Daryl Hunt
Your Worst Nightmare
- Banned
- #821
Obviously so does the Senate.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
McConnell Cannot Block Witnesses - Just Announced
- Thread starter Billy_Kinetta
- Start date
Obviously so does the Senate.
Should have subpoenaed others ???The WH refused to let witnesses appear the WH refused to show documents A trial without witnesses is NO TRIAL at all And now the POS in the WH can strut around saying he's innocent??? Not by a long shotNot to mention that it's the first time that the accused didn't have his Due Process, youThere have been 15 impeachment trials in the senate This is the FIRST one without witnessesExcuse me? The House can't call witnesses? What the fuck do you think the House was DOING during the impeachment process? The Constitution does NOT mandate that the Senate do the investigating for the House.
The House can’t call witnesses at the trial. Good lord, did you actually read ?
Good Lord, do you actually think? The House called and heard witnesses during their big sham "investigation". Those testimonies were part of the impeachment managers' presentation to the Senate.
The only thing the House can't do is force the Senate to do their investigatory job by calling EVEN MORE witnesses, which the House didn't bother to call before.
If the House wanted to present extra witness testimony to the Senate, they should have tended to that before now.
forgot about that part, huh?
Well, the House had 17...maybe 18 witnesses, they should have subpoenaed any others that they wanted.Instead,
they wanted to end their proceedings early and get home before Christmas.
There was lots of testimony used in the Senate that the House provided.
The House could have forced the testimony and documents but did not. Trump said no and they said okay. So he can and will say he's innocent.
Daryl Hunt
Your Worst Nightmare
- Banned
- #823
Get ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted outThe executive branch works for trumpInvestigating abuse of power by joe biden in ukraine is the goal and that is entirely within trumps authorityBullshit.
Soliciting a foreign national to interfere with an election is a crime...
§30121
Obstructing Congress is a crime...
18 U.S. Code § 1505
trump has not obstructed congress by invoking executive privilage
it's within the scope and goal of the Justice Department no Rumps personal Attorney operating off of information provided by Putin.
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,439
- 2,290
Get ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted outThe executive branch works for trumpInvestigating abuse of power by joe biden in ukraine is the goal and that is entirely within trumps authority
trump has not obstructed congress by invoking executive privilage
it's within the scope and goal of the Justice Department no Rumps personal Attorney operating off of information provided by Putin.
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 66,814
- 48,568
- 3,565
It would worry me if more people like you votedThe next time you go to take a crap, rip off a few squares of your TP and read the US Constitution. I know that's the only place you have it. We have sent a very dangerous message to Rump (who is dangerous with or without a message) and future Presidents that they are beyond the law.
And what law is that?
The non-existent one Democrats swear exists but can never tell anybody where it is. Basically they believe the country is supposed to stop dead and do nothing until they're happy and making all the decisions, and Presidents have to take orders from Congress and stuff.
It's We the People not Me the Rump.
You trying to sell the idea that Democrats actually believe that? lol that's cute.
I am reminding America. You don't want everyone to vote. Well, the more you go, the more I point out that EVERYONE needs to vote regardless of whom they vote for. The more people that vote scares the living hell out of you. Well, let's all show up and vote and put you into a catatonic state.
but at least you are only mildly misinformed
most of the non voters have no clue at all
The witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsGet ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted outThe executive branch works for trumpit's within the scope and goal of the Justice Department no Rumps personal Attorney operating off of information provided by Putin.
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 66,814
- 48,568
- 3,565
Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsGet ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted outThe executive branch works for trump
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 66,814
- 48,568
- 3,565
The executive branch works for trumpInvestigating abuse of power by joe biden in ukraine is the goal and that is entirely within trumps authorityBullshit.Well as I said, I think that's no longer the case. The Republicans will be looking to get even next chance they get. You can't play by the rules with these criminals. They will always do some underhanded trick to cheat the system for their own selfish reasons.
This is the third impeachment in our history; the first impeachment that didn't involve any sort of crime. It's the first Thought Police impeachment where there was no evidence to their claim. The Republicans have every right to do one better. They impeached a Republican President with no impeachable offenses.
Soliciting a foreign national to interfere with an election is a crime...
§30121
Obstructing Congress is a crime...
18 U.S. Code § 1505
trump has not obstructed congress by invoking executive privilage
it's within the scope and goal of the Justice Department no Rumps personal Attorney operating off of information provided by Putin.
