Schumer's pipe dream, a trial with.....you know.....evidence.

[Oldstyle]

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

Trump has refused all requests at documents and witnesses. I can’t believe you aren’t aware of that.

THAT is not an impeachable offense! If you on the left feel that Trump is improperly invoking Executive Privilege then you should be taking that to the courts for a decision. You haven't done that however because you're SO desperate to come up with something you can impeach Trump on...and you've failed so epically to find something that you're reduced to claiming "obstruction of justice" because Trump isn't cooperating with your mock trial in the House!

This isn't about impeachable offenses! It never was. It's about impeaching Trump no matter what he's done or not done! It's why you're bringing impeachment articles

against him for doing something that Barack Obama did as well.

Republicans would have been all over Obama had he done one tenth of the crap trump has done.

So Obama didn't claim Executive Privilege when Congress was investigating Fast & Furious? The Obama Justice Department didn't scam a FISA court into giving them wiretaps on the opposing party's campaign? The IRS under Obama didn't target conservative groups?

There are two things that are amusing about the statement you just made, Jason! The first is that you think Trump has actually "done" something! The second is that you're convinced Barry DIDN'T!

 

[Oldstyle]

And 'they' still haven't found squat on Trump.
Even after three years of trying.


lmao

Several of trump's 'associates' in prison and one awaiting sentencing. That should tell you something.

It does tell me something.

It doesn't have anything to do with the House of Reps (Democrat) hardon to impeach Trump.

Trump impeached himself by bribing the Ukranian president. Even Joe Biden had hijacked an airplane and raped a nun in Ukraine, that had nothing to do with what trump did.
The 2 quid pro quos at the heart of the impeachment inquiry

And yet the Ukrainian President says that there was no Quid Pro Quo, Jason? Is he lying?

 

[Meister]

Schumer, Pushing McConnell to Negotiate, Lays Out Plan for Impeachment Trial
The Senate Democratic leader wants to seek testimony from Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton and other White House officials, and subpoena documents the White House has withheld.
Schumer, Pushing McConnell to Negotiate, Lays Out Plan for Impeachment Trial

WASHINGTON — As the House prepared to make President Trump only the third president in American history to be impeached, the Senate’s top Democrat on Sunday laid out a detailed proposal for a Senate trial “in which all of the facts can be considered fully and fairly” — including subpoenas for documents the White House has withheld and witnesses it has prevented from testifying.

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, presented the proposal in a letter to his Republican counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell, in an opening move to force Republicans to negotiate over the shape and scope of the proceedings. Mr. McConnell had said last week that he was “taking my cues” from the White House, prompting Democrats to accuse him of abandoning his duty to render “impartial justice” in the trial.

In the letter, Mr. Schumer proposed a trial beginning Jan. 7 that would give each side a fixed amount of time to present its case, and called for four top White House officials who have not previously testified — including Mick Mulvaney, Mr. Trump’s acting chief of staff, and John R. Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser — to appear as witnesses.

Mr. Schumer also called for the Senate to subpoena documents that could shed light on the events at the heart of the charges against Mr. Trump: his campaign to enlist Ukraine to investigate his political rivals. And he set forth a specific timetable for each side to present its case, modeled on the one used when President Bill Clinton was tried in 1999. Mr. Clinton’s trial lasted about five weeks.
.....................................................................................................................................
Chuck should know better by now than to think McTurtle has an interest in anything approximating the kind of deliberative trial the Senate is obligated conduct. This is why it was so important for Trump's specious narrative of an unfair process in the House to have been spewed (just as it was equally important to make the similarly, objectively false accusations about the Mueller probe). All the trained seals repeat the sham process lie endlessly and will keep doing so all through the phony process Mitch is about to orchestrate in close consultation with the WH (Mitch has adopted the Trumpian strategy of violating rules, ethics, and law right out in the open). Why does McTreason think he can get away with it? Because he knows from experience The Following will swallow any ball of shit he feeds them. They rather like it.

Oh, they got him now....they have the evidence....not that they presented any up to this point, but, in the Senate, that's where it is. LOL
Let's get the whistle blower and Schiff under oath, it's about time they are exposed for who they are.

 

[WillowTree]

Wants the Senate trial to be limited to only what the House presented. He says that’s only fair. He’s an idiot.



it was just on TV. I will add link as soon as it becomes available.



here is link.

 

[colfax_m]

They’ve drug their heels rather than participate and find the truth. The impeachment inquiry has been perfectly lawful.

