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

[M14 Shooter]

Unless you can explain how or why the President's private lawyer can only represent the President in his persona/private issues, to the full exclusion of public or policy issues, your accusation cannot hold water with rational, reasoned people.

Well?

Do rational people ignore information that is counter to their beliefs?

Thank you for admitting you cannot explain how how or why the President's private lawyer can only represent the President in his persona/private issues, to the full exclusion of public or policy issues, and thusly demonstrating your accusation will not hold water with rational, reasoned people.

You’re asking a hypothetical. I’m stating a factual.

No. You made an unsupportable assumption.
You cannot explain how how or why the President's private lawyer can only represent the President in his persona/private issues, to the full exclusion of public or policy issues, and thus you cannot demonstrate your assumption to be sound.

Giuliani’s public statements support my assertion.

^^^^
This is a lie.

 

[busybee01]

How does the GOP justify coordinating the proceedings with the accused?

Yeah, how dare they allow him to mount a defense.

Moron.

There is no problem with Trump mounting a defense. I encourage him to testify

But having the Senate coordinate the trial with the White House violates the oath to be impartial

No one gives a fuck, moron. The idea that Dims are impartial doesn't pass the laugh test.

The trouble is that voters agree with Democrats more than they do with Republicans. They agree that Trump was wrong to do what he did. A majority agreed he abused his authority. Pluralities agree he obstructed justice and committed bribery.

 

[colfax_m]

Do rational people ignore information that is counter to their beliefs?

Thank you for admitting you cannot explain how how or why the President's private lawyer can only represent the President in his persona/private issues, to the full exclusion of public or policy issues, and thusly demonstrating your accusation will not hold water with rational, reasoned people.

You’re asking a hypothetical. I’m stating a factual.

No. You made an unsupportable assumption.
You cannot explain how how or why the President's private lawyer can only represent the President in his persona/private issues, to the full exclusion of public or policy issues, and thus you cannot demonstrate your assumption to be sound.

Giuliani’s public statements support my assertion.

^^^^
This is a lie.

At least you stopped cropping it out of my responses.

Here’s Giuliani:
“The investigation I conducted concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption, was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges, that kept changing as one after another were disproven.”

 

[busybee01]

For example?

Who should be on that stand if not Mulveney who held up the aid on Trump's orders, or Juliani who was SMACK MIDDLE OF THE ENTIRE THING and who Trump referred EVERYONE to deal with including the President of Ukraine?

You want to get to the truth you ask the people involved, not put up sideshow about people who had nothing to do with real-time events this whole thing is about.

Sounds like something the democrats should have done.

You mean like this?

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D024.pdf

MR. GOLDMAN: This is the deposition of Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Mr. Mulvaney was subpoenaed to appear at 9:00 a.m.
It is 9:07 a.m. He is not here.

And then followed up in court to force testimony, but they did not do that. This is what happens when you try to unseat a president this close to an election. He can use the clock.

Why hold up the process for a year (and place it smack middle of election) when the bare fact of this Obstruction of Congressional Investigation is itself an impeachment Article and evidence of guilt??

To do this is to basically give a roadmap to future President crooks - avoid Congressional oversight by running out the clock.

Horseshit. "Obstruction of Congress" isn't even a crime. Pursuing legal constitutional processes is not a crime.

Impeding a congressional investigation is obstruction of justice. Impeachment does not require a statutory crime.

 

[The Original Tree]

It was their job to prove their case. They refused to wait for court decisions on Subpoenas and refused to allow GOP witnesses testify, refused to allow witnesses cross examined, because they wanted Impeachment under The Christmas Tree for Christmas.

Grinch Trump was stonewalling all subpoena requests for individuals and documents in hopes of running out the clock before next November. Do you suppose that has anything to do with statute of limitations restrictions over his pending Russian collusion/obstruction charges?

Michael Cohen: "Individual 1 is Donald J. Trump"

Liberal Dictionary:
================================================
Stonewalling: Pursuing the legal means the Constitution makes available to you.

Liberal Dictionary:
================================================
Stonewalling: Pursuing the legal means the Constitution makes available to you.

Get back to me when you elect a POTUS who's read the Constitution.
All the times Trump said the constitution let's him do whatever he wants

It definitely allows him to pursue Congressional demands all the way to the Supreme Court.

Do you disagree?

It definitely allows him to pursue Congressional demands all the way to the Supreme Court.

Do you disagree?

