If The Senate shuts this down....

[Daryl Hunt]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of Independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

You're a Democrat partisan hack if you want the Senate to do the House's job.

Pelosi could have subpoenaed anyone she wanted to, and the courts would have given each one due consideration.

Pelosi decided to skip the 3rd Branch of Government and Impeach Trump for acknowledging the Judicial Branch.

And rump would have started at the lowest court, lost, taken it to the next higher court, lost.....rinse, repeat as necessary and 2 years would have gone by before the Supreme Court would have ruled exactly like they did in 1974. Actually, the SC would have not ruled at all since it was already ruled on. Why waste the bother. Now, let the Senate do their thing where there is NO way out in even the courts. If they try and sweep it under the table, the Senate Reps and Rump all look like co-conspirators (which they are) and November isn't very kind to any of them except the deep, deep red areas.

Nancy is playing the Reps like a fiddle on this one.

There's nothing to "sweep under the table," shit for brains. The Dims have no case. They have admitted as much. There's no way out for the Dims.

I am watching the Senate Hearings right now. Not once has any of the Reps said that Rump didn't do anything wrong. Instead, they are trying to find ways to get this over as quickly as possible. It's worse than I thought it would be. Moscow Mitch read his opening statement that just as well as been written by a Rump speech writer. So far, Moscow Mitch is trying to sweep it all under the table. He's not representing the Senate, he's representing Rump. And most of the Rep Senators are also representing the Rump as well. It's coming out pretty loud.

The resolution that has been presented is exactly what needs to be done but Moscow Mitch will probably table it. In other words, kill it. And that would be completely contrary to ALL of the Impeachment trials of the past. No matter what Moscow Mitch says, he's making the rules up to suit Rump, no one else. And careers be damned.

Good thing the House didn't do the same for the inquiry, huh?

The House could not extend consequences. The Senate can. If the Senate is denied anything by the President, they can vote to remove him from office in compliance with the House's Impeachment article. Simple as that. The Court rulings have already been made under Nixon which is considered the modern Gold Standard. And there won't be any court ruling since that ruling has already been made. Rump would be removed from office should the Senate choose. The House did not have that option.

Using the Nixon Trial as the Gold Standard, the Senate can compel anyone to testify under oath including any of the Cabinet members past or present. Executive Privilege only extends to those items that CONGRESS deems as National Security. And I doubt if the two articles of impeachment have anything to do with National Security. Rumps actions with Ukraine and his trying to cover his tracks have zero to do with national security. Therefore, any and all information pertaining to either are fair game. And it's the Senates obligation to call any and all witnesses pertaining to the two articles of impeachment. If Justice Roberts believes calling Hunter Biden is within those confines then that, too, is within those confines. The only US Citizen that cannot be force to testify is Rump, himself.

Moscow Mitch is trying to keep on representing Rump instead of the People of the United States of America. He's trying to rewrite the rules set by the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment proceedings.

 

[justoffal]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of Independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

Please stop making me laugh....
They are NEVER going to get 67 votes
And the forecast for November looks like
A wider spread for the GOP.

Landslide 2020....

End of Story.

Jo

 

[Daryl Hunt]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Anything less than a removal is going to be called a sweep job. At this point the Democrats are so predictable you could use them for a nuclear clock.

Jo

Well, I would accept a "Yah, we know but it''s it's not enough for removal from Office". Just admit that he did the deeds just like they did with Blow Job Bill and move on. But they lie out thier asses and won't even go that far.

 

[justoffal]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Anything less than a removal is going to be called a sweep job. At this point the Democrats are so predictable you could use them for a nuclear clock.

Jo

Well, I would accept a "Yah, we know but it''s it's not enough for removal from Office". Just admit that he did the deeds just like they did with Blow Job Bill and move on. But they lie out thier asses and won't even go that far.

Sorry but no can do. When Lefty holds out his hand of friendship it's not to shake your hand....it's to hold you still so he can stab you to death with the other hand.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

You're a Democrat partisan hack if you want the Senate to do the House's job.

Pelosi could have subpoenaed anyone she wanted to, and the courts would have given each one due consideration.

Pelosi decided to skip the 3rd Branch of Government and Impeach Trump for acknowledging the Judicial Branch.

And rump would have started at the lowest court, lost, taken it to the next higher court, lost.....rinse, repeat as necessary and 2 years would have gone by before the Supreme Court would have ruled exactly like they did in 1974. Actually, the SC would have not ruled at all since it was already ruled on. Why waste the bother. Now, let the Senate do their thing where there is NO way out in even the courts. If they try and sweep it under the table, the Senate Reps and Rump all look like co-conspirators (which they are) and November isn't very kind to any of them except the deep, deep red areas.

Nancy is playing the Reps like a fiddle on this one.

