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

[Sunsettommy]

I admitted nothing like that

Yes you did - you stated military aid was released. Military aid WAS released, while Barry refused to do so when Ukraine needed it most. Are you now saying military aid was NOT released to Ukraine? You seemed confused, unsure of what it is you said...perhaps because you have tour socialist democrat masters' talking points all jumbled up and confused. Either military aid was released to Ukraine - which it was under Trump or it was not, as it was denied Ukraine just before Barry's pal Putin invaded. Get back to us when you figure out which one it is.

You are a fucking moron consitently posting stupid nonsense.

Trump held up congressionally approved millitary aid to Ukraine and he did so illegally, without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations.

NOTHING you just said re. orginal approval by Trump administration for lethal aid refutes that fact in any way, it is wholly IRRELAVANT to the issue.

According to YOU, it was released:

"Trump held up congressionally aproved millitary aid and he did so illegally and without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations."

It was never illegal anyway, as the ADMINISTRATIVE branch can delay it for a FOREIGN POLICY reason, Obama did it, so did Clinton and Bush.

Drop your partisanship hate will be helpful.....

Do you seriously not get why pointing to the release of aid AFTER THE DRUG DEAL WAS ALREADY BUSTED is not a rational defense?

At that point there was NO OPTION for Trump to keep the illegal hold on the aid and all Trump would be doing is burying himself deeper by not releasing it ASAP!

You don't need to be a lefty to understand this simple concept, it has nothing to do with partisanship, it has to with having a head on your shoulders.

You keep claiming the "hold" was illegal, you have yet to SHOW that it is illegal. Many Presidents have done this many times in American history, which is why I doubt your claim.

 

[bripat9643]

For what purpose?

What purpose? To determine if the person is telling the truth or not. They called many other witnesses, why would they not call the one that made the initial accusation? We can't have a system where anyone can make any claim they would like and then not be questioned. That is ridiculous.

Hmm, Trump can make any claim he wants. Can we question him?

How are you going to determine if the whistleblower is “telling the truth” or not? Didn’t we already do that with testimony from witnesses?

Trump is innocent until proven guilty. I guess you missed that part. I guess you want to change the entire court system to get your wishes. No reason to cross-examine those who make accustations against others. How absurd can you be?

That would be true in a court of law, which this isn't. As it stands now, he's the only impeached president who's not been acquitted.

That's true, this isn't a court of law. It is a situation in which the handlers of the House inquiry are fair game, as well as the supposed ignition point, aka the WB, and the majority has a lot of leeway to shape it how they want it shaped. IOW, they can totally ignore Schumer's bleating about how they should cover for the sloppy House work.

They keep claiming the Dims are following due process, and then making excuses for them when they clearly aren't.

 

[hadit]

In essence you are saying that no one should insist that the case against the president be a strong one and that it be well supported by more than second hand impressions and opinions.

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

The same is likely to happen this time as well. Voters don't like one party trying so hard to get rid of a sitting president.

 

[hadit]

What purpose? To determine if the person is telling the truth or not. They called many other witnesses, why would they not call the one that made the initial accusation? We can't have a system where anyone can make any claim they would like and then not be questioned. That is ridiculous.

Hmm, Trump can make any claim he wants. Can we question him?

How are you going to determine if the whistleblower is “telling the truth” or not? Didn’t we already do that with testimony from witnesses?

Trump is innocent until proven guilty. I guess you missed that part. I guess you want to change the entire court system to get your wishes. No reason to cross-examine those who make accustations against others. How absurd can you be?

That would be true in a court of law, which this isn't. As it stands now, he's the only impeached president who's not been acquitted.

That's true, this isn't a court of law. It is a situation in which the handlers of the House inquiry are fair game, as well as the supposed ignition point, aka the WB, and the majority has a lot of leeway to shape it how they want it shaped. IOW, they can totally ignore Schumer's bleating about how they should cover for the sloppy House work.

They keep claiming the Dims are following due process, and then making excuses for them when they clearly aren't.

They excuse the democrats from following due process because "it's a political, not criminal" process, then insist the Republicans treat it like a criminal, not political, process.

 

[Faun]

Then why is McConnell refusing to allow any witnesses?

Because it was Schiff and Nadler who were supposed to call them. Why did Schiff refuse to call the whistle blower?