Obviously so does the Senate.
yes, thank goodness
America needs trump and we dont want to see him taken down by liberal sore losers
Ever hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsGet ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted out
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
You gave a lying pos the privilege and America is paying the priceTrump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsGet ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted out
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,439
- 2,290
Ever hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsOur representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
No, and we had 17 witnesses at this one. There were 18, but one would have incriminated Adam Schiff, so he withheld that testimony and kept his in-the-basement testimony out of the House hearing.
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 66,814
- 48,568
- 3,565
BullYou gave a lying pos the privilege and America is paying the priceTrump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsOur representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
trump is a vast improvement over clinton, bush, or obama
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 66,814
- 48,568
- 3,565
When the prosecution cannot prove guilt the defense restsEver hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsOur representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
We proved it and would have proved it even more beyond a shadow of a doubt if the lying traitors in Repub senate weren't scared to death of the pig in the WH and allowed testimony from those under subpoenaWhen the prosecution cannot prove guilt the defense restsEver hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsPhony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,439
- 2,290
We proved it and would have proved it even more beyond a shadow of a doubt if the lying traitors in Repub senate weren't scared to death of the pig in the WH and allowed testimony from those under subpoenaWhen the prosecution cannot prove guilt the defense restsEver hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsThe accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
The commies are using you people and you don't even realize it. The commies want Biden to win, so they want to prolong this impeachment farce as long as they can to bring those other Senators in for the hearing and keep them off the campaign trail. You people are suckers for falling into their trap.
The witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsGet ready for ANOTHER rigging of our election thanks to republican cowards in the senate.... 75% of Americans wanted witnesses for a fair trial Hopefully the scum all get voted outThe executive branch works for trump
Our representatives don't act according to rigged polls, they conduct themselves by right or wrong. This phony impeachment was clearly wrong. A hundred more witnesses doesn't change that fact. They were not needed.
Phony is when the accused is innocent. And it's pretty apparent that Rump was born guilty and just gets guiltier every day by his own actions. So don't try that tired old argument. The General Public ain't buyin' it.
The accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
lol rubbish. Zero evidence this is anything but a fake scam concocted by Democrats embedded in the bureaucracy and some homo activist allowed to work in intel jobs they should be barred from, since they're unstable mentally ill deviants.
A minimum meaningful sample size is 100.There have been 15 impeachment trials in the senate This is the FIRST one without witnessesNo, the dems did not do everything they could to get the truth out. They cut corners and tried to get
the Senate to do the work they should have done. I'm not sure why you are defending them
as you are. The dems feet are the ones who's feet should be held to the fire.
You have any idea how long it would take to get the lawsuits through the court? McGhan’s lawsuit has a single ruling in district court and that was like 8 months ago. This will take years and I have little doubt they will be taking these to court now. Nothing was lost by going an alternative route.
The Senate should have called witnesses during the trial. The House can’t do that. They weren’t asking the Senate to do their job for them. They were asking the Senate to do the job the Constitution gives them.
Excuse me? The House can't call witnesses? What the fuck do you think the House was DOING during the impeachment process? The Constitution does NOT mandate that the Senate do the investigating for the House.
The House can’t call witnesses at the trial. Good lord, did you actually read ?
Good Lord, do you actually think? The House called and heard witnesses during their big sham "investigation". Those testimonies were part of the impeachment managers' presentation to the Senate.
The only thing the House can't do is force the Senate to do their investigatory job by calling EVEN MORE witnesses, which the House didn't bother to call before.
If the House wanted to present extra witness testimony to the Senate, they should have tended to that before now.
The House had 18 witnesses.
If the Senate needed or wanted more witnesses, they would have had them, they did not.
The House tried to bully the Senate and the Senate, for once, stood up to them. The recent Kavanaugh fiasco where they tried to accommodate you certainly stiffened their spines. In the End, they once again Followed The Biden Rule:
Joe Biden argued during the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton that witnesses should be rejected by the Senate, according to a memo obtained by Politico.
“The Senate need not hold a ‘full blown’ trial” with witnesses and testimony, then-Sen. Biden wrote. “[T]he Senate may dismiss articles of impeachment without holding a full trial or taking any evidence.”
“Put another way, the Constitution does not impose on the Senate the duty to hold a trial,” he continued. “In fact the Senate need not hold a trial even though the House wishes to present evidence and hold a full trial[.]”
Biden cited multiple precedents showing that the Senate was not obligated in any way to accept new evidence or testimony regardless of what the House impeachment managers desired.
