Trump again, like right now

 

[Polishprince]

That's exactly right.

I'm not a high priced legal expert by any stretch of the imagination. But I know its a LEGAL question as to whether exec privilege applies.

And this has to meander its way through the courts. If Congress wins, they can compel these fellas to testify. If they don't, tough shit.

That's the American way.

Precedent has already been set on this, everyone who is subpoenaed, HAS TO SHOW UP.

Trumps order to not show up, is OBSTRUCTION of congress.

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

 

[Care4all]

Precedent has already been set on this, everyone who is subpoenaed, HAS TO SHOW UP.

Trumps order to not show up, is OBSTRUCTION of congress.

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

 

[Polishprince]

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

No he couldn't have, and that's the point. The libs announced from Day One, when Trump disembarked from the Golden Escalator, that they intended to drive him from the marketplace of ideas with impeachment.

Trump isn't perfect, no president is. But none have ever faced the insane ire of libs like he has.

 

[toobfreak]

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations....

TOO FUNNY. If Trump were innocent, he would have PROVED it.

1. People in a free society don't prove their innocence, that is already assumed. It is up to the ACCUSER to prove your guilt.
2. Since the first charge is based purely on an assumption made from circumstances rather than any hard evidence and the second charge is based solely on his exercising his legal rights, there is no proof on this planet that would have dissuaded the Democrats in the House from impeaching Trump. I mean, seriously, they've been showing their hand for THREE ******* YEARS. This was the best they finally could come up with before it got too close to the election hoping it would stick long enough to confuse enough voters to cost him the election, nothing more. The charges are tissue paper.

Don't blow smoky up our dresses, Honey.

 

[Polishprince]

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations....

TOO FUNNY. If Trump were innocent, he would have PROVED it.

1. People in a free society don't prove their innocence, that is already assumed. It is up to the ACCUSER to prove your guilt.
2. Since the first charge is based purely on an assumption made from circumstances rather than any hard evidence and the second charge is based solely on his exercising his legal rights, there is no proof on this planet that would have dissuaded the Democrats in the House from impeaching Trump. I mean, seriously, they've been showing their hand for THREE ******* YEARS. This was the best they finally could come up before it got too close to the election hoping it would stick long enough to confuse enough voters to cost him the election, nothing more. The charges are tissue paper.

Don't blow smoky up our dresses, Honey.

President Trump cooperated 1000% with the phony Mueller investigation,which turned up exactly ZERO proof of any collusion between Trump and Uncle Pooty. Mueller and his stooges went to extreme lengths, questioning scores of Trump associates for hundreds of hours. Locked disabled Senior Citizen Paul Manafort in the hole for a year, trying to get him to lie about The Donald. Complete failure by Mueller.

After the report came out, that was that, the libs don't get a chance to re-do it. President Trump has work to do.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Subpoenas can be fought in court, that's all that's happening.

Obama did the same thing, ditto with clinton and bush. Pick up those guys too, if its really a "high crime".

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

You don't understand American legal procedures. The burden of proof is solely on the accuser. The defendant need present nothing until the accuser's contentions are presented along with their evidence.

Since the Democrats have produced no evidence, they've moved to start up a another Congressional Chinese gang-**** to try to support their nonsense.

 

[Polishprince]

Why is Trump fighting witnesses that will clear him?

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

You don't understand American legal procedures. The burden of proof is solely on the accuser. The defendant need present nothing until the accuser's contentions are presented along with their evidence.

Since the Democrats have produced no evidence, they've moved to start up a another Congressional Chinese gang-**** to try to support their nonsense.

Since President Trump realizes that after he is exonerated on this Fake Impeachment, another is approaching right on the heels of this, there is really no reason to try and rush this one. Another "historic" moment is right down the road as Trump become the first President to get impeached twice, and after that one is resolved, he'll be the first to be impeached thrice.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He is not

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

You don't understand American legal procedures. The burden of proof is solely on the accuser. The defendant need present nothing until the accuser's contentions are presented along with their evidence.

