XponentialChaos
Platinum Member
- Jul 25, 2018
- 28,126
- 10,238
- 435
Of course he's going to keep communicating like has has all of his life.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Will Speaker Pelosi withhold articles of impeachment from Senate until guaranteed a fair trial?
- Thread starter Lakhota
- Start date
Of course he's going to keep communicating like has has all of his life.
The Democrat -controlled House merely serves as the Grand Jury, determining whether charges should be filed....it could not possibly be more unfair than the democratic house was.
A Grand Jury merely determines whether sufficient cause and evidence exists to indict...
Grand Juries usually operate in secret although representatives of both sides are able to present both evidence and questions...
Which is exactly the way that the House did this... begun in secret, with representatives of both sides, inviting the 'suspect' to participate...
For political reasons, this 'Grand Jury' opened-up the hearings, once the exploratory committees had served-up their initial findings...
For both security reasons and to prevent the Minority from overly-delaying the proceedings, the Minority was merely kept on a short leash...
Understandable, given the servile, slavish manner in which Republicans now champion their new Orange Demigod and Master at any cost...
However... it is the Petite Jury which actually tries the indictment brought about by the Grand Jury...
The Senate now becomes a Petite Jury for all intents and purposes...
With higher standards of evidence and witnessing and interrogatories and a more compelling mandate for objectivity...
The question now becomes: "Do the Republicans in the Senate have the balls to conduct the Trial the way it should be conducted?"
Doubtful, but stranger things have happened; all it takes is one, rediscovering his conscience, duty and soul... the first righteous domino.
Last edited:
Billy_Bob
Diamond Member
The House IS NOT A GRAND-JURY and should not operate as such. You idiots need to see how Clinton was handled. They collected both evidence for and against impeachment with full cooperation of Clintons lawyers who were allowed to call witnesses and question uninterrupted unlike the schitt show..The Democrat -controlled House merely serves as the Grand Jury, determining whether charges should be filed....it could not possibly be more unfair than the democratic house was.
A Grand Jury merely determines whether sufficient cause and evidence exists to indict...
Grand Juries usually operate in secret although representatives of both sides are able to present both evidence and questions...
Which is exactly the way that the House did this... begun in secret, with representatives of both sides, inviting the 'suspect' to participate...
For political reasons, this 'Grand Jury' opened-up the hearings, once the exploratory committees had served-up their initial findings...
For both security reasons and to prevent the Minority from overly-delaying the proceedings, the Minority was merely kept on a short leash...
Understandable, given the servile, slavish manner in which Republicans now champion their new Orange Demigod and Master at any cost...
However... it is the Petite Jury which actually tries the indictment brought about by the Grand Jury...
The Senate now becomes a Petite Jury for all intents and purposes...
With higher standards of evidence and witnessing and interrogatories and a more compelling mandate for objectivity...
The question now becomes: "Do the Republicans in the Senate have the balls to conduct the Trial the way it should be conducted?"
Doubtful, but stranger things have happened; all it takes is one, rediscovering his conscience, duty and soul... the first righteous domino.
Last edited:
Speaker Pelosi refused to answer that question a few minutes ago.
Its because she is inebriated...
She doesn't drink alcohol. Stop lying.
Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol
Funny that her daughter calls her "speaker Pelosi".
Maybe Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink, but her mama Pelosi certainly does.
Based on her recent decisions, it seems that alcohol is her primary political and spiritual adviser.
Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol. Her daughter even confirmed that fact.
A self-described satirical website made up a story about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi being kicked out of an event after a “drunken outburst.” That bogus story since has been posted on other websites without being labeled as satire.
This is not the first time that Pelosi has been the target of false claims about alcohol, even though Pelosi’s office has told FactCheck.org on two other occasions that she does not drink alcohol: once in 2010, amid accusations of Pelosi spending taxpayer dollars on partying during air travel, and again in May, when two videos were manipulated to make Pelosi’s words sound slurred.
Another Bogus Claim About Nancy Pelosi
Claim about Nancy Pelosi bar tab is baseless
Referring to "Factcheck" as a source to your information is only slightly less stupid than Factcheck using Pelosi's daughter to their own source of information.