Schiff and Nadler cannot call witnesses in the trial.

There was no purpose to call the whistleblower other than intimidation and diversion.

It's in the fucking constitution, asshole. If anyone is engaging in intimidation and diversion, it's Adolph Schiffler and the rest of the Dims. That's all they have. No facts.

Lying fucking moron, it is not in the Constitution.

Wrong, asshole:

Article [VI] (Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

LOLOL

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever??

Lying fucking moron, did you bother to read what YOU posted...??

"In all criminal prosecutions..."​

And as you said earlier...

It's not a legal trial, dumbass.

Like I said, lying fucking moron, your bullshit is not in the Constitution.

The funniest part is that YOU proved it's not.

 

[AntonToo]

Yes you did - you stated military aid was released. Military aid WAS released, while Barry refused to do so when Ukraine needed it most. Are you now saying military aid was NOT released to Ukraine? You seemed confused, unsure of what it is you said...perhaps because you have tour socialist democrat masters' talking points all jumbled up and confused. Either military aid was released to Ukraine - which it was under Trump or it was not, as it was denied Ukraine just before Barry's pal Putin invaded. Get back to us when you figure out which one it is.

You are a fucking moron consitently posting stupid nonsense.

Trump held up congressionally approved millitary aid to Ukraine and he did so illegally, without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations.

NOTHING you just said re. orginal approval by Trump administration for lethal aid refutes that fact in any way, it is wholly IRRELAVANT to the issue.

According to YOU, it was released:

"Trump held up congressionally aproved millitary aid and he did so illegally and without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations."

It was never illegal anyway, as the ADMINISTRATIVE branch can delay it for a FOREIGN POLICY reason, Obama did it, so did Clinton and Bush.

Drop your partisanship hate will be helpful.....

Do you seriously not get why pointing to the release of aid AFTER THE DRUG DEAL WAS ALREADY BUSTED is not a rational defense?

At that point there was NO OPTION for Trump to keep the illegal hold on the aid and all Trump would be doing is burying himself deeper by not releasing it ASAP!

You don't need to be a lefty to understand this simple concept, it has nothing to do with partisanship, it has to with having a head on your shoulders.

You keep claiming the "hold" was illegal, you have yet to SHOW that it is illegal. Many Presidents have done this many times in American history, which is why I doubt your claim.

It is obvious.

We have OMB staff quitting over this hold up and administration still has not provided any valid reason.

If there actually was one they OF COURSE would be providing it instead of defying congressional requests for documents and letting Trump get impeached.

Just use your head.

 

[Faun]

In essence you are saying that no one should insist that the case against the president be a strong one and that it be well supported by more than second hand impressions and opinions.

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

Wut?? They got the better by losing the House AND Senate?

 

[Faun]

In essence you are saying that no one should insist that the case against the president be a strong one and that it be well supported by more than second hand impressions and opinions.

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

The same is likely to happen this time as well. Voters don't like one party trying so hard to get rid of a sitting president.

So you're saying it's likely that Democrats are going to win the House and the Senate next year? Cool.

 

[iceberg]

hey - if he doesn't have to have any, no one does.

 

[bripat9643]

Trump is innocent until proven guilty. I guess you missed that part. I guess you want to change the entire court system to get your wishes. No reason to cross-examine those who make accustations against others. How absurd can you be?

My wish? My wish is to have this matter taken seriously. The whistleblower cannot indict or exonerate the president. They aren’t actually the “accuser”.

I am not even convinced this is a real whistleblower. IMO, this is a person who colluded with Schiff to find anything that Schiff could use to try to impeach, no matter how weak. This would explain why Pelosi said they were going to impeach BEFORE the information from the whistleblower was actually released. She knew about it all along. She jumped the gun. She also made the assumption that the call with the Ukraine would be a sure quid pro quo, which it wasn't. The whole thing stinks to high heavens and now that she is saying she may not release the article of impeachment to the Senate, it stinks even more. A pure, unadulterated witch hunt...again.

There's no whistleblower? Yet everything in his/her complaint has been verified. Pelosi was against impeachment until after the WB became public. The call was a quid pro quo.

Do not take that tin foil hat off under any circumstances. I don't think you could handle the shock of what reality actually is.

More lies. The whistleblower's complaint was a pile of lies.

LOL

Lying fucking moron, almost everything in the whistleblower's complaint was confirmed in the House impeachment hearings.