There's nothing to "sweep under the table," shit for brains. The Dims have no case. They have admitted as much. There's no way out for the Dims.

I am watching the Senate Hearings right now. Not once has any of the Reps said that Rump didn't do anything wrong. Instead, they are trying to find ways to get this over as quickly as possible. It's worse than I thought it would be. Moscow Mitch read his opening statement that just as well as been written by a Rump speech writer. So far, Moscow Mitch is trying to sweep it all under the table. He's not representing the Senate, he's representing Rump. And most of the Rep Senators are also representing the Rump as well. It's coming out pretty loud.

The resolution that has been presented is exactly what needs to be done but Moscow Mitch will probably table it. In other words, kill it. And that would be completely contrary to ALL of the Impeachment trials of the past. No matter what Moscow Mitch says, he's making the rules up to suit Rump, no one else. And careers be damned.

Good thing the House didn't do the same for the inquiry, huh?

The House could not extend consequences. The Senate can. If the Senate is denied anything by the President, they can vote to remove him from office in compliance with the House's Impeachment article. Simple as that. The Court rulings have already been made under Nixon which is considered the modern Gold Standard. And there won't be any court ruling since that ruling has already been made. Rump would be removed from office should the Senate choose. The House did not have that option.

Using the Nixon Trial as the Gold Standard, the Senate can compel anyone to testify under oath including any of the Cabinet members past or present. Executive Privilege only extends to those items that CONGRESS deems as National Security. And I doubt if the two articles of impeachment have anything to do with National Security. Rumps actions with Ukraine and his trying to cover his tracks have zero to do with national security. Therefore, any and all information pertaining to either are fair game. And it's the Senates obligation to call any and all witnesses pertaining to the two articles of impeachment. If Justice Roberts believes calling Hunter Biden is within those confines then that, too, is within those confines. The only US Citizen that cannot be force to testify is Rump, himself.

Moscow Mitch is trying to keep on representing Rump instead of the People of the United States of America. He's trying to rewrite the rules set by the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment proceedings.

YAWWWWWWWWWWWN....

LANDSLIDE 2020....

Jo

 

[Markle]

The two items of Impeachment are correct. Stick with just those two and tell me again that Rump didn't do either of the two. Everything else is just "Hey, Look Over There" crapola.

What was the underlying crime? If there is an underlying crime, such as a burglary at the Watergate Hotel by five Republican operatives or felony perjury by the President himself, tell us what it is!

 

[Sun Devil 92]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're a Democrat partisan hack if you want the Senate to do the House's job.

Pelosi could have subpoenaed anyone she wanted to, and the courts would have given each one due consideration.

Pelosi decided to skip the 3rd Branch of Government and Impeach Trump for acknowledging the Judicial Branch.

And rump would have started at the lowest court, lost, taken it to the next higher court, lost.....rinse, repeat as necessary and 2 years would have gone by before the Supreme Court would have ruled exactly like they did in 1974. Actually, the SC would have not ruled at all since it was already ruled on. Why waste the bother. Now, let the Senate do their thing where there is NO way out in even the courts. If they try and sweep it under the table, the Senate Reps and Rump all look like co-conspirators (which they are) and November isn't very kind to any of them except the deep, deep red areas.

Nancy is playing the Reps like a fiddle on this one.

There's nothing to "sweep under the table," shit for brains. The Dims have no case. They have admitted as much. There's no way out for the Dims.

I am watching the Senate Hearings right now. Not once has any of the Reps said that Rump didn't do anything wrong. Instead, they are trying to find ways to get this over as quickly as possible. It's worse than I thought it would be. Moscow Mitch read his opening statement that just as well as been written by a Rump speech writer. So far, Moscow Mitch is trying to sweep it all under the table. He's not representing the Senate, he's representing Rump. And most of the Rep Senators are also representing the Rump as well. It's coming out pretty loud.

The resolution that has been presented is exactly what needs to be done but Moscow Mitch will probably table it. In other words, kill it. And that would be completely contrary to ALL of the Impeachment trials of the past. No matter what Moscow Mitch says, he's making the rules up to suit Rump, no one else. And careers be damned.

Good thing the House didn't do the same for the inquiry, huh?

The House could not extend consequences. The Senate can. If the Senate is denied anything by the President, they can vote to remove him from office in compliance with the House's Impeachment article. Simple as that. The Court rulings have already been made under Nixon which is considered the modern Gold Standard. And there won't be any court ruling since that ruling has already been made. Rump would be removed from office should the Senate choose. The House did not have that option.