Yes, the House Dems have dug their heels in.

Since November 2016 - when Pelosi and Maxine began screeching "Impeach, Impeach!"

Dumb Dems can't even impeach properly.

They had to wait for Trump to do something stupid enough to be impeachable. It was only a matter of time really.

They waited? Dude, the Democrats were trying to impeach Trump as soon as he beat Hillary! Waited? Don't make me laugh! It's been three years of liberals trying desperately to undo a legal election that they lost!

Incorrect. The impeachment investigation started just a few months ago.

Oh, bullshit! The Democratic search for an impeachable offense began as soon as you realized that the "impossible" had just happened...as soon as you realized that Hillary Clinton had lost to Donald Trump!

Of course they did. Happens to every presidency. It’s one of the things that keeps presidents in check.

 

[Nostra]

And 'they' still haven't found squat on Trump.
Even after three years of trying.


lmao

Several of trump's 'associates' in prison and one awaiting sentencing. That should tell you something.

It does tell me something.

It doesn't have anything to do with the House of Reps (Democrat) hardon to impeach Trump.

Trump impeached himself by bribing the Ukranian president. Even Joe Biden had hijacked an airplane and raped a nun in Ukraine, that had nothing to do with what trump did.
The 2 quid pro quos at the heart of the impeachment inquiry

Why isn't bribery included in the articles of impeachment?

 

[berg80]

Whatever information Trump has been hiding from the House.

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

Trump has refused all requests at documents and witnesses. I can’t believe you aren’t aware of that.

THAT is not an impeachable offense! If you on the left feel that Trump is improperly invoking Executive Privilege then you should be taking that to the courts for a decision. You haven't done that however because you're SO desperate to come up with something you can impeach Trump on...and you've failed so epically to find something that you're reduced to claiming "obstruction of justice" because Trump isn't cooperating with your mock trial in the House!

This isn't about impeachable offenses! It never was. It's about impeaching Trump no matter what he's done or not done! It's why you're bringing impeachment articles

against him for doing something that Barack Obama did as well.

Republicans would have been all over Obama had he done one tenth of the crap trump has done.

So Obama didn't claim Executive Privilege when Congress was investigating Fast & Furious? The Obama Justice Department didn't scam a FISA court into giving them wiretaps on the opposing party's campaign? The IRS under Obama didn't target conservative groups?

There are two things that are amusing about the statement you just made, Jason! The first is that you think Trump has actually "done" something! The second is that you're convinced Barry DIDN'T!

I'm so glad you brought that up. Because Obama's use of EP during F&F was specific to a narrow range of conversations and documents, not the blanket assertion of absolute privilege over all witnesses and documents the Orange Messiah is claiming.

Furthermore, Holder testified 9 times during F&F hearings and the DoJ turned over 7,600 documents in cooperating with the congressional investigation.

Is anyone defending Fast and Furious?

Not really. In early 2011, the Justice Department wrote in a letter to Congress that no guns had been intentionally allowed to "walk," which it says was based on statements from ATF officials. That letter was retracted when it became clear that it was wrong. There's now a consensus that the operation was botched, but two questions remain. First, who approved it -- was Fast and Furious the work of a rogue ATF, or did Attorney General Eric Holder (or perhaps even President Obama) know of or approve it? Second, has there been an attempt to mislead Congress about the operation through a cover-up? On the first question, the department insists that only the ATF's Phoenix office approved the sting. At some point, however, the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix became aware, as did the acting director of the ATF. Both were forced to resign in August 2011 after Issa uncovered emails showing they'd been briefed. Justice says it's not trying to cover anything up, noting that it has turned over 7,600 documents and that Holder has testified before Congress nine times about Fast and Furious.

Eric Holder, Contempt of Congress, and Fast and Furious: What You Need to Know

 

[Oldstyle]

Yes, the House Dems have dug their heels in.

Since November 2016 - when Pelosi and Maxine began screeching "Impeach, Impeach!"

Dumb Dems can't even impeach properly.

They had to wait for Trump to do something stupid enough to be impeachable. It was only a matter of time really.

They waited? Dude, the Democrats were trying to impeach Trump as soon as he beat Hillary! Waited? Don't make me laugh! It's been three years of liberals trying desperately to undo a legal election that they lost!

Incorrect. The impeachment investigation started just a few months ago.

Oh, bullshit! The Democratic search for an impeachable offense began as soon as you realized that the "impossible" had just happened...as soon as you realized that Hillary Clinton had lost to Donald Trump!

