Impeachment Trial... Questions phase

[The Original Tree]

"I like how the mic goes dead between questions at the senate trial, lest anyone get caught on a hot mic talking about grabbing p@$$y."

You mean grabbing you.

 

[Jitss617]

The claim was the subpoenas were invalid.

Get up to speed.

The discussion was about executive privilege, dope.

Schiff never found out HE DIDNT FOLLOW UP

EP would be invoked to the issuing body, dope.

That’s the process .. helloooo mcfly

It's not. EP is invoked to the body that issues the subpoena. Either that body accepts the exemptions and redactions or they challenge them in court.

That is the process.

And schiff didn’t go through the process ,, if he did we would have gotten there

 

[sartre play]

Please explain what Biden's son has to do with the trial, he does not work for the American government or the Ukraine government, a separate issue as best.& not sure why anyone would care beyond throwing mud. plus in what way would he be involved in a government deal about money/arms for that government?

 

[The Original Tree]

Correct

The discussion was about executive privilege, dope.

Schiff never found out HE DIDNT FOLLOW UP

EP would be invoked to the issuing body, dope.

That’s the process .. helloooo mcfly

It's not. EP is invoked to the body that issues the subpoena. Either that body accepts the exemptions and redactions or they challenge them in court.

That is the process.

And schiff didn’t go through the process ,, if he did we would have gotten there

 

[Chuz Life]

Please explain what Biden's son has to do with the trial, he does not work for the American government or the Ukraine government, a separate issue as best.& not sure why anyone would care beyond throwing mud. plus in what way would he be involved in a government deal about money/arms for that government?

Did someone just send you back to go for start overs?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That is not a valid reason. There is no law , rule or regulation that requires a full vote in the house to issue subpoenas. Pure nonsense.
The president doesn't get to decide how the House conducts investigations or impeachment.

What is the remedy when the Congress and Executive disagree?

They go to court for a ruling. YOUR House Clowns didn’t do that. Why not?

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

No administration has refused every subpoena. Not one.

If that is not willful obstruction, I don't know what would be.

That's because never before have they all been illegal. The House can only subpoena impeachment witnesses after a full vote of the House to start an impeachment.

They aren't all illegal and the witnesses can't be "impeachment witnesses" when there's no impeachment proceedings.Schiff's cmte investigation obviously wasn't part of the impeachment . How could it be? They can't vote to proceed with impeachment proceedings if there is no evidence that warrants impeachment.

Your argument is that they should have opened formal impeachment proceedings to see if there was sufficient evidence to open formal impeachment proceedings.

Derp....

Also...
Obviously the subpoenas issued after the vote to open formal impeachment proceedings are not covered by your specious legal arguments either.

 

[Siete]

"I like how the mic goes dead between questions at the senate trial, lest anyone get caught on a hot mic talking about grabbing p@$$y."

on/off switches are not for the weak minded ..

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You mean like Obama?

That is not a law, dope.

From your link:
"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

Who's the dope?
Is the constitution not the supreme law of the land, dope.
There's precedent and under our legal system based on English common law, precedent carries weight under the law.
This ain't France, shitforbrains. And if you need to ask about that, don't you'll just look all the more stupid.

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

Name one example of where they refused to turn over anything.

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and Furious

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and

You're a straight up liar and an idiot for lying about something so easy to refute.

Trump Wrong About Obama Documents
"In June 2012, Obama asserted executive privilege to block the transfer of some documents requested by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Republicans on the committee recommended that Attorney General Eric Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over those documents. A few months earlier, Holder said the Justice Department had already turned over 6,000 documents related to the case.

A July 31, 2012, joint staff report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Judiciary Committee notes that its review at that time was based on “more than 10,000 pages of documents, 6,989 of them produced by the Justice Department pursuant to subpoena.”

In 2014, under a court order, the Justice Department produced nearly 65,000 pages of documents related to Operation Fast and Furious that had been sought by the oversight committee. And two years later, pursuant to a federal court order, the Justice Department handed over thousands of additional pages of documents related to the case.

So it could be said that the Obama administration initially resisted turning over many documents, but it produced some, and — after court orders — it turned over tens of thousands more."

 

[bripat9643]

What is the remedy when the Congress and Executive disagree?

They go to court for a ruling. YOUR House Clowns didn’t do that. Why not?

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

No administration has refused every subpoena. Not one.

If that is not willful obstruction, I don't know what would be.

That's because never before have they all been illegal. The House can only subpoena impeachment witnesses after a full vote of the House to start an impeachment.

