Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He had no defence, because he was guilty.... there was no one that he could call....that's why his lawyers argued he was above the Law... And made up their "the process was unfair" bull crud.To be specific the house does not interview defense witnesses. And to the point Trump's defense never ask for any.Without even searching, the Defense called 16 of their own witness that would not have been part of the House's witnesses...Bullshit be specific now and show us where in the 1868 one the Senate called unquestioned witnesses.
so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...Moron, again JUST for you...... The HOUSE does the Investigation, they call the witnesses and they amass the evidence. Once they feel they have enough ththe FIX WAS IN, SHAM impeachment TRIAL
Will go down in History... there will be hundreds of books by Historians recapping the FACTS of what actually happened.
It's NOT going to be swept under the rug or forgotten, if we still have a country left, 100 or 500 years from now.
You and Trump can not just cover your eyes and cover your ears or make up crap to change the actual facts...
it just ain't gonna happen...
yes, the SHAM trial, with no witnesses and evidence allowed, resulted in an acquittal....
He was acquitted, but we ALL KNOW WHY..... and HISTORY will record such. Period.
Good GOD you are BEYOND STUPID.the FIX WAS IN, SHAM impeachment TRIAL
Will go down in History... there will be hundreds of books by Historians recapping the FACTS of what actually happened.
It's NOT going to be swept under the rug or forgotten, if we still have a country left, 100 or 500 years from now.
You and Trump can not just cover your eyes and cover your ears or make up crap to change the actual facts...
it just ain't gonna happen...
yes, the SHAM trial, with no witnesses and evidence allowed, resulted in an acquittal....
He was acquitted, but we ALL KNOW WHY..... and HISTORY will record such. Period.
Here let me help you out.
The way Impeachment works is the HOUSE investigates gathers evidence calls witnesses and brings the case together. The JOB to call witnesses rests SOLELY with the HOUSE. I asked you before to name a single witness called to Clinton's Impeachment that was not questioned by the House.
The Senate hears the Houses evidence and looks at their evidence and MAY on occasion call a witness the HOUSE ALREADY TALKED TOO, for clarity. It is not and never has been the responsibility of the Senate to call witnesses that the HOUSE did not call and question. EVER.
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
He broke laws and he broke his constitutional oath, to faithfully execute the law.Trump hasn't broken any laws, dingbat.No guarantee one way or the other imo, it's all up to President Trump, and how far he will take his own bold lawlessness!does that make Trump any less guilty?
Lamar Alexander R, says the evidence was OVERWHELMING and proved Trump was guilty as charged.... only Lamar's excuse is that he didn't want him removed and he'd rather let voters decide in November....
No, he as always been 100% not guilty.
TOTAL EXONERATION!
he was not totally exonerated.... his record and charges were not expunged.
Exonerated FOREVER.
Are democrats going to impeach president Trump again?(if he gets much worse, Christ will come and save us, from the antichrist's wrath so we won't need impeachment)
so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...Moron, again JUST for you...... The HOUSE does the Investigation, they call the witnesses and they amass the evidence. Once they feel they have enough th
Good GOD you are BEYOND STUPID.
Here let me help you out.
The way Impeachment works is the HOUSE investigates gathers evidence calls witnesses and brings the case together. The JOB to call witnesses rests SOLELY with the HOUSE. I asked you before to name a single witness called to Clinton's Impeachment that was not questioned by the House.
The Senate hears the Houses evidence and looks at their evidence and MAY on occasion call a witness the HOUSE ALREADY TALKED TOO, for clarity. It is not and never has been the responsibility of the Senate to call witnesses that the HOUSE did not call and question. EVER.
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Because the Trump team With all republican senators voting to have the material witnesses, would have boxed him in.... He needed them to acquit him... his threats to what he'd do to them if they did not support him would be nullified, cuz they would have held the upper hand.
If he fought the subpoena it would have been visible and front and center, to the public who would know he was acting guilty to fight them, if he was innocent... causing for more calls to impeach him out of office
The courts, in the middle of a trial would have been fast tracked if they were used, and his appointed judges could not help his stonewalling with the world watching and chief justice watching.
Trump would not have wanted the impeachment trial hanging open, and over his head....
____________
Any one of those reasons above.....??