You see, Pelosi's actions would be more understandable and acceptable if they're result of alcoholism, and your claim that she doesn't drink can only mean that her actions are product of everlasting insanity.
Street Juice
Platinum Member
It is insane to allow a small, racially distinct, hostile minority with no allegiance to the American people control the Narrative. Tell me again, why did we attack Iraq? I can't remember. Tell me again how two planes brought down three skyscrapers in NYC on 9-11. The Narrative doesn't explain it. If you think that's cool, then you are likely a member of the small, insatiably antagonistic minority.No, they’re allowed to do what they want, you fking can’t and like it!The press needs diversity of ownershipHe deserves to be aquitted or exonerated immediately by what the lack of evidence shows. Everyone knew this sham impeachment was a bunch of bullcrap, and to try and make it seem legit is flat outright ignorant. What a waste it has all been. I know one thing, and that is that this nation has got to quit lying to itself, and allowing bullcrap to take place at taxpayers expense. These paycheck riding do nothing demoncrats need to be punished at the ballot box big time.... or ... someone who was already told by those in charge of the trial that it will be biased, working directly with the defendant, and is already planning to acquit him no matter what the evidence shows.Only someone who feels they have a weak case delays the start of a trial.Some House Democrats push Pelosi to withhold impeachment articles, delaying Senate trial
When will Speaker Pelosi send Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for trial? Apparently that is her choice if/when she sends them over for trial. It sounds like she is strategically waiting for feedback from McConnell about the rules/procedures - and FAIRNESS. If she thinks it's just going to be a sham trial - she may not send them over. The Articles of Impeachment DO NOT EXPIRE - not next year; not next Congress; not ever.
What do you think?
- Thread starter
- #706
Speaker Pelosi refused to answer that question a few minutes ago.
Its because she is inebriated...
She doesn't drink alcohol. Stop lying.
Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol
Funny that her daughter calls her "speaker Pelosi".
Maybe Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink, but her mama Pelosi certainly does.
Based on her recent decisions, it seems that alcohol is her primary political and spiritual adviser.
Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol. Her daughter even confirmed that fact.
A self-described satirical website made up a story about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi being kicked out of an event after a “drunken outburst.” That bogus story since has been posted on other websites without being labeled as satire.
This is not the first time that Pelosi has been the target of false claims about alcohol, even though Pelosi’s office has told FactCheck.org on two other occasions that she does not drink alcohol: once in 2010, amid accusations of Pelosi spending taxpayer dollars on partying during air travel, and again in May, when two videos were manipulated to make Pelosi’s words sound slurred.
Another Bogus Claim About Nancy Pelosi
Claim about Nancy Pelosi bar tab is baseless
Referring to "Factcheck" as a source to your information is only slightly less stupid than Factcheck using Pelosi's daughter to their own source of information.
You see, Pelosi's actions would be more understandable and acceptable if they're result of alcoholism, and your claim that she doesn't drink can only mean that her actions are product of everlasting insanity.
Go Nancy!
TheShockJock
Active Member
- Dec 13, 2019
- 125
- 33
- 33
The House IS NOT A GRAND-JURY and should not operate as such. You idiots need to see how Clinton was handled. They collected both evidence for and against impeachment with full cooperation of Clintons lawyers who were allowed to call witnesses and question uninterrupted unlike the schitt show..The Democrat -controlled House merely serves as the Grand Jury, determining whether charges should be filed....it could not possibly be more unfair than the democratic house was.
A Grand Jury merely determines whether sufficient cause and evidence exists to indict...
Grand Juries usually operate in secret although representatives of both sides are able to present both evidence and questions...
Which is exactly the way that the House did this... begun in secret, with representatives of both sides, inviting the 'suspect' to participate...
For political reasons, this 'Grand Jury' opened-up the hearings, once the exploratory committees had served-up their initial findings...
For both security reasons and to prevent the Minority from overly-delaying the proceedings, the Minority was merely kept on a short leash...
Understandable, given the servile, slavish manner in which Republicans now champion their new Orange Demigod and Master at any cost...
However... it is the Petite Jury which actually tries the indictment brought about by the Grand Jury...
The Senate now becomes a Petite Jury for all intents and purposes...
With higher standards of evidence and witnessing and interrogatories and a more compelling mandate for objectivity...