“At present, House of Representatives Impeachment Managers are taking the position that the Senate is required to hold a full trial with live witnesses and evidentiary proceedings,” Biden wrote to his Democrat colleagues. “The House of Representatives took the opposite position in 1986 when it argued that the Senate should summarily convict Judge Harry Claiborne without taking any evidence or hearing any witnesses[.]”
Biden’s arguments from 1999 directly refute claims from Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and other Democrat impeachment managers that the Senate must be required to seek testimony from witnesses the House itself refused to subpoena, such as fired former White House National Security Adviser John Bolton.
“In a number of previous impeachment trials, the Senate has reached the judgment that its constitutional role as sole trier of impeachments does not require it to take new evidence or hear live witness testimony.”
While the Senate eventually requested the testimony of three witnesses in the impeachment trial of Clinton–Monica Lewinsky, Vernon Jordan, and Sidney Blumenthal each of those witnesses had already been deposed before the House of Representatives or a federal grand jury following lengthy litigation. The Senate refused to call new witnesses whose previous testimony hadn’t already formed a basis for the impeachment articles against Clinton.
You can read Biden’s full memorandum here.
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 36,458
- 24,031
- 1,845
We proved it and would have proved it even more beyond a shadow of a doubt if the lying traitors in Repub senate weren't scared to death of the pig in the WH and allowed testimony from those under subpoenaWhen the prosecution cannot prove guilt the defense restsEver hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitorsThe accused is innocent because he broke no laws. Even if it could be proven that Trump did a quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Biden situation, there is nothing illegal about that. In fact, quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents in the past.
It's impossible to prove motive, especially given the fact at the time of the call, the nomination was nearly a year away as to who Trump's opponent would be. So that negates this phony claim that Trump did it for personal reasons. Therefore, the impeachment and charge are totally bogus.
How is it that so many adults dont know how trials work?
We proved it and would have proved it even more beyond a shadow of a doubt if the lying traitors in Repub senate weren't scared to death of the pig in the WH and allowed testimony from those under subpoenaWhen the prosecution cannot prove guilt the defense restsEver hear of anyone on trial refusing to hear those who will prove his innocence? I haven't .Maybe you have Ever hear of an impeachment trial without witnesses?Trump has executive privilege and every right to invoke itThe witnesses NOT ALLOWED to testify by trump would have more than proven Trump was guilty as sin Was there ANY proof Trump didn't commit a crime,,,or just repub BS ? Since when do we have a trial without witnesses ?? Repubs in the senate are scared of the POS in the WH They are cowardly traitors
How is it that so many adults dont know how trials work?
Dope addled illiterate Democrats whose lives are focused on meth and deviant porn.
That's what they got courts for, Ed. Exercise the three branches that's what they're here for.Should have subpoenaed others ???The WH refused to let witnesses appear the WH refused to show documents A trial without witnesses is NO TRIAL at all And now the POS in the WH can strut around saying he's innocent??? Not by a long shotNot to mention that it's the first time that the accused didn't have his Due Process, youThere have been 15 impeachment trials in the senate This is the FIRST one without witnessesExcuse me? The House can't call witnesses? What the fuck do you think the House was DOING during the impeachment process? The Constitution does NOT mandate that the Senate do the investigating for the House.
The House can’t call witnesses at the trial. Good lord, did you actually read ?
Good Lord, do you actually think? The House called and heard witnesses during their big sham "investigation". Those testimonies were part of the impeachment managers' presentation to the Senate.
The only thing the House can't do is force the Senate to do their investigatory job by calling EVEN MORE witnesses, which the House didn't bother to call before.
If the House wanted to present extra witness testimony to the Senate, they should have tended to that before now.
forgot about that part, huh?
Well, the House had 17...maybe 18 witnesses, they should have subpoenaed any others that they wanted.Instead,
they wanted to end their proceedings early and get home before Christmas.
There was lots of testimony used in the Senate that the House provided.
No excuses for the democrats....and let's be honest, it wasn't about impeaching the president.
The democrats knew that wasn't going to happen from the get-go, they just wanted to smear Trump
in this election year. The dems know that their stable of mules couldn't win an election for an
environmental technician much less a president.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 208
- Replies
- 460
- Views
- 5K
- Replies
- 31
- Views
- 510
- Replies
- 11
- Views
- 139
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 30
- Views
- 123
- Replies
- 27
- Views
- 91
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 30
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8517
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 484
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-