Of course they did. Happens to every presidency. It’s one of the things that keeps presidents in check.

The opposing party has searched for an impeachable offense against every President? You're about as clueless about Presidential history as you are about what constitutes an impeachable offense, Colfax!

 

[beautress]

Wants the Senate trial to be limited to only what the House presented. He says that’s only fair. He’s an idiot.



it was just on TV. I will add link as soon as it becomes available.

Thank Heaven he's not a majority in the Senate or this nation would be in serious trouble. /whew!

 

[Oldstyle]

giddy-up

Trump didn't 'hide' anything from the House.

Or do you mean the 'testimony' behind closed doors the House Dems hid from the public??

Trump has refused all requests at documents and witnesses. I can’t believe you aren’t aware of that.

THAT is not an impeachable offense! If you on the left feel that Trump is improperly invoking Executive Privilege then you should be taking that to the courts for a decision. You haven't done that however because you're SO desperate to come up with something you can impeach Trump on...and you've failed so epically to find something that you're reduced to claiming "obstruction of justice" because Trump isn't cooperating with your mock trial in the House!

This isn't about impeachable offenses! It never was. It's about impeaching Trump no matter what he's done or not done! It's why you're bringing impeachment articles

against him for doing something that Barack Obama did as well.

Republicans would have been all over Obama had he done one tenth of the crap trump has done.

So Obama didn't claim Executive Privilege when Congress was investigating Fast & Furious? The Obama Justice Department didn't scam a FISA court into giving them wiretaps on the opposing party's campaign? The IRS under Obama didn't target conservative groups?

There are two things that are amusing about the statement you just made, Jason! The first is that you think Trump has actually "done" something! The second is that you're convinced Barry DIDN'T!

I'm so glad you brought that up. Because Obama's use of EP during F&F was specific to a narrow range of conversations and documents, not the blanket assertion of absolute privilege over all witnesses and documents the Orange Messiah is claiming.

Furthermore, Holder testified 9 times during F&F hearings and the DoJ turned over 7,600 documents in cooperating with the congressional investigation. It was only when Issa turned the investigation in to a fishing expedition that Obama made a claim of EP.

Is anyone defending Fast and Furious?

Not really. In early 2011, the Justice Department wrote in a letter to Congress that no guns had been intentionally allowed to "walk," which it says was based on statements from ATF officials. That letter was retracted when it became clear that it was wrong. There's now a consensus that the operation was botched, but two questions remain. First, who approved it -- was Fast and Furious the work of a rogue ATF, or did Attorney General Eric Holder (or perhaps even President Obama) know of or approve it? Second, has there been an attempt to mislead Congress about the operation through a cover-up? On the first question, the department insists that only the ATF's Phoenix office approved the sting. At some point, however, the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix became aware, as did the acting director of the ATF. Both were forced to resign in August 2011 after Issa uncovered emails showing they'd been briefed. Justice says it's not trying to cover anything up, noting that it has turned over 7,600 documents and that Holder has testified before Congress nine times about Fast and Furious.

Eric Holder, Contempt of Congress, and Fast and Furious: What You Need to Know

The reason that Holder was found in contempt of Congress is that he refused to testify as to when HE knew about Fast & Furious but more importantly...when Barack Obama knew about it!

 

[colfax_m]

Trump has refused all requests at documents and witnesses. I can’t believe you aren’t aware of that.

THAT is not an impeachable offense! If you on the left feel that Trump is improperly invoking Executive Privilege then you should be taking that to the courts for a decision. You haven't done that however because you're SO desperate to come up with something you can impeach Trump on...and you've failed so epically to find something that you're reduced to claiming "obstruction of justice" because Trump isn't cooperating with your mock trial in the House!

This isn't about impeachable offenses! It never was. It's about impeaching Trump no matter what he's done or not done! It's why you're bringing impeachment articles

against him for doing something that Barack Obama did as well.

Republicans would have been all over Obama had he done one tenth of the crap trump has done.

So Obama didn't claim Executive Privilege when Congress was investigating Fast & Furious? The Obama Justice Department didn't scam a FISA court into giving them wiretaps on the opposing party's campaign? The IRS under Obama didn't target conservative groups?

There are two things that are amusing about the statement you just made, Jason! The first is that you think Trump has actually "done" something! The second is that you're convinced Barry DIDN'T!

I'm so glad you brought that up. Because Obama's use of EP during F&F was specific to a narrow range of conversations and documents, not the blanket assertion of absolute privilege over all witnesses and documents the Orange Messiah is claiming.