The question now becomes: "Do the Republicans in the Senate have the balls to conduct the Trial the way it should be conducted?"
Doubtful, but stranger things have happened; all it takes is one, rediscovering his conscience, duty and soul... the first righteous domino.
Exactly.............the 'impeachment process' set up by our forefathers in the constitution is a unique manner in which to deal with a President who has commited high crimes ...it does not fall under the Parameters of our Judicial system....though the Chief Justice of the Supreme Ct. will preside over the trial in the senate if that ever happens ......it is a singular process designed to remove a President who has commited high crimes and in our entire history no President has ever been removed from office by the impeachment process....now some mistakenly believe Nixon was impeached....though he was not. He simply resigned....thus there is no tradition for removing a President....the only precedent we have is for impeaching which in and of itself means nothing though obviously Pelosi and her fellow conspirators think it carries such a onus it will hurt Trump in the election....they have made a huge mistake believing that.
- Thread starter
- #708
Are Trump and his supporters delusional about him being IMPEACHED?
Frannie
Gold Member
- Feb 27, 2019
- 6,880
- 347
- 135
- Banned
- #709
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts....Who is the presiding judge over the trial?...
The voters of fifty States....Who picks the impartial jurors?...
No. I am sufficiently read to know that each Senator swears a solemn and binding oath to be impartial as a 'juror' in the Senate trial....Or are you stupid enough to claim that sitting US senators are impartial?...
"I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald J. Trump, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.’’
Tell that to Andrew Johnson or Bill Clinton....There will be no trial...
Your so-called 'facts' do not bear any resemblance to Reality....Just a fact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States#Senate_trial
Not one senator would be able to be a juror in a real trial against Trump, and Roberts knowing everyone would have to disqualify himself. All you are doing is quoting the fake system that will not let a juror in a real case read a dictionary because they are required to base their decision on ignorance.
Do you enjoy being my toy?
Referring to "Factcheck" as a source to your information is only slightly less stupid than Factcheck using Pelosi's daughter to their own source of information.
You see, Pelosi's actions would be more understandable and acceptable if they're result of alcoholism, and your claim that she doesn't drink can only mean that her actions are product of everlasting insanity.
Go Nancy!
And that is your argument?
The way I see it, in 2016 you lefties lost so bad, that even three years later you still feel buthurt. The only way that you can make that assfucking look slightly less ugly is if you start bleaching your assholes.
Frannie
Gold Member
- Feb 27, 2019
- 6,880
- 347
- 135
- Banned
- #711
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
It's a fucking joke
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
It's a fucking joke
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. Correct for a normal jury trial, but not an impeachment trial, the senate is the jury.
The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is.
You will see how wrong you are when the senate trial starts, there is no jury questionnaire.
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
As Chief Justice Roberts is the presiding judge, period.
It's a fucking joke. Its no joke, its all prescribed in the Constitution, and there are no appeals to the verdict. Trump either stays president or he leaves office if 67 senators vote for removal, which won't happen.
Again if there is no impartial jury and the judge was appointed on party lines this is NOT A TRIAL. Look I know they are calling it one, but it is not a trial, not for a second.
You can disagree with it, but its in the Constitution, so throw pillows at the TV when something happens that you don't like when the "trial" starts in January. <g>
p.s. the Chief Justice was appointed by the president, like RBG will be replaced by Trump, and probably Breyer too, and hopefully Thomas too as his final FU to the democrats and Joe Biden.
Justice Thomas will probably retire during the 2nd Trump term. The libs have been pushing him to leave since he was confirmed and will finally get their wish. He is 71, and getting someone else in there that will be able to serve into the 2050's is a smart move.
RBG can't quit until Trump leaves. If she were to retire under Trump, the libs would condemn the old lady and she would lose all of her lib friends. Most probably she'll die in office
Totally agree about Thomas, he should retire in 2020 at 72 and Trump puts in a nice young conservative justice.
Breyer is 81 and should retire in Trump's 2nd term while he's still able to, if he wants to wait for a democrat he would be in another 6-years.
Are you kidding about RBG? She's a demi-godess to the democrat women. Agree she won't quit, but her health may fail and force her retirement, she looks like death warmed over now. What will she look like in 5-years, brrrrr?.
