Marco Rubio Speaks Out

[The Purge]

Last March Rep. Schiff said there was "little to be gained by putting the country through" the "wrenching experience" of a partisan impeachment.

But then they decided to do it anyway.

The House admitted they didn’t try to enforce testimony of witnesses in court because it would tie them up in litigation for a year. But then spent weeks demanding the Senate do it now. We were never going to play this stupid game with them

The same people to say "how dare Trump disagree with our intelligence professionals" are also the ones doubting the "intelligence professionals" on Soleimani planning an imminent attack.
The poll tested "stealing the election" line was also a joke. Was Trump trying to tamper with voting equipment or something? I wanted to laugh every time they said it but I think laughing was against the Senate impeachment rules

most obnoxious argument was the "I have secret information that's damning,but I can’t divulge it" Total crap. We have access to the same information & you don't have squat. If you did it would be leaked. Just like the mole at NSC illegally leaking portions of Bolton's book.

Bottom line is despite not initially wanting to do it they were bullied into impeachment by radical far left voices they are afraid of. Then they fell in love with the case & the cameras & the adoration of the media & forgot the damage impeachment inflicts on the country.

Marco Rubio ^

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

So howcome you masters of the universe in the senate didn't allow a motion to dismiss like you did with Clinton? Giving your fake opponents cover. Government is just a big WWE match, both sides taking public $$$.

Two weeks of senate in trial mode is playing the stupid game with them. Of all people, Murkowski had the balls to call the articles out as worthless. Rubio comes out after the fact. Weakling.

I'm glad Trump was acquitted, but the GOP is putting up a half-baked fight.... as it usually does. But at least this time almost all of them stood together....Collins and Romney should have new committee assignments in the COAT ROOM, they are almost as dangerous to the nations health as the toxic DemonRATS!

So Rubio agrees he committed impeachable acts?


Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office," Rubio wrote in a Medium post.

Rubio: Impeachable actions don't necessarily mean a president should be removed

Where does he say that about Trump...he is making a general statement!

 

[Daryl Hunt]

TRUMP ACQUITED IS THE NEW HEADLINE TO BE INCLUDED IN ALL HISTORY BOOKS IN THE FUTURE.....Perhaps they will refer to the MANY great books like Garetts for the truth!

Johnson was Acquitted. Clinton was acquitted. But they are both forever remembered as being impeached. That is how the history books read.

 

[The Purge]

TRUMP ACQUITED IS THE NEW HEADLINE TO BE INCLUDED IN ALL HISTORY BOOKS IN THE FUTURE.....Perhaps they will refer to the MANY great books like Garetts for the truth!

Johnson was Acquitted. Clinton was acquitted. But they are both forever remembered as being impeached. That is how the history books read.

And we know the story about both. As we do with the attempted coup by the DemonRAT scum and their enablers of insanity!

 

[debbiedowner]

Last March Rep. Schiff said there was "little to be gained by putting the country through" the "wrenching experience" of a partisan impeachment.

But then they decided to do it anyway.

The House admitted they didn’t try to enforce testimony of witnesses in court because it would tie them up in litigation for a year. But then spent weeks demanding the Senate do it now. We were never going to play this stupid game with them

The same people to say "how dare Trump disagree with our intelligence professionals" are also the ones doubting the "intelligence professionals" on Soleimani planning an imminent attack.
The poll tested "stealing the election" line was also a joke. Was Trump trying to tamper with voting equipment or something? I wanted to laugh every time they said it but I think laughing was against the Senate impeachment rules

most obnoxious argument was the "I have secret information that's damning,but I can’t divulge it" Total crap. We have access to the same information & you don't have squat. If you did it would be leaked. Just like the mole at NSC illegally leaking portions of Bolton's book.

Bottom line is despite not initially wanting to do it they were bullied into impeachment by radical far left voices they are afraid of. Then they fell in love with the case & the cameras & the adoration of the media & forgot the damage impeachment inflicts on the country.

Marco Rubio ^

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

So howcome you masters of the universe in the senate didn't allow a motion to dismiss like you did with Clinton? Giving your fake opponents cover. Government is just a big WWE match, both sides taking public $$$.

Two weeks of senate in trial mode is playing the stupid game with them. Of all people, Murkowski had the balls to call the articles out as worthless. Rubio comes out after the fact. Weakling.