They aren't all illegal and the witnesses can't be "impeachment witnesses" when there's no impeachment proceedings.Schiff's cmte investigation obviously wasn't part of the impeachment . How could it be? They can't vote to proceed with impeachment proceedings if there is no evidence that warrants impeachment.

Your argument is that they should have opened formal impeachment proceedings to see if there was sufficient evidence to open formal impeachment proceedings.

Derp....

Also...
Obviously the subpoenas issued after the vote to open formal impeachment proceedings are not covered by your specious legal arguments either.

That's the sleazy game Adolph Schiffler and Pelosi are playing. No vote is required because it's not an impeachment, even though Piglosi said it was an impeachment. Then when they vote on impeachment, all the testimony becomes impeachment testimony.

Who do you scumbags think you're fooling?

 

[depotoo]

You mean like Obama?

Yes there is, turd. I have already quoted it

Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[9] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber;​

That is not a law, dope.

From your link:
"Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas."

Who's the dope?
Is the constitution not the supreme law of the land, dope.
There's precedent and under our legal system based on English common law, precedent carries weight under the law.
This ain't France, shitforbrains. And if you need to ask about that, don't you'll just look all the more stupid.

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

Name one example of where they refused to turn over anything.

Fast and Furious

 

[The Original Tree]

Subpoenas and Other Nonsense!

What is the remedy when the Congress and Executive disagree?

They go to court for a ruling. YOUR House Clowns didn’t do that. Why not?

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

No administration has refused every subpoena. Not one.

If that is not willful obstruction, I don't know what would be.

That's because never before have they all been illegal. The House can only subpoena impeachment witnesses after a full vote of the House to start an impeachment.

They aren't all illegal and the witnesses can't be "impeachment witnesses" when there's no impeachment proceedings.Schiff's cmte investigation obviously wasn't part of the impeachment . How could it be? They can't vote to proceed with impeachment proceedings if there is no evidence that warrants impeachment.

Your argument is that they should have opened formal impeachment proceedings to see if there was sufficient evidence to open formal impeachment proceedings.

Derp....

Also...
Obviously the subpoenas issued after the vote to open formal impeachment proceedings are not covered by your specious legal arguments either.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Certain committees already have independent subpoena authority. They have for some time. Certainly those subpoenas issued after the impeachment resolution are not "invalid".

LOL impeachment requires a full vote of the HOUSE fact and backed up by all previous impeachments. It's not our fault House Dems are stupid.

They had a full vote of the House to open impeachment.

After the subpoenas were issued, moron. That makes them invalid.

So those subpoenas weren't part of the impeachment proceedings then. Right?

How about those issued after the vote?

 

[bripat9643]

You mean like Obama?

Who's the dope?
Is the constitution not the supreme law of the land, dope.
There's precedent and under our legal system based on English common law, precedent carries weight under the law.
This ain't France, shitforbrains. And if you need to ask about that, don't you'll just look all the more stupid.

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

Name one example of where they refused to turn over anything.

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and Furious

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and

You're a straight up liar and an idiot for lying about something so easy to refute.

Trump Wrong About Obama Documents
"In June 2012, Obama asserted executive privilege to block the transfer of some documents requested by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Republicans on the committee recommended that Attorney General Eric Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over those documents. A few months earlier, Holder said the Justice Department had already turned over 6,000 documents related to the case.

A July 31, 2012, joint staff report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Judiciary Committee notes that its review at that time was based on “more than 10,000 pages of documents, 6,989 of them produced by the Justice Department pursuant to subpoena.”

In 2014, under a court order, the Justice Department produced nearly 65,000 pages of documents related to Operation Fast and Furious that had been sought by the oversight committee. And two years later, pursuant to a federal court order, the Justice Department handed over thousands of additional pages of documents related to the case.

So it could be said that the Obama administration initially resisted turning over many documents, but it produced some, and — after court orders — it turned over tens of thousands more."

The only reason that didn't happen with this impeachment is that the Dims refused to follow the legal process that the Republican Congress followed in the Fast and Furious investigation. Your complaint is with Adolph Schiffler and company, not Trump.

 

[bripat9643]

Certain committees already have independent subpoena authority. They have for some time. Certainly those subpoenas issued after the impeachment resolution are not "invalid".

LOL impeachment requires a full vote of the HOUSE fact and backed up by all previous impeachments. It's not our fault House Dems are stupid.

They had a full vote of the House to open impeachment.

After the subpoenas were issued, moron. That makes them invalid.

So those subpoenas weren't part of the impeachment proceedings then. Right?

How about those issued after the vote?

In reality, they were part of the impeachment inquiry. Failing to have a vote on it was just one of the many abuses Adolph Schiffler is guitly of.