Using the Nixon Trial as the Gold Standard, the Senate can compel anyone to testify under oath including any of the Cabinet members past or present. Executive Privilege only extends to those items that CONGRESS deems as National Security. And I doubt if the two articles of impeachment have anything to do with National Security. Rumps actions with Ukraine and his trying to cover his tracks have zero to do with national security. Therefore, any and all information pertaining to either are fair game. And it's the Senates obligation to call any and all witnesses pertaining to the two articles of impeachment. If Justice Roberts believes calling Hunter Biden is within those confines then that, too, is within those confines. The only US Citizen that cannot be force to testify is Rump, himself.

Moscow Mitch is trying to keep on representing Rump instead of the People of the United States of America. He's trying to rewrite the rules set by the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment proceedings.

First off, you are wrong. There is no precedent for when a President can use EP to not comply with Congress. DumBama did it, and the Republicans had to take it to court to force him to hand over the requested documents. Each case is different due to national security measures.

If the Senate demands anything of Trump, he can do the same thing; claim executive privilege. Then, if desired, Mitch can go through the legal process to force him to give up documents, witnesses, or testimony. Under no condition will they remove him from office for that reason. Furthermore I doubt if Mitch would even go that far. He will continue the hearing without those witnesses.

I know the commies think they run the entire country now, but they don't. The House made their rules of the inquiry, and now Mitch gets to make the rules in the Senate hearing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Anything less than a removal is going to be called a sweep job. At this point the Democrats are so predictable you could use them for a nuclear clock.

Jo

"Folks, I know Democrats like I know every inch of my glorious naked body."
Rush Limbaugh

 

[Markle]

Using the Nixon Trial as the Gold Standard, the Senate can compel anyone to testify under oath including any of the Cabinet members past or present. Executive Privilege only extends to those items that CONGRESS deems as National Security. And I doubt if the two articles of impeachment have anything to do with National Security. Rumps actions with Ukraine and his trying to cover his tracks have zero to do with national security. Therefore, any and all information pertaining to either are fair game. And it's the Senates obligation to call any and all witnesses pertaining to the two articles of impeachment. If Justice Roberts believes calling Hunter Biden is within those confines then that, too, is within those confines. The only US Citizen that cannot be force to testify is Rump, himself.

Moscow Mitch is trying to keep on representing Rump instead of the People of the United States of America. He's trying to rewrite the rules set by the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment proceedings

How can you say that the Nixon TRIAL is the Gold Standard?

President Richard M. Nixon was never Impeached. Three articles were passed out of the Judiciary committee but Nixon resigned before the House voted. The Senate holds the trial after the Impeachment articles are delivered to them. There was never an Impeachment so there was never a trial.

Three articles of impeachment are debated and approved by the House Judiciary Committee against Nixon—obstruction of justice, misuse of power and contempt of Congress.

There were several underlying felonies behind those charges. There was the break-in where wiretaps were installed on the Democrats phones, FBI documents were destroyed and there was that irksome gap on the secret audiotapes. NOTHING even remotely similar to that has happened in the sham, Trump Impeachment.

How then can the Nixon resignation be the gold standard for any impeachment?

https://www.history.com/topics/watergate-scandal-timeline-nixon

 

[Crepitus]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

 

[Crepitus]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

No, he didn't

 

[Sun Devil 92]

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

No, he didn't

Please stop showing what an ass you are.

Obama relents in fight over Fast and Furious documents

 

[Crepitus]

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

No, he didn't

Please stop showing what an ass you are.

Obama relents in fight over Fast and Furious documents

That was executive privilege, not some imaginary "absolute immunity" that doesn't exist.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

No, he didn't

Please stop showing what an ass you are.

Obama relents in fight over Fast and Furious documents

That was executive privilege, not some imaginary "absolute immunity" that doesn't exist.

 

[lennypartiv]

They did call these people who refused to testify. Probably because Trump is guilty as sin.

Link?

LINK? Try reality!

So you're not going to back up your claim?

 

[Markle]

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Lies.

The house did call these people. tRump obstructed.

He has every right to refuse. Presidents do it all the time.

You people are desperate and stupid.

"Absolute immunity" does not exist. He does not have that right, because it isn't a real thing.

Tell that to BHO who used it extensively in Fast and Furious cover up.

No, he didn't

You really should view something other than MSNBC, CNN, and Facebook.

The scandal in Washington no one is talking about
By Paul Sperry
May 21, 2016 | 6:37pm
[...]
While then-Attorney General Eric Holder was focused on politics, people were dying. At least 20 other deaths or violent crimes have been linked to Fast and Furious-trafficked guns.

The program came to light only after Terry’s 2010 death at the hands of Mexican bandits, who shot him in the back with government-issued semiautomatic weapons. Caught red-handed, “the most transparent administration in history” flat-out lied about the program to Congress, denying it ever even existed.

Then Team Obama conspired to derail investigations into who was responsible by first withholding documents under subpoena — for which Holder earned a contempt-of-Congress citation — and later claiming executive privilege to keep evidence sealed.