He broke laws and he broke his constitutional oath, to faithfully execute the law.Trump hasn't broken any laws, dingbat.No guarantee one way or the other imo, it's all up to President Trump, and how far he will take his own bold lawlessness!No, he as always been 100% not guilty.
TOTAL EXONERATION!
he was not totally exonerated.... his record and charges were not expunged.
Exonerated FOREVER.
Are democrats going to impeach president Trump again?
Trump broke Box Wine Nancy.
Chief Justice Roberts:
"It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the said Donald John Trump be, and he is
hereby, acquitted of the charges in said articles"
Again, you are just as Delusional, Insane and Mentally Unstable as Pelosi. Thank God she doesn't have her finger on the Nuclear Button.She has a point.... Clinton was acquitted after a real trial, with witnesses and with evidence submitted, from both sides....
There was no real trial, with evidence and witnesses in Trumps....
I don't think there was ever a criminal, civic or impeachment trial in our entire history of a Nation, that did not permit witness testimony and documented evidence, as was with this SHAM trial......
THAT will forever be the *asterisk next to the Trump Acquittal.....
they should have just allowed them.... he was going to likely be acquitted anyway, on a partisan basis, but at least it would have made the trial appear to be, a trial and not the shameful, blatant, not questionable, the fix is in SCAM that it was....
doesn't it simply mean i'm tired of "whelming" - i'm "over it"?does that make Trump any less guilty?Excuses....excuses....excuses....His assistant already had one wo was called to testify first, and took it to court, and bolton shared the same lawyer with him....They didn’t even send Bolton a subpoena.What job did they refuse to do...? Go to court for years because of the president's stonewalling by tying witnesses and evidence up in the courts?
that's all bull crud.
When we already have precedence from the Supreme Court, witnesses and TAPES, like in the NIXON TAPES of his personal doings with his full administration, could NOT be held back from the impeachment inquirers on the basis of Executive privilege.... period.
Just think about it, there would be no reason for the Founders to even put impeachment in to the Constitution, if the President could legally stonewall the impeachment investigation for months or years by denying subpoenas and admin witnesses, and then tying it up in the court for months or years....to get the subpoena witnesses and evidence....
It would completely nullify the power given to the House on Impeachment....
Your excuses for them not doing their job isn’t working. They rushed it so they could go on vacation.
and remember, it was at the time of the impeachment, 10 months of the House trying to get Don Mcghan to testify on the Mueller report , trump obstruction of Justice.... and the president has fought it all the way, all the courts have ruled HE HAS TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS, and the president keeps appealing it, it is now up to the SC level and if they take the case....not certain if they have.... and if they do, it will be another 5 or 6 months.... and likely not to give a ruling till after the election so not to interfere with it...
the president's plan of STONEWALLING was and is working for him....
AND THAT IS NOT, what our Founders had in mind with the power of Impeachment given to the House.
The House already knew it would take years of court battles to get through all of Trump's obstruction, in to his own impeachment.... and impeachment is not something that one can wait a half a year or two.... sorry, I do not agree with you if you think it should....
The House didn’t do its job. Period.
Lamar Alexander R, says the evidence was OVERWHELMING and proved Trump was guilty as charged.... only Lamar's excuse is that he didn't want him removed and he'd rather let voters decide in November....
That is Lamar Alexander's opinion and his problem for not acting on it.
Just because he said, does not make it true.
It's not a reflection on Trump that Alexander doesn't have any balls.
And to OVERWHELMING....then why do you stupid asses keep saying you need witnesses.
Do you know what OVERWHELMING means ?
might as well tell her to stop breathing.I will not let her LIE repeatedly about how an Impeachment works. There may actually be people that read this stuff that do not know she is LYING.Dude, you are banging your head against a retarded wall..........and you would get a more coherent response from that retarded wall.I have REPEATEDLY ask you to list for us in any previous IMPEACHMENT the witnesses the Senate called that were NOT originally called by and interviewed by the HOUSE. I must assume your failure to do so means there have been NONE EVER. I will repeat for you, because you obviously are to stupid to have grasp it yet, even though I have posted it several times now,The HOUSE Investigates, they call witnesses and they gather evidence. They are tasked with that part of the Impeachment procedures. The Senate is task with hearing from the House managers all the charges , the House presents all the testimony and evidence they have gathered that support those charges. The ONLY time the Senate has EVER called a witness was when they wanted clarification from some witness the House had already interviewed. The Senate then votes on the individual charges.It took balls for any Republican Senator to be impartial and vote for and with the truth, that they all knew was the OVERWHELMING truth....does that make Trump any less guilty?