I'm glad Trump was acquitted, but the GOP is putting up a half-baked fight.... as it usually does. But at least this time almost all of them stood together....Collins and Romney should have new committee assignments in the COAT ROOM, they are almost as dangerous to the nations health as the toxic DemonRATS!

So Rubio agrees he committed impeachable acts?


Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office," Rubio wrote in a Medium post.

Rubio: Impeachable actions don't necessarily mean a president should be removed

Where does he say that about Trump...he is making a general statement!

Hell Lamar Alexander also said that what did was inappropriate but didn't think he deserved to be removed. Most of the repubs felt he deserved impeachment but not removal.

 

[Unkotare]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

No, unfortunately for the democrats that is not the bottom line.

 

[SAYIT]

"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” Rubio wrote.

Seriously? How could allowing a president to remain in office after committing impeachable offenses be in the best interest of the country? It definitely is not in the best interest of the country to allow a criminal to become a de facto dictator who thumbs his nose at the U.S. Constitution and laws.

This demonstrates why rubio should not be in the Senate, much less be considered as a possible POTUS.

He was generalizing about impeachment, not claiming Trump had committed impeachable offenses. How is it no leftard can decipher adult discourse? Is that why you are leftarded or vice versa?

 

[Osiris-ODS]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

Acquitted. Impeached = indicted. Acquitted = Not Guilty

Not proven guilty.

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and arbitrary speculation.

 

[BluesLegend]

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and speculation.

Lawless punks in the Dem party assume Republicans are guilty. Even when Republicans prove their innocence Dems just ignore it and go right on claiming they are guilty or make up some new baseless charge. It's called propaganda.

 

[Lysistrata]

"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” Rubio wrote.

Seriously? How could allowing a president to remain in office after committing impeachable offenses be in the best interest of the country? It definitely is not in the best interest of the country to allow a criminal to become a de facto dictator who thumbs his nose at the U.S. Constitution and laws.

This demonstrates why rubio should not be in the Senate, much less be considered as a possible POTUS.

He was generalizing about impeachment, not claiming Trump had committed impeachable offenses. How is it no leftard can decipher adult discourse? Is that why you are leftarded or vice versa?

Trying to roll it back, I see. Do you support the bimbos in the Senate who refused to be presented with evidence? People who were that scared of what might be put in front of their noses? Don't talk to me about "adult discourse" when you support these scardy-cat children. If you want "adult discourse," ask them why they did it.

 

[Lysistrata]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

Acquitted. Impeached = indicted. Acquitted = Not Guilty

Not proven guilty.

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and arbitrary speculation.

Not when the jurors enter the "courtroom" with their minds already made up, in violation of the oaths they take, and then refuse to allow the presentation of the evidence. No acquittal in these circumstances is valid as it results from a "jury" that has openly announced, beforehand, that they are corrupt and have no intention of abiding by the oaths they took. Frankly, these senators perjured themselves.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

Acquitted. Impeached = indicted. Acquitted = Not Guilty

Not proven guilty.

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and arbitrary speculation.

Not when the jurors enter the "courtroom" with their minds already made up, in violation of the oaths they take, and then refuse to allow the presentation of the evidence. No acquittal in these circumstances is valid as it results from a "jury" that has openly announced, beforehand, that they are corrupt and have no intention of abiding by the oaths they took. Frankly, these senators perjured themselves.

You mean like the 100% partisan impeachment in the house? LOL Even Dershowitz a Democrat argued against them.

 

[Osiris-ODS]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

Acquitted. Impeached = indicted. Acquitted = Not Guilty

Not proven guilty.

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and arbitrary speculation.

Not when the jurors enter the "courtroom" with their minds already made up, in violation of the oaths they take, and then refuse to allow the presentation of the evidence. No acquittal in these circumstances is valid as it results from a "jury" that has openly announced, beforehand, that they are corrupt and have no intention of abiding by the oaths they took. Frankly, these senators perjured themselves.

What impeachment trial are you talking about? Because you're not describing the one that taking place right now, that's for sure. "Refuse to allow the presentation of the evidence"? You mean other than the 2,700 documents that were introduced in evidence and the testimony of 17 witnesses, including full transcripts of all of that testimony and video segments the House Managers felt best made their case? So you when you say "refused to allow presentation of the evidence," you're essentially saying all the evidence introduced which took 21 hours to present didn't amount to squat and wasn't sufficient to support a conviction on the articles of impeachment as charged. So why even pursue this to a Senate trial when they did? The possibility that maybe some new earth shattering revelation might fall in their lap during the trial?