Since the Democrats have produced no evidence, they've moved to start up a another Congressional Chinese gang-**** to try to support their nonsense.

Since President Trump realizes that after he is exonerated on this Fake Impeachment, another is approaching right on the heels of this, there is really no reason to try and rush this one. Another "historic" moment is right down the road as Trump become the first President to get impeached twice, and after that one is resolved, he'll be the first to be impeached thrice.

Impeaching again will not help Democrats' popularity. My 93 year-old mom despises them even more for making the networks interfere with her soap operas with their nonsense the first time around. And yes, she still votes.

 

[Polishprince]

So none of the people who he denied to testify can clear him? Further proof of guilt.

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

You don't understand American legal procedures. The burden of proof is solely on the accuser. The defendant need present nothing until the accuser's contentions are presented along with their evidence.

Since the Democrats have produced no evidence, they've moved to start up a another Congressional Chinese gang-**** to try to support their nonsense.

Since President Trump realizes that after he is exonerated on this Fake Impeachment, another is approaching right on the heels of this, there is really no reason to try and rush this one. Another "historic" moment is right down the road as Trump become the first President to get impeached twice, and after that one is resolved, he'll be the first to be impeached thrice.

Impeaching again will not help Democrats' popularity. My 93 year-old mom despises them even more for making the networks interfere with her soap operas with their nonsense the first time around. And yes, she still votes.

And it just isn't the soap operas that the libs are messing with. My mum is 89 and complained how they cut in the middle of the Price is Right.

 

[Care4all]

You have things half assed backwards, dave.

Its up to the Libs to prove Trump guilty, not for Trump to prove himself innocent. And even it was, there is nothing that Mr. Bolton could say that would convince extreme doofuses like Pocahontas and Crazy Bernie that Trump is a tremendous President who is worthy to rule over the nation he loves.

he could have prevented the charges, the articles of impeachment, from even happening,

if he was innocent he would have shown something, anything at all that would have discredited the accusations.... like any normal human being, innocent of accusations, would have presented to the cops before they were charged... that could exculpate them, before those charges are drawn.

Makes ya wonder, did Trump want this impeachment for some perverted political gain?

OR, is he really not as innocent and perfect, as he claims to you Trumpettes?


-----------------------------------------------------------

The R's do not want a trial, where the prosecution has to provide their case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

There is no other way to view it.

Ya'll seem to want a SHAM trial, where the FIX IS IN, before prosecutors even present their witnesses and evidence.

You don't understand American legal procedures. The burden of proof is solely on the accuser. The defendant need present nothing until the accuser's contentions are presented along with their evidence.

Since the Democrats have produced no evidence, they've moved to start up a another Congressional Chinese gang-**** to try to support their nonsense.

Since President Trump realizes that after he is exonerated on this Fake Impeachment, another is approaching right on the heels of this, there is really no reason to try and rush this one. Another "historic" moment is right down the road as Trump become the first President to get impeached twice, and after that one is resolved, he'll be the first to be impeached thrice.

Impeaching again will not help Democrats' popularity. My 93 year-old mom despises them even more for making the networks interfere with her soap operas with their nonsense the first time around. And yes, she still votes.

And it just isn't the soap operas that the libs are messing with. My mum is 89 and complained how they cut in the middle of the Price is Right.

my hubby has the same complaint! He hates it when the Price is Right is usurped for it!!!!

 

[luchitociencia]

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

The problem with your witnesses is that they have gave their opinions only.

Their answers about any wrongdoing by the president have been in reference to the same question: in your opinion, who will benefit from this and that?

In their opinion they think the president did something wrong.

Well, I think he did not.

Now is their opinion against mine. Tell me about it.

You want to go forward with an impeachment case that in reality is not a valid case because is just accusations made based on opinions.