Furthermore, Holder testified 9 times during F&F hearings and the DoJ turned over 7,600 documents in cooperating with the congressional investigation. It was only when Issa turned the investigation in to a fishing expedition that Obama made a claim of EP.

Is anyone defending Fast and Furious?

Not really. In early 2011, the Justice Department wrote in a letter to Congress that no guns had been intentionally allowed to "walk," which it says was based on statements from ATF officials. That letter was retracted when it became clear that it was wrong. There's now a consensus that the operation was botched, but two questions remain. First, who approved it -- was Fast and Furious the work of a rogue ATF, or did Attorney General Eric Holder (or perhaps even President Obama) know of or approve it? Second, has there been an attempt to mislead Congress about the operation through a cover-up? On the first question, the department insists that only the ATF's Phoenix office approved the sting. At some point, however, the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix became aware, as did the acting director of the ATF. Both were forced to resign in August 2011 after Issa uncovered emails showing they'd been briefed. Justice says it's not trying to cover anything up, noting that it has turned over 7,600 documents and that Holder has testified before Congress nine times about Fast and Furious.

Eric Holder, Contempt of Congress, and Fast and Furious: What You Need to Know

The reason that Holder was found in contempt of Congress is that he refused to testify as to when HE knew about Fast & Furious but more importantly...when Barack Obama knew about it!

That’s not true. Holder testified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...its-mistakes/2011/11/08/gIQAbaC81M_story.html

 

[Pogo]

Wants the Senate trial to be limited to only what the House presented. He says that’s only fair. He’s an idiot.



it was just on TV. I will add link as soon as it becomes available.

Actually the idea is to put up a link WHEN it becomes available. Before that it's just hot air connected to nothing. The void.

What's the point here anyway? Why WOULDN'T* such a trial be limited to what's presented? Where have you ever seen a trial that ventures off into shit not presented?

(* And no "would" still does not mean "wouldn't".)

 

[Oldstyle]

That's the Obama Administration invoking Executive Privilege for one reason only...to protect the President and the Attorney General from being exposed for knowing about Fast & Furious and doing nothing to stop it!

 

[colfax_m]

They had to wait for Trump to do something stupid enough to be impeachable. It was only a matter of time really.

They waited? Dude, the Democrats were trying to impeach Trump as soon as he beat Hillary! Waited? Don't make me laugh! It's been three years of liberals trying desperately to undo a legal election that they lost!

Incorrect. The impeachment investigation started just a few months ago.

Oh, bullshit! The Democratic search for an impeachable offense began as soon as you realized that the "impossible" had just happened...as soon as you realized that Hillary Clinton had lost to Donald Trump!

Of course they did. Happens to every presidency. It’s one of the things that keeps presidents in check.

The opposing party has searched for an impeachable offense against every President? You're about as clueless about Presidential history as you are about what constitutes an impeachable offense, Colfax!

Of course they have. They did it to Obama. They did it to Bush. They did it to Clinton (obviously). It’s Congress’s duty to oversee the executive.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Wants the Senate trial to be limited to only what the House presented. He says that’s only fair. He’s an idiot.



it was just on TV. I will add link as soon as it becomes available.

McConnell's laughing too hard. Someone slap him before he has a seizure.

 

[Oldstyle]

THAT is not an impeachable offense! If you on the left feel that Trump is improperly invoking Executive Privilege then you should be taking that to the courts for a decision. You haven't done that however because you're SO desperate to come up with something you can impeach Trump on...and you've failed so epically to find something that you're reduced to claiming "obstruction of justice" because Trump isn't cooperating with your mock trial in the House!

This isn't about impeachable offenses! It never was. It's about impeaching Trump no matter what he's done or not done! It's why you're bringing impeachment articles

against him for doing something that Barack Obama did as well.

Republicans would have been all over Obama had he done one tenth of the crap trump has done.

So Obama didn't claim Executive Privilege when Congress was investigating Fast & Furious? The Obama Justice Department didn't scam a FISA court into giving them wiretaps on the opposing party's campaign? The IRS under Obama didn't target conservative groups?

There are two things that are amusing about the statement you just made, Jason! The first is that you think Trump has actually "done" something! The second is that you're convinced Barry DIDN'T!

I'm so glad you brought that up. Because Obama's use of EP during F&F was specific to a narrow range of conversations and documents, not the blanket assertion of absolute privilege over all witnesses and documents the Orange Messiah is claiming.