Lamar Alexander R, says the evidence was OVERWHELMING and proved Trump was guilty as charged.... only Lamar's excuse is that he didn't want him removed and he'd rather let voters decide in November....
That is Lamar Alexander's opinion and his problem for not acting on it.
Just because he said, does not make it true.
It's not a reflection on Trump that Alexander doesn't have any balls.
And to OVERWHELMING....then why do you stupid asses keep saying you need witnesses.
Do you know what OVERWHELMING means ?
No Republican Senator had balls....to vote with the truth and the Law, THEY GAVE THOSE BALLS AWAY BEFORE THE TRIAL BEGAN and sealed the deal when they voted for no witnesses and no evidence to be presented in the trial...
the fear of The Wrath of Trump was too frightening for them....they were shakin' in their boots, ALL ball less....
except Romney,
but to you all, he's a useless piece of shit, RINO
girl, he's rolled you up and smoked your ass. you keep shouting and pasting a lot of irrelevant shit and then demanding people find relevance in your lingering bullshit.Without even searching, the Defense called 16 of their own witness that would not have been part of the House's witnesses...Bullshit be specific now and show us where in the 1868 one the Senate called unquestioned witnesses.
What laws did he break? How about the one that says work permits are given only to aliens who are legally in the country?He broke laws and he broke his constitutional oath, to faithfully execute the law.Trump hasn't broken any laws, dingbat.No guarantee one way or the other imo, it's all up to President Trump, and how far he will take his own bold lawlessness!No, he as always been 100% not guilty.
TOTAL EXONERATION!
he was not totally exonerated.... his record and charges were not expunged.
Exonerated FOREVER.
Are democrats going to impeach president Trump again?
You mean it would have been a circus?so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...Moron, again JUST for you...... The HOUSE does the Investigation, they call the witnesses and they amass the evidence. Once they feel they have enough th
Good GOD you are BEYOND STUPID.
Here let me help you out.
The way Impeachment works is the HOUSE investigates gathers evidence calls witnesses and brings the case together. The JOB to call witnesses rests SOLELY with the HOUSE. I asked you before to name a single witness called to Clinton's Impeachment that was not questioned by the House.
The Senate hears the Houses evidence and looks at their evidence and MAY on occasion call a witness the HOUSE ALREADY TALKED TOO, for clarity. It is not and never has been the responsibility of the Senate to call witnesses that the HOUSE did not call and question. EVER.
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Because the Trump team With all republican senators voting to have the material witnesses, would have boxed him in.... He needed them to acquit him... his threats to what he'd do to them if they did not support him would be nullified, cuz they would have held the upper hand.
If he fought the subpoena it would have been visible and front and center, to the public who would know he was acting guilty to fight them, if he was innocent... causing for more calls to impeach him out of office
The courts, in the middle of a trial would have been fast tracked if they were used, and his appointed judges could not help his stonewalling with the world watching and chief justice watching.
Trump would not have wanted the impeachment trial hanging open, and over his head....
____________
Any one of those reasons above.....??
so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...Moron, again JUST for you...... The HOUSE does the Investigation, they call the witnesses and they amass the evidence. Once they feel they have enough ththe FIX WAS IN, SHAM impeachment TRIAL
Will go down in History... there will be hundreds of books by Historians recapping the FACTS of what actually happened.
It's NOT going to be swept under the rug or forgotten, if we still have a country left, 100 or 500 years from now.
You and Trump can not just cover your eyes and cover your ears or make up crap to change the actual facts...
it just ain't gonna happen...
yes, the SHAM trial, with no witnesses and evidence allowed, resulted in an acquittal....
He was acquitted, but we ALL KNOW WHY..... and HISTORY will record such. Period.
Good GOD you are BEYOND STUPID.the FIX WAS IN, SHAM impeachment TRIAL
Will go down in History... there will be hundreds of books by Historians recapping the FACTS of what actually happened.
It's NOT going to be swept under the rug or forgotten, if we still have a country left, 100 or 500 years from now.
You and Trump can not just cover your eyes and cover your ears or make up crap to change the actual facts...
it just ain't gonna happen...
yes, the SHAM trial, with no witnesses and evidence allowed, resulted in an acquittal....