There's no Constitutional provision for refusing ALL congressional requests for documents AND individuals relating to a impeachment proceeding.

House Judiciary Committee passes articles of impeachment against Trump - WQOW

You are rising through the Ranks of Our Kremlin Kids Program, & soon you will be a Jr. Russian Cub, Comrade. Continue perfecting your hate for America on this Glorious Day for Mother Russia. We congratulate you on your success for overturning the 2016 Election where my Dirty Russian Dossier had failed.

 

[easyt65]

The person who brought up the issue is no longer germane as other have confirmed his information. Schiff is not relevant.

The person who started this is relevant because they started all this with 2nd-hand info.

Schiff is important because AFTER THE DOJ HAD DISMISSED THE COMPLAINT from the non-whistle blower because no crime was proven and there are no witnesses SCHIFF is the one who blew the whole thing into another unsupported coup attempt.

The fact that Schiff has engaged in sedition the last 2 years, has attempted to manufactor false evidence, and has taken a lot of money from a Russian-born arms dealer and Burisma MAKES Schiff important.

The fact that Obama's DOJ & FBI engaged in FISA Court abuses by withholding evidence. manufacturing evidence / etc... Makes Schiff doing the same thing in Congress for 2 1/2 years extremely relevant.

 

[The Original Tree]

Sounds like something the democrats should have done.

You mean like this?

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D024.pdf

MR. GOLDMAN: This is the deposition of Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Mr. Mulvaney was subpoenaed to appear at 9:00 a.m.
It is 9:07 a.m. He is not here.

And then followed up in court to force testimony, but they did not do that. This is what happens when you try to unseat a president this close to an election. He can use the clock.

Why hold up the process for a year (and place it smack middle of election) when the bare fact of this Obstruction of Congressional Investigation is itself an impeachment Article and evidence of guilt??

To do this is to basically give a roadmap to future President crooks - avoid Congressional oversight by running out the clock.

Horseshit. "Obstruction of Congress" isn't even a crime. Pursuing legal constitutional processes is not a crime.

Impeding a congressional investigation is obstruction of justice. Impeachment does not require a statutory crime.

Yes, Comrade, Make sure to tell stupid American Dogs, that Due Process, Executive Privilege, are Nonsense, and make them believe The House of Representatives has Absolute Tyrannical Power over The Executive Branch and NEVER has to see The Judicial Branch to arbitrate disagreements between The House and The Executive Branch. If you were in Mother Russia, I would kiss your cheeks.

 

[Meister]

Sounds like something the democrats should have done.

You mean like this?

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D024.pdf

MR. GOLDMAN: This is the deposition of Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Mr. Mulvaney was subpoenaed to appear at 9:00 a.m.
It is 9:07 a.m. He is not here.

And then followed up in court to force testimony, but they did not do that. This is what happens when you try to unseat a president this close to an election. He can use the clock.

Why hold up the process for a year (and place it smack middle of election) when the bare fact of this Obstruction of Congressional Investigation is itself an impeachment Article and evidence of guilt??

To do this is to basically give a roadmap to future President crooks - avoid Congressional oversight by running out the clock.

Horseshit. "Obstruction of Congress" isn't even a crime. Pursuing legal constitutional processes is not a crime.

Impeding a congressional investigation is obstruction of justice. Impeachment does not require a statutory crime.

Take it to the courts, that's what it's there for. Fifty some odd days for an impeachment is signs of a sham and reeks with
shenanigans. Look up how long the Clinton impeachment lasted.

 

[The Original Tree]

You mean like this?

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D024.pdf

MR. GOLDMAN: This is the deposition of Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Mr. Mulvaney was subpoenaed to appear at 9:00 a.m.
It is 9:07 a.m. He is not here.

And then followed up in court to force testimony, but they did not do that. This is what happens when you try to unseat a president this close to an election. He can use the clock.

Why hold up the process for a year (and place it smack middle of election) when the bare fact of this Obstruction of Congressional Investigation is itself an impeachment Article and evidence of guilt??

To do this is to basically give a roadmap to future President crooks - avoid Congressional oversight by running out the clock.

Horseshit. "Obstruction of Congress" isn't even a crime. Pursuing legal constitutional processes is not a crime.

Impeding a congressional investigation is obstruction of justice. Impeachment does not require a statutory crime.

Take it to the courts, that's what it's there for. Fifty some odd days for an impeachment is signs of a sham and reeks with
shenanigans. Look up how long the Clinton impeachment lasted.