Her health failed years ago
- Thread starter
- #712
Referring to "Factcheck" as a source to your information is only slightly less stupid than Factcheck using Pelosi's daughter to their own source of information.
You see, Pelosi's actions would be more understandable and acceptable if they're result of alcoholism, and your claim that she doesn't drink can only mean that her actions are product of everlasting insanity.
Go Nancy!
And that is your argument?
The way I see it, in 2016 you lefties lost so bad, that even three years later you still feel buthurt. The only way that you can make that assfucking look slightly less ugly is if you start bleaching your assholes.
What argument? I wouldn't waste my time trying to debate a great American patriot like Speaker Pelosi with you or any other NaziCon. Her record speaks for itself.
Frannie
Gold Member
- Feb 27, 2019
- 6,880
- 347
- 135
- Banned
- #713
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
It's a fucking joke
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
It's a fucking joke
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. Correct for a normal jury trial, but not an impeachment trial, the senate is the jury.
The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is.
You will see how wrong you are when the senate trial starts, there is no jury questionnaire.
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
As Chief Justice Roberts is the presiding judge, period.
It's a fucking joke. Its no joke, its all prescribed in the Constitution, and there are no appeals to the verdict. Trump either stays president or he leaves office if 67 senators vote for removal, which won't happen.
Again if there is no impartial jury and the judge was appointed on party lines this is NOT A TRIAL. Look I know they are calling it one, but it is not a trial, not for a second.
You can disagree with it, but its in the Constitution, so throw pillows at the TV when something happens that you don't like when the "trial" starts in January. <g>
p.s. the Chief Justice was appointed by the president, like RBG will be replaced by Trump, and probably Breyer too, and hopefully Thomas too as his final FU to the democrats and Joe Biden.
The jurors are all partial not one is impartial and the judge is a political appointee in a political trial
LOL look retard the democrats are not all even going to vote to impeach
Democratic Sen. Doug Jones says he'll vote to acquit President Trump if 'dots aren't connected'
I'm not sure what you are trying to argue?
The judge is the Chief Justice, period, full stop. There is no other option.
The jurors are all 100 senators, period, full stop.
Senator Doug Jones can say anything he wants to now, we all know how he will vote on the articles.
The two articles of impeachment aren't even "crimes" and Article 2 was voided by the USSC when they took the Trump vs House democrats on subpoenas of Trump's taxes. Trump does have the right to take House subpoenas to court, and its not "obstruction of congress".
It's not a trial as the judge can not know everyone in the room and the people accusing the defendant can not be the fucking jury.
IT'S NOT A TRIAL, IT'S A LYNCHING
TheShockJock
Active Member
- Dec 13, 2019
- 125
- 33
- 33
Again any trial must have an impartial jury of ones peers. Correct for a normal jury trial, but not an impeachment trial, the senate is the jury.
The sitting senate can not in any way and under any circumstance pass a jury questionnaire of impartiality. So without an impartial jury the system would not be legal in any court. I have been a jury foreman, it's not rocket science unless I get technical that is.
You will see how wrong you are when the senate trial starts, there is no jury questionnaire.
Bye the way genius in any real court Roberts would have to disqualify himself, so there is no legit judge presiding. LOL if shitomayor was the chief justice and having said that no honkey like Trump could ever have the wisdom of a wise Latina judge was the judge would that be fair.
As Chief Justice Roberts is the presiding judge, period.
It's a fucking joke. Its no joke, its all prescribed in the Constitution, and there are no appeals to the verdict. Trump either stays president or he leaves office if 67 senators vote for removal, which won't happen.
Again if there is no impartial jury and the judge was appointed on party lines this is NOT A TRIAL. Look I know they are calling it one, but it is not a trial, not for a second.
You can disagree with it, but its in the Constitution, so throw pillows at the TV when something happens that you don't like when the "trial" starts in January. <g>
p.s. the Chief Justice was appointed by the president, like RBG will be replaced by Trump, and probably Breyer too, and hopefully Thomas too as his final FU to the democrats and Joe Biden.
The jurors are all partial not one is impartial and the judge is a political appointee in a political trial
LOL look retard the democrats are not all even going to vote to impeach
Democratic Sen. Doug Jones says he'll vote to acquit President Trump if 'dots aren't connected'
I'm not sure what you are trying to argue?