But thanks to the court order, Justice has to cough up the “sensitive” documents. So far it’s produced 20,500 lightly redacted pages, though congressional investigators say they hardly cover all the internal department communications under subpoena. They maintain the administration continues to “withhold thousands of documents.”

Even so, the batch in hand reveals the lengths to which senior Obama operatives went to keep information from Congress.

The degree of obstruction was “more than previously understood,” House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz said in a recent memo to other members of his panel.
[...]
https://nypost.com/2016/05/21/the-scandal-in-washington-no-one-is-talking-about/

 

[Daryl Hunt]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

It's crystal clear that Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are eager to sweep this Senate impeachment trial under the rug, shut it down, and allow no new evidence or witnesses. But what happens if they try to do that? Will other Republican Senators march in lockstep, and try to deal with the coming election fallout in November? Will they break ranks and join the Democrats in insisting documents and witnesses being suppressed by President Trump be revealed? Recent polling shows:

71% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 40% of Republicans say Senate should call additional witnesses to testify.

51% say Senate should remove Trump from office.

Either way, Senate Republicans are in a tough spot. Do they cave in to public opinion and hold a fair trial? or do they cave in to Donald Trump and risk being removed from office in November?

JMHO - Too close to call right now.

Thoughts?

Most Voters Want More Impeachment Witnesses as Senate Prepares for Trial

How is calling witnesses fair? The House did not call these people, so why should the Senate? You numbers are indicative of the poor education these people received. Most of them probably don't vote.

Anything less than a removal is going to be called a sweep job. At this point the Democrats are so predictable you could use them for a nuclear clock.

Jo

Well, I would accept a "Yah, we know but it''s it's not enough for removal from Office". Just admit that he did the deeds just like they did with Blow Job Bill and move on. But they lie out thier asses and won't even go that far.

Sorry but no can do. When Lefty holds out his hand of friendship it's not to shake your hand....it's to hold you still so he can stab you to death with the other hand.

Jo

And you wonder why anyone other than a Party of the Rump can find you trustworthy.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And rump would have started at the lowest court, lost, taken it to the next higher court, lost.....rinse, repeat as necessary and 2 years would have gone by before the Supreme Court would have ruled exactly like they did in 1974. Actually, the SC would have not ruled at all since it was already ruled on. Why waste the bother. Now, let the Senate do their thing where there is NO way out in even the courts. If they try and sweep it under the table, the Senate Reps and Rump all look like co-conspirators (which they are) and November isn't very kind to any of them except the deep, deep red areas.

Nancy is playing the Reps like a fiddle on this one.

There's nothing to "sweep under the table," shit for brains. The Dims have no case. They have admitted as much. There's no way out for the Dims.

I am watching the Senate Hearings right now. Not once has any of the Reps said that Rump didn't do anything wrong. Instead, they are trying to find ways to get this over as quickly as possible. It's worse than I thought it would be. Moscow Mitch read his opening statement that just as well as been written by a Rump speech writer. So far, Moscow Mitch is trying to sweep it all under the table. He's not representing the Senate, he's representing Rump. And most of the Rep Senators are also representing the Rump as well. It's coming out pretty loud.

The resolution that has been presented is exactly what needs to be done but Moscow Mitch will probably table it. In other words, kill it. And that would be completely contrary to ALL of the Impeachment trials of the past. No matter what Moscow Mitch says, he's making the rules up to suit Rump, no one else. And careers be damned.

Good thing the House didn't do the same for the inquiry, huh?

The House could not extend consequences. The Senate can. If the Senate is denied anything by the President, they can vote to remove him from office in compliance with the House's Impeachment article. Simple as that. The Court rulings have already been made under Nixon which is considered the modern Gold Standard. And there won't be any court ruling since that ruling has already been made. Rump would be removed from office should the Senate choose. The House did not have that option.

Using the Nixon Trial as the Gold Standard, the Senate can compel anyone to testify under oath including any of the Cabinet members past or present. Executive Privilege only extends to those items that CONGRESS deems as National Security. And I doubt if the two articles of impeachment have anything to do with National Security. Rumps actions with Ukraine and his trying to cover his tracks have zero to do with national security. Therefore, any and all information pertaining to either are fair game. And it's the Senates obligation to call any and all witnesses pertaining to the two articles of impeachment. If Justice Roberts believes calling Hunter Biden is within those confines then that, too, is within those confines. The only US Citizen that cannot be force to testify is Rump, himself.

Moscow Mitch is trying to keep on representing Rump instead of the People of the United States of America. He's trying to rewrite the rules set by the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment proceedings.

YAWWWWWWWWWWWN....

LANDSLIDE 2020....

Jo

Not the landslide you thing.