He was acquitted, but we ALL KNOW WHY..... and HISTORY will record such. Period.
Here let me help you out.
The way Impeachment works is the HOUSE investigates gathers evidence calls witnesses and brings the case together. The JOB to call witnesses rests SOLELY with the HOUSE. I asked you before to name a single witness called to Clinton's Impeachment that was not questioned by the House.
The Senate hears the Houses evidence and looks at their evidence and MAY on occasion call a witness the HOUSE ALREADY TALKED TOO, for clarity. It is not and never has been the responsibility of the Senate to call witnesses that the HOUSE did not call and question. EVER.
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Lies.He broke laws and he broke his constitutional oath, to faithfully execute the law.Trump hasn't broken any laws, dingbat.No guarantee one way or the other imo, it's all up to President Trump, and how far he will take his own bold lawlessness!No, he as always been 100% not guilty.
TOTAL EXONERATION!
he was not totally exonerated.... his record and charges were not expunged.
Exonerated FOREVER.
Are democrats going to impeach president Trump again?
That and some serious Never-Trump hate/jealousy.It took balls for any Republican Senator to be impartial and vote for and with the truth, that they all knew was the OVERWHELMING truth....
No Republican Senator had balls....to vote with the truth and the Law, THEY GAVE THOSE BALLS AWAY BEFORE THE TRIAL BEGAN and sealed the deal when they voted for no witnesses and no evidence to be presented in the trial...
the fear of The Wrath of Trump was too frightening for them....they were shakin' in their boots, ALL ball less....
except Romney,
but to you all, he's a useless piece of shit, RINO
so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...Moron, again JUST for you...... The HOUSE does the Investigation, they call the witnesses and they amass the evidence. Once they feel they have enough th
Good GOD you are BEYOND STUPID.
Here let me help you out.
The way Impeachment works is the HOUSE investigates gathers evidence calls witnesses and brings the case together. The JOB to call witnesses rests SOLELY with the HOUSE. I asked you before to name a single witness called to Clinton's Impeachment that was not questioned by the House.
The Senate hears the Houses evidence and looks at their evidence and MAY on occasion call a witness the HOUSE ALREADY TALKED TOO, for clarity. It is not and never has been the responsibility of the Senate to call witnesses that the HOUSE did not call and question. EVER.
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Nope. The Senate doesn't have some magic subpoena power the House doesn't have.
The House Clowns were lazy and in a hurry. Blaming the Senate for not doing the job the Constitution delegates to the House is idiotic, but that's all single digit IQ Dimwingers can come up with at this point.
BINGO!so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Nope. The Senate doesn't have some magic subpoena power the House doesn't have.
The House Clowns were lazy and in a hurry. Blaming the Senate for not doing the job the Constitution delegates to the House is idiotic, but that's all single digit IQ Dimwingers can come up with at this point.
I believe they set it up like this on purpose to give themselves cover when it all fell apart. They knew there was no way they could get a conviction with that weak case, and needed something their minions could latch onto.
so you are claiming that any and all witnesses that The House subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry do not have to show up and any and all evidence the house subpoenas can be denied, unless they take a year or two tying it up in the courts before they can get them?They, the House could have gone to COURT to get the witnesses and that is what is REQUIRED when a witness refuses to come forward using the means they used. At least tell the smae lies through out a thread we can all go back and read again. The House did not call them not because they did not know about them but because they said it would take to long in the Courts.RGS, in Clinton's impeachment it was a special prosecutor with a grand jury, that did the depositions of witnesses, KEN STARR..... remember? Then the Starr report was all turned over to the House, and this is what they used. The DOJ/Barr refused to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes of the president done in the Ukraine, so the House had to do the best they could, all on their own, with a DOJ acting as the president's personal law team instead of the USA's...
I don't think so.... nor would our founders of the constitution.
Why would it be any faster in the Senate?
Nope. The Senate doesn't have some magic subpoena power the House doesn't have.
The House Clowns were lazy and in a hurry. Blaming the Senate for not doing the job the Constitution delegates to the House is idiotic, but that's all single digit IQ Dimwingers can come up with at this point.
I believe they set it up like this on purpose to give themselves cover when it all fell apart. They knew there was no way they could get a conviction with that weak case, and needed something their minions could latch onto.