The Trump Impeachment is actually only 36 days. The Clinton Impeachment by Contrast was 162 Days.

 

[georgephillip]

1. The non-qualifying whistle blower admittedly has ZERO 1st hand knowledge of the debunked accusations in their complaint.

Except all first hand testimony and the memorandum of the conversation released by Putin's Bitch completely verifies the whistleblower's accusations. If Trump is innocent, why won't he testify UNDER OATH in front of the gullible fools who put him in office?

 

[easyt65]

It was their job to prove their case. They refused to wait for court decisions on Subpoenas and refused to allow GOP witnesses testify, refused to allow witnesses cross examined, because they wanted Impeachment under The Christmas Tree for Christmas.

Grinch Trump was stonewalling all subpoena requests for individuals and documents in hopes of running out the clock before next November. Do you suppose that has anything to do with statute of limitations restrictions over his pending Russian collusion/obstruction charges?

Michael Cohen: "Individual 1 is Donald J. Trump"

Liberal Dictionary:
================================================
Stonewalling: Pursuing the legal means the Constitution makes available to you.

Liberal Dictionary:
================================================
Stonewalling: Pursuing the legal means the Constitution makes available to you.

Get back to me when you elect a POTUS who's read the Constitution.
All the times Trump said the constitution let's him do whatever he wants

It definitely allows him to pursue Congressional demands all the way to the Supreme Court.

Do you disagree?

It definitely allows him to pursue Congressional demands all the way to the Supreme Court.

Do you disagree?

There's no Constitutional provision for refusing ALL congressional requests for documents AND individuals relating to a impeachment proceeding.

House Judiciary Committee passes articles of impeachment against Trump - WQOW

The FISA Court just DESTROYED this faux argument by exposing the fact that the Dems' coup attempts / investigations from day 1 have been ILLEGAL based on crimes perpetrated by the Obama administration's DOJ and FBI.

The US IG made it clear the FBI knowingly used BS propaganda from a known in-reliable source - a foreign spy working with Russians, withheld the fact that Carter Page was an official govt information source reporting on the Russians - one of 17 FISA Court abuses - to legally spy on Trump & his team based on a false manufactured accusation / story!

Jonathon Gruber must be so proud of you!

 

[The Original Tree]

1. The non-qualifying whistle blower admittedly has ZERO 1st hand knowledge of the debunked accusations in their complaint.

Except all first hand testimony and the memorandum of the conversation released by Putin's Bitch completely verifies the whistleblower's accusations. If Trump is innocent, why won't he testify UNDER OATH in front of the gullible fools who put him in office?

You learned your lessons well at The Russian Academy for Political Division and Strife.

We thank you for your service, on this Glorious Day for Mother Russia.

I blow you a kiss, from my lips to yours. Thank you for your service.

 

[easyt65]

Except all first hand testimony and the memorandum of the conversation released by Putin's Bitch completely verifies the whistleblower's accusations.

You are a f*ing LIAR - THERE WAS NO 1ST-HAND ACCOUNT WITNESSES, & YOU ARE PARROTING DEM LIES OR SCHIFF'S 'PARODY'!

 

[georgephillip]

2. The prosecutorial divisions within the DOJ REJECTED the complaint because NO CRIME was proven to have been committed, & there were NO WITNESSESS.

You mean the Bill Barr/Roy Cohn Donald J. Trump Protection Agency

"President Trump famously asked, 'Where’s my Roy Cohn?' Demanding a stand-in for his old personal lawyer and fixer, Mr. Trump has actually gotten something better with Bill Barr: a lawyer who like Cohn stops seemingly at nothing in his service to Mr. Trump and conveniently sits atop the nation’s Justice Department."

Opinion | Donald Trump Wanted Another Roy Cohn. He Got Bill Barr.

 

[easyt65]

2. The prosecutorial divisions within the DOJ REJECTED the complaint because NO CRIME was proven to have been committed, & there were NO WITNESSESS.

You mean the Bill Barr/Roy Cohn Donald J. Trump Protection Agency

"President Trump famously asked, 'Where’s my Roy Cohn?' Demanding a stand-in for his old personal lawyer and fixer, Mr. Trump has actually gotten something better with Bill Barr: a lawyer who like Cohn stops seemingly at nothing in his service to Mr. Trump and conveniently sits atop the nation’s Justice Department."

