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

[Faun]

Of course it does.

He asked a foreign national to investigate a political rival who's also campaigning for the office of president. An investigation is something of value that benefits his campaign.

You have summed up the democrst complaint

but I and most other people do not accept that claim

How is a president soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival not violating that law?

You only see biden as a political candidate rather than a former VP who abused his office

It doesn't matter. Under no circumstance can Trump break the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival. Even if Trump suspected Biden committed a crime, he should have had his own Justice Department investigate Biden, not a foreign national. It involved a political rival. It's illegal and a threat to national security to delegate that job to a foreign nation.

As I have pointed out 100 times, the term "solicit" implies something illegal. So you're saying it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help because it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help.

There's no law that says the government can't investigate political candidates if they have broken the law. They don't get a "get out of jail free" card because they filed to run for office.

If your claims are true, then why didn't the House Dims file a charge on that issue? Apparently, even they know you're full of shit.

I'm saying it's illegal to solicit a foreign national because the law says it's illegal to solicit a foreign national.

 

[colfax_m]

I believe we should hear from the involved officials themselves. A genuine trial would welcome it.

It has nothing to do with the strength of the case. There is plenty of evidence already.

It's not the jury's job to look for evidence for the accusers.

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

The Senate is the jury that's all they are

I’ve never heard of a jury vote on witnesses to be called in a case, have you?

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I believe we should hear from the involved officials themselves. A genuine trial would welcome it.

It has nothing to do with the strength of the case. There is plenty of evidence already.

It's not the jury's job to look for evidence for the accusers.

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's not the jury's job to look for evidence for the accusers.

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

The Senate is the jury that's all they are

I’ve never heard of a jury vote on witnesses to be called in a case, have you?

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

 

[Faun]

It's not the jury's job to look for evidence for the accusers.

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

 

[colfax_m]

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

The Senate is the jury that's all they are

I’ve never heard of a jury vote on witnesses to be called in a case, have you?

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.

 

[bripat9643]

You only see biden as a political candidate rather than a former VP who abused his office

It doesn't matter. Under no circumstance can Trump break solicit a foreign national to investigate a political rival. Even if Trump suspected Biden committed a crime, he should have had his own Justice Department investigate Biden, not a foreign national. It involved a political rival. It's illegal and a threat to national security to delegate that job to a foreign nation.

We've already told you, the DOJ is a next of deep state vipers. Trump gave the job to someone he could trust, not someone who was going to try to get him impeached or leak classified secrets to the press. That's not illegal.

You're also wrong in claiming that a foreign government to investigate American crooks in their country. The treaty we signed with Ukraine proves that theory is bogus from the starting gate.

You're inventing legal theories out of thin air.

Again, the term "solicit" implies a crime was committed. You're begging the question whenever you use it.

As far as the treaty, YOU posted provisions in it must be followed. And the provision for making requests must come from our Attorney General, not the president. And they must be made to their Minister of Justice, not their president. And requests must be made on ongoing investigations, not opening up new ones.

ROFL! Now you're trying to claim (without actually claiming it) than not going by the procedure in the treaty is a crime. The fact is they must be followed only if you want the cooperation of the signers to the treaty. It doesn't make not following the procedure a crime, you fucking douchebag.

The existence of the treaty shows that it's not illegal to ask a foreign government for help in prosecuting American criminals.

In your douchebag fashion, you come down on both wrong sides of that issue.

LOLOL

You poor, deranged, lying fucking moron... YOU say I said it's a crime to not adhere to the treaty -- I never said that. I said he's not covered by the treaty because he didn't use it, but instead, went directly to the president of Ukraine.

Yeah, I know douchebag. You tried your usual shtick of implying that it was illegal not to follow the procedure without actually saying that:

As far as the treaty, YOU posted provisions in it must be followed. And the provision for making requests must come from our Attorney General, not the president.​

"Not covered by the treaty" is just another way of implying that not following the procedure is illegal.

If it's not illegal, then what's the point of saying what you posted?

Who do you think you're fooling?

 

[bripat9643]

The Senate is the jury that's all they are

I’ve never heard of a jury vote on witnesses to be called in a case, have you?

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.

When was "last time," asshole?

 

[bripat9643]

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The senate is more than the jury during impeachment. Normally, a jury doesn’t have the authority to call witnesses.

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

They can only call those that was heard from in the investigation

 

[colfax_m]

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

They can only call those that was heard from in the investigation

That’s not true.

 

[boedicca]

The Dems should have thought about witnesses and evidence before their Congress Critters abused their power.

Just sayin'.

 

[bripat9643]

You have summed up the democrst complaint

but I and most other people do not accept that claim

How is a president soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival not violating that law?

You only see biden as a political candidate rather than a former VP who abused his office

It doesn't matter. Under no circumstance can Trump break the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival. Even if Trump suspected Biden committed a crime, he should have had his own Justice Department investigate Biden, not a foreign national. It involved a political rival. It's illegal and a threat to national security to delegate that job to a foreign nation.

As I have pointed out 100 times, the term "solicit" implies something illegal. So you're saying it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help because it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help.

There's no law that says the government can't investigate political candidates if they have broken the law. They don't get a "get out of jail free" card because they filed to run for office.

If your claims are true, then why didn't the House Dims file a charge on that issue? Apparently, even they know you're full of shit.

I'm saying it's illegal to solicit a foreign national because the law says it's illegal to solicit a foreign national.

Again, the term "solicit" implies a law was broken.

It's illegal to hire foreign nationals to work on political campaigns. Trump didn't do that, dumbass.

 

[colfax_m]

the constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -

does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?

They don’t have to call witnesses.

They will if they’re interested in the truth

 

[colfax_m]

I’ve never heard of a jury vote on witnesses to be called in a case, have you?

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.

When was "last time," asshole?

Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

They can only call those that was heard from in the investigation

That’s not true.

It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutor

 

[bripat9643]

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.

When was "last time," asshole?

Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?

I just didn't follow your poor writing.

Last time, Dims got to call all the witnesses they wanted during the House inquiry. You don't help your case by citing the Clinton impeachment.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Senate is the jury what's your point? but no the jury doesn't investigate for the prosecution

They’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.

When you introduce new witnesses it is investigating

Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.

When was "last time," asshole?

Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?

Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crime

 

[bigrebnc1775]

We've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?

They don’t have to call witnesses.

They will if they’re interested in the truth

If there was true why didn't the democrats find it? Why are democrats dependent on the Republicans to find what they couldn't? 3 years now and nothing impeachable

 

[Siete]

Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.

The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses

Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??

They can only call those that was heard from in the investigation

That’s not true.

It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutor

THE TRUTH IS YOU'RE IGNORING THE US CONSTITUTION.