This whole exercise is a perfect illustration of why the impeachment lacked merit from the get go.

 

[Lesh]

You think Rump has been a bad boy up to now? Here, hold my beer.

Gonna be a bumpy ride folks

 

[Lesh]

What they "admitted" was that they thought Trump was wrong to ask for the investigation into Biden...what they both were quite clear about was that they didn't think what Trump did even came close to being a reason to impeach a sitting President!

Exactly. Guilty as charged...they just don't care...and neither do you

 

[kyzr]

What they "admitted" was that they thought Trump was wrong to ask for the investigation into Biden...what they both were quite clear about was that they didn't think what Trump did even came close to being a reason to impeach a sitting President!

Exactly. Guilty as charged...they just don't care...and neither do you

Looking at Bill Clinton's impeachment crimes and Trump's Articles, whose are worse?
If you can't say that Clinton's were far worse then you're just a partisan hack like we are.
Unless the Articles are a slam-dunk like Nixon, no president will ever be removed, because no one will remove a president from their party for bullshit.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

TRUMP ACQUITED IS THE NEW HEADLINE TO BE INCLUDED IN ALL HISTORY BOOKS IN THE FUTURE.....Perhaps they will refer to the MANY great books like Garetts for the truth!

Johnson was Acquitted. Clinton was acquitted. But they are both forever remembered as being impeached. That is how the history books read.

What difference does that make to anyone with a room temp IQ?

Not a damn thing!

 

[CWayne]

"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” Rubio wrote.

Seriously? How could allowing a president to remain in office after committing impeachable offenses be in the best interest of the country? It definitely is not in the best interest of the country to allow a criminal to become a de facto dictator who thumbs his nose at the U.S. Constitution and laws.

This demonstrates why rubio should not be in the Senate, much less be considered as a possible POTUS.

Rubio is wrong about reaching an impeachable crime. So are you, unless you care to
name a crime which is denied by the Democrats has being a requirement.

Read the articles of impeachment. Remember the testimony during the investigation. Remember the orange whore's obstruction. He is guilty on both counts.

The articles are a sham. There is no proof of the allegations anywhere.

 

[CWayne]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

The bottom line is that impeachment has an asterisk next to it that says, "Democrat impeachment with bipartisan opposition".

No it wasn't bipartisan opposition, I'm sure Collins and Romney knew Alexander would not vote for more witnesses. And probably Lisa from AK got a call from tramp the night before and bribed her.

For the impeachment, it was 100% Republicans against it, and they had something like 2 or 3 Democrats who voted against it. That is bipartisan opposition to impeachment.

 

[Erinwltr]

Come on, one more step, you're almost there.... What do we say in this country? Innocent until ... That's right, proven guilty. So take it from the top. Not proven guilty equals presumed innocence (aka, acquittal). Unless you favor some other standard based on feelz and speculation.

Lawless punks in the Dem party assume Republicans are guilty. Even when Republicans prove their innocence Dems just ignore it and go right on claiming they are guilty or make up some new baseless charge. It's called propaganda.

Go to sleep. Wake up. Drink water. Take your meds. Breathe Fresh Air! Eat. Repeat.

 

[CWayne]

Bottom line is that DJT has been Impeached and should be removed from office. Bottom line.

Acquitted. Impeached = indicted. Acquitted = Not Guilty

Not proven guilty.

Everyone who is not guilty in our legal system is not “proven” guilty. As the burden of proof lies with the accuser. Thank you for agreeing with me.

Bullshit. I can't agree with you when this "verdict" is the result of a "trial" in which many of the jurors refused to hear any evidence and came into the jury box with their minds already made up, entirely ignoring the oath they took. Looks like these senators may have committed perjury.

The accusers were deprived of any opportunity to present their evidence, including the newly-discovered evidence in the form of a witness who was present during the events in question. They turned this "trial" into a sham worthy of the old Soviet Union. The orange whore is guilty as sin and everybody knows it. But why not trash the Republic?

This is a lie. The Democrats were allowed to provide their case before the Senate. They were to provide their evidence (snicker) pertaining to the two articles of impeachment.

They were given the opportunity to call the witnesses they interviewed during the investigation.

They are NOT entitled to continue the investigation after they file the articles.