Opinion | Donald Trump Wanted Another Roy Cohn. He Got Bill Barr.

Nice 'OPINION' Piece....couldn't find any FACTS, huh?!

 

[busybee01]

1. He is a whistleblower according to federal law.

STFU LIAR!

I posted the exact Law and link to it while you have OBVIOUSLY not even read it. It does NOT afford this Deep State coup-conspirator ' Whistle Blower' status... You are a LIAR....

Just like DragonLady who claimed, like Schiff, that the Law affords the non-qualifying Whistle Blower with ANONYMITY & IMMUNITY! IT DOES NOT.

I am sick and tired of lying, Trump-hating, Democrat / fake news-parroting, opinionated snowflake trolls pushing their lies without EVER posting anything - no links, testimony, reports, etc... - especially YOU not doing so to back up the lies you spread.

I could not get past your 1st lie....enough is enough, troll.

You are the LIAR. The whistleblower is protected especially since Trump publicly threatened the whistleblower.

You are a lying Trump supporter who will cheat and steal to protect Trump. Your supporting stuff is opinions and lies by Trump supporters. Someone parroting Trump's lies does not prove anything.

 

[georgephillip]

In Schiff's coup circus hearings EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO TESTIFIED ADMITTED THEY PERSONALLY WITNESSED NOTHING ... and when asked directly to name the crime the President committed THEY COULD NOT DO IT.

Are you finding it more and more difficult to defend a pathological liar and world class con man?

Imagine how much worse it will get when Trump's out of office and facing federal and state charges in a criminal courtroom?

Federal Criminal Offenses and the Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

"The short pieces that follow this introduction outline various ways in which the evidence compiled by the House Intelligence Committee supports the allegations of serious criminal liability by the President and otherwise supports allegations of impeachable offenses — from abuse of power, to violations of the bribery and the Federal Election Campaign Act statutes."

 

[Jitss617]

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.

You have evidence now? Lol

Sure! They couldn't make their case in The House, so let's do a Hail Mary in The Senate!

CHUCK SCHUMER’S IMPEACHMENT MOAN THROWS HOUSE DEMS UNDER THE BUS

Senate Democrats need a trial strategy. A major part of the strategy will be to demand more information. What information? Mainly testimony from past and present administration officials like Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton. Possibly grand jury testimony from the Mueller investigation, as well.

The House could have held off on impeaching President Trump while seeking these forms of evidence in court. However, House Democrats were in a big hurry.

To impeach a president before the facts have come out is a disgrace.​

Senate Democrats undercut the House Dems and their primary impeachment article by moaning that they need more facts. They long for something that might turn public opinion around.

Mitch McConnell dismissed the whining of Schumer and other Senate Democrats with this comment:

“The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury, to hear a trial, not to re-run the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rush sloppily through it.”​

He’s right. The American public will agree.

Everyone knows Democrats didn't make the case, can we all just stop fighting and enjoy the Holidays?

He’s right. The American public will agree

Poll: 71% of Americans believe Trump should allow top aides to testify

What’s your point

 

[georgephillip]

So Due Process is Something you oppose?

As you well know, if the Dems continued to let pathological lying scum POS Tramp stall using the courts, it would have gone well past the election allowing the scumbag to CHEAT yet again and steal another election.
But that's what you Trump Chumps want!

Due process is a part of the criminal justice system. Not a impeachment trial.

Wrong, but thanks for admitting you are opposed to due process.

There is no such thing as due process. Trump was offered a chance to participate but declined.

I like the way you think, Comrade. Don't you think today is a glorious day for Mother Russia?

like the way you think, Comrade. Don't you think today is a glorious day for Mother Russia?

You should direct that question to

Shithead.

 

[The Original Tree]

In Schiff's coup circus hearings EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO TESTIFIED ADMITTED THEY PERSONALLY WITNESSED NOTHING ... and when asked directly to name the crime the President committed THEY COULD NOT DO IT.

Are you finding it more and more difficult to defend a pathological liar and world class con man?

Imagine how much worse it will get when Trump's out of office and facing federal and state charges in a criminal courtroom?

Federal Criminal Offenses and the Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

"The short pieces that follow this introduction outline various ways in which the evidence compiled by the House Intelligence Committee supports the allegations of serious criminal liability by the President and otherwise supports allegations of impeachable offenses — from abuse of power, to violations of the bribery and the Federal Election Campaign Act statutes."

Good Job Comrade