Spare us your pathetic lying.

I've already posted a number of times about the invalid claims in his complaint.

 

[Mac-7]

In essence you are saying that no one should insist that the case against the president be a strong one and that it be well supported by more than second hand impressions and opinions.

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

Wut?? They got the better by losing the House AND Senate?

Clinton was not convicted and his poll numbers went up

 

[bripat9643]

Because it was Schiff and Nadler who were supposed to call them. Why did Schiff refuse to call the whistle blower?

Schiff and Nadler cannot call witnesses in the trial.

There was no purpose to call the whistleblower other than intimidation and diversion.

It's in the fucking constitution, asshole. If anyone is engaging in intimidation and diversion, it's Adolph Schiffler and the rest of the Dims. That's all they have. No facts.

Lying fucking moron, it is not in the Constitution.

Wrong, asshole:

Article [VI] (Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

LOLOL

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever??

Lying fucking moron, did you bother to read what YOU posted...??

"In all criminal prosecutions..."​

And as you said earlier...

It's not a legal trial, dumbass.

Like I said, lying fucking moron, your bullshit is not in the Constitution.

The funniest part is that YOU proved it's not.

Yes, we know the Dims can run a Soviet style show trial and not follow due process if they want. Then they have no basis for complaining when the Republicans don't allow them to call witnesses.

 

[hadit]

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

The same is likely to happen this time as well. Voters don't like one party trying so hard to get rid of a sitting president.

So you're saying it's likely that Democrats are going to win the House and the Senate next year? Cool.

Not very likely, but you can always hope. By same thing, obviously, I expect the president's popularity to increase, which likely will ensure victory next year, as the democrats have yet to find a coherent candidate, much less a message. Running on "We failed to get rid of him" just doesn't sound like a winning message.

 

[Mac-7]

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

The same is likely to happen this time as well. Voters don't like one party trying so hard to get rid of a sitting president.

So you're saying it's likely that Democrats are going to win the House and the Senate next year? Cool.

No

I’m saying that the clinton impeachment backfired on the repubs

 

[Faun]

My wish? My wish is to have this matter taken seriously. The whistleblower cannot indict or exonerate the president. They aren’t actually the “accuser”.

I am not even convinced this is a real whistleblower. IMO, this is a person who colluded with Schiff to find anything that Schiff could use to try to impeach, no matter how weak. This would explain why Pelosi said they were going to impeach BEFORE the information from the whistleblower was actually released. She knew about it all along. She jumped the gun. She also made the assumption that the call with the Ukraine would be a sure quid pro quo, which it wasn't. The whole thing stinks to high heavens and now that she is saying she may not release the article of impeachment to the Senate, it stinks even more. A pure, unadulterated witch hunt...again.

There's no whistleblower? Yet everything in his/her complaint has been verified. Pelosi was against impeachment until after the WB became public. The call was a quid pro quo.

Do not take that tin foil hat off under any circumstances. I don't think you could handle the shock of what reality actually is.

More lies. The whistleblower's complaint was a pile of lies.

LOL

Lying fucking moron, almost everything in the whistleblower's complaint was confirmed in the House impeachment hearings.

Spare us your pathetic lying.

I've already posted a number of times about the invalid claims in his complaint.

LOLOL

As if your hollow denials carry any weight.

You're the lying fucking moron who actually just posted the impeached Trump does NOT have the Constitutional right to face his accuser AFTER claiming he does.



You're such a lying fucking moron, you proved yourself to be a lying fucking moron.

 

[Sunsettommy]

You are a fucking moron consitently posting stupid nonsense.

Trump held up congressionally approved millitary aid to Ukraine and he did so illegally, without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations.

NOTHING you just said re. orginal approval by Trump administration for lethal aid refutes that fact in any way, it is wholly IRRELAVANT to the issue.

According to YOU, it was released:

"Trump held up congressionally aproved millitary aid and he did so illegally and without a valid reason, releasing only after Congress opened investigations."

It was never illegal anyway, as the ADMINISTRATIVE branch can delay it for a FOREIGN POLICY reason, Obama did it, so did Clinton and Bush.

Drop your partisanship hate will be helpful.....

Do you seriously not get why pointing to the release of aid AFTER THE DRUG DEAL WAS ALREADY BUSTED