The judge is the Chief Justice, period, full stop. There is no other option.
The jurors are all 100 senators, period, full stop.
Senator Doug Jones can say anything he wants to now, we all know how he will vote on the articles.
The two articles of impeachment aren't even "crimes" and Article 2 was voided by the USSC when they took the Trump vs House democrats on subpoenas of Trump's taxes. Trump does have the right to take House subpoenas to court, and its not "obstruction of congress".
It's not a trial as the judge can not know everyone in the room and the people accusing the defendant can not be the fucking jury.
IT'S NOT A TRIAL, IT'S A LYNCHING
Attempted Lynching.....they made a rope, constructed a platform....and then..............and then.........................the whole process collapsed............Nancy has now been reduced to taking her ball and going home --completely humiliated ---- a laughing stock of the Nation.
Referring to "Factcheck" as a source to your information is only slightly less stupid than Factcheck using Pelosi's daughter to their own source of information.
You see, Pelosi's actions would be more understandable and acceptable if they're result of alcoholism, and your claim that she doesn't drink can only mean that her actions are product of everlasting insanity.
Go Nancy!
And that is your argument?
The way I see it, in 2016 you lefties lost so bad, that even three years later you still feel buthurt. The only way that you can make that assfucking look slightly less ugly is if you start bleaching your assholes.
What argument? I wouldn't waste my time trying to debate a great American patriot like Speaker Pelosi with you or any other NaziCon. Her record speaks for itself.
And you're doing it by acting just as Nazis did.
- Oct 18, 2011
- 22,320
- 12,832
- 1,405
Some House Democrats push Pelosi to withhold impeachment articles, delaying Senate trial
When will Speaker Pelosi send Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for trial? Apparently that is her choice if/when she sends them over for trial. It sounds like she is strategically waiting for feedback from McConnell about the rules/procedures - and FAIRNESS. If she thinks it's just going to be a sham trial - she may not send them over. The Articles of Impeachment DO NOT EXPIRE - not next year; not next Congress; not ever.
What do you think?
There’s “fair” and then there is Democrats’ version of Fair: any means possible.
- Oct 19, 2012
- 61,093
- 59,313
- 3,635
Speaker Pelosi refused to answer that question a few minutes ago.
Its because she is inebriated...
She doesn't drink alcohol. Stop lying.
Speaker Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol
No? LOL
I read this online ............hahahahaa too funny
" When Nancy Pelosi walks into a liquor store - fearing for their lives, hundreds of bottles of vodka start shaking and clanking together. They know they're in big trouble."
- Nov 14, 2011
- 120,619
- 64,997
- 2,635
Welfare??What does that have to do with Pelosi stringing Impeached Trump along...?Dumbfuck, an election prediction is not an approval rating. That was your idiotic claim.Dumbfuck, that's not an approval rating.
Wrong again they were election predictions, fake news and lies
Were u born dumb oar dud u stubdy
Hopefully you pick better stocks than you pick candidates...……………..
How is your Pokémon collection working out
I picked GOOG
Alphabet Inc. Cl C
Cant wait until the feds break them up
Nothing to someone on welfare like you...………….
MAGA
I'm raising my family myself with no assistance from the government.
- Nov 14, 2011
- 120,619
- 64,997
- 2,635
LOLOLAnd Impeached Trump will still be impeached.The Articles of Impeachment DO NOT EXPIRE - not next year; not next Congress; not ever.
They will expire when McConnell sets the trial date. Once Pisslosi doesn’t turn over the required paperwork, vote to dismiss. Case closed.
Not if your cowardly leaders (and you know cowards wing one yourself) don’t send it to the Senate fuckwad. Process NOT complete no matter how much you cry dipshit.
Yup, still impeached.
basquebromance
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2015
- 109,396
- 27,004
- 2,220
- Banned
- #720
God wants Trump impeached, my friends!
Similar threads
- Replies
- 41
- Views
- 841
- Replies
- 263
- Views
- 10K
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 660
- Replies
- 46
- Views
- 3K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 58
- Views
- 278
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 51
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 37
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8029
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 468
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-