 

[The Original Tree]

Anyone with a brain knows the Democrats are conducting Treason and a COUP in the Senate and not a legitimate Impeachment.

It’s a direct assault on The Constitution and Separation of Powers and Civil Rights and Due Process.

But Schiff likes to Ummm Ahhh, when he is spinning lies if you pay attention when he isn’t reading from a script!

The remedy is impeachment for obstruction.

So any time the executive branch objects to a subpoena, then the House has cause to impeach him?

No administration has refused every subpoena. Not one.

If that is not willful obstruction, I don't know what would be.

That's because never before have they all been illegal. The House can only subpoena impeachment witnesses after a full vote of the House to start an impeachment.

They aren't all illegal and the witnesses can't be "impeachment witnesses" when there's no impeachment proceedings.Schiff's cmte investigation obviously wasn't part of the impeachment . How could it be? They can't vote to proceed with impeachment proceedings if there is no evidence that warrants impeachment.

Your argument is that they should have opened formal impeachment proceedings to see if there was sufficient evidence to open formal impeachment proceedings.

Derp....

Also...
Obviously the subpoenas issued after the vote to open formal impeachment proceedings are not covered by your specious legal arguments either.

That's the sleazy game Adolph Schiffler and Pelosi are playing. No vote is required because it's not an impeachment, even though Piglosi said it was an impeachment. Then when they vote on impeachment, all the testimony becomes impeachment testimony.

Who do you scumbags think you're fooling?

 

[toomuchtime_]

What are your thoughts about how the questions phase of the impeachment trial is going?

(Yawn) It will be orderly but it will not affect the final outcome: acquittal.

 

[depotoo]

You mean like Obama?

Who's the dope?
Is the constitution not the supreme law of the land, dope.
There's precedent and under our legal system based on English common law, precedent carries weight under the law.
This ain't France, shitforbrains. And if you need to ask about that, don't you'll just look all the more stupid.

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

Name one example of where they refused to turn over anything.

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and Furious

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and

You're a straight up liar and an idiot for lying about something so easy to refute.

Trump Wrong About Obama Documents
"In June 2012, Obama asserted executive privilege to block the transfer of some documents requested by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Republicans on the committee recommended that Attorney General Eric Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over those documents. A few months earlier, Holder said the Justice Department had already turned over 6,000 documents related to the case.

A July 31, 2012, joint staff report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Judiciary Committee notes that its review at that time was based on “more than 10,000 pages of documents, 6,989 of them produced by the Justice Department pursuant to subpoena.”

In 2014, under a court order, the Justice Department produced nearly 65,000 pages of documents related to Operation Fast and Furious that had been sought by the oversight committee. And two years later, pursuant to a federal court order, the Justice Department handed over thousands of additional pages of documents related to the case.

So it could be said that the Obama administration initially resisted turning over many documents, but it produced some, and — after court orders — it turned over tens of thousands more."

Subpoena fight over operation Fast and Furious documents finally settled Note the date of 2019.
Obama admin spent $36M on lawsuits to keep info secret

 

[The Original Tree]

Dershowitz just destroyed The Cowardly Dishonest Adolph Schiffler & his DemNazi SS!

 

[The Original Tree]

Winner!

You mean like Obama?

LOL...
There's tons of precedent stating that the president must comply with congressional subpoenas as well, dope.

Name one example of where they refused to turn over anything.

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and Furious

Eric Holder and Obama refused to hand over any documents related to Fast and

You're a straight up liar and an idiot for lying about something so easy to refute.

Trump Wrong About Obama Documents
"In June 2012, Obama asserted executive privilege to block the transfer of some documents requested by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Republicans on the committee recommended that Attorney General Eric Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over those documents. A few months earlier, Holder said the Justice Department had already turned over 6,000 documents related to the case.

A July 31, 2012, joint staff report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Judiciary Committee notes that its review at that time was based on “more than 10,000 pages of documents, 6,989 of them produced by the Justice Department pursuant to subpoena.”

In 2014, under a court order, the Justice Department produced nearly 65,000 pages of documents related to Operation Fast and Furious that had been sought by the oversight committee. And two years later, pursuant to a federal court order, the Justice Department handed over thousands of additional pages of documents related to the case.

So it could be said that the Obama administration initially resisted turning over many documents, but it produced some, and — after court orders — it turned over tens of thousands more."

Subpoena fight over operation Fast and Furious documents finally settled Note the date of 2019.

 

[two_iron]

OMG, Dershowitz is mopping the floor with Shitt's face. It's the equivalent of William F. Buckley schooling an effeminate version of Fred Flinstones.

6:24 EST. F*cking Brutal!