Furthermore, Holder testified 9 times during F&F hearings and the DoJ turned over 7,600 documents in cooperating with the congressional investigation. It was only when Issa turned the investigation in to a fishing expedition that Obama made a claim of EP.

Is anyone defending Fast and Furious?

Not really. In early 2011, the Justice Department wrote in a letter to Congress that no guns had been intentionally allowed to "walk," which it says was based on statements from ATF officials. That letter was retracted when it became clear that it was wrong. There's now a consensus that the operation was botched, but two questions remain. First, who approved it -- was Fast and Furious the work of a rogue ATF, or did Attorney General Eric Holder (or perhaps even President Obama) know of or approve it? Second, has there been an attempt to mislead Congress about the operation through a cover-up? On the first question, the department insists that only the ATF's Phoenix office approved the sting. At some point, however, the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix became aware, as did the acting director of the ATF. Both were forced to resign in August 2011 after Issa uncovered emails showing they'd been briefed. Justice says it's not trying to cover anything up, noting that it has turned over 7,600 documents and that Holder has testified before Congress nine times about Fast and Furious.

Eric Holder, Contempt of Congress, and Fast and Furious: What You Need to Know

The reason that Holder was found in contempt of Congress is that he refused to testify as to when HE knew about Fast & Furious but more importantly...when Barack Obama knew about it!

That’s not true. Holder testified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...its-mistakes/2011/11/08/gIQAbaC81M_story.html

Holder testified that he lied. When he was pressed on when Obama knew about Fast & Furious...he ignored Congressional subpoenas to testify.

 

[Oldstyle]

They waited? Dude, the Democrats were trying to impeach Trump as soon as he beat Hillary! Waited? Don't make me laugh! It's been three years of liberals trying desperately to undo a legal election that they lost!

Incorrect. The impeachment investigation started just a few months ago.

Oh, bullshit! The Democratic search for an impeachable offense began as soon as you realized that the "impossible" had just happened...as soon as you realized that Hillary Clinton had lost to Donald Trump!

Of course they did. Happens to every presidency. It’s one of the things that keeps presidents in check.

The opposing party has searched for an impeachable offense against every President? You're about as clueless about Presidential history as you are about what constitutes an impeachable offense, Colfax!

Of course they have. They did it to Obama. They did it to Bush. They did it to Clinton (obviously). It’s Congress’s duty to oversee the executive.

There is a difference between overseeing the Executive and trying to impede what the Executive Branch is doing with a nonstop barrage of unfounded accusations and subpoenas. This IS NOT Congress fulfilling it's "duty"...this is Democratic Congressional leaders abusing their power!

 

[Oldstyle]

Adam Schiff was not interested in getting to the truth in the Ukrainian matter! If he was he would have called on the Biden's to testify. He would have had the "whistle blower" testify in person. This was never about overseeing the Executive Branch! This was always about coming up with something to impeach Trump with...no matter how flimsy the case was.

 

[berg80]

That's the Obama Administration invoking Executive Privilege for one reason only...to protect the President and the Attorney General from being exposed for knowing about Fast & Furious and doing nothing to stop it!

Nope. You folks sure do believe in a lot of bullshit. Must be the media sources you use that are lying to you every day.

Justice Department report clears Holder, but faults DOJ, ATF officials
Justice Department report clears Holder, but faults DOJ, ATF officials

The Justice Department’s inspector general (IG) on Wednesday cleared Attorney General Eric Holder in the controversial “Fast and Furious” operation but faulted several other federal officials for acting irresponsibly.

The 471-page IG report was issued after an 18-month investigation and recommends 14 agency officials receive administrative or disciplinary action for their role in the botched gun-tracking operation.

But it exonerates Holder, who has repeatedly butted heads with congressional Republicans over what he knew about the program and when he knew it.
.................................................................................................................................
If you have any credible evidence you can present stating Obama was aware of what was happening with F&F please present it.

 

[MeBelle]

Wants the Senate trial to be limited to only what the House presented. He says that’s only fair. He’s an idiot.



it was just on TV. I will add link as soon as it becomes available.

Actually the idea is to put up a link WHEN it becomes available. Before that it's just hot air connected to nothing. The void.

What's the point here anyway? Why WOULDN'T* such a trial be limited to what's presented?




Where have you ever seen a trial that ventures off into shit not presented?




(* And no "would" still does not mean "wouldn't".)

Pogo to the bold

The DEM led House of Representatives holding their inquiry behind closed doors without a chance for their witnesses to be cross examined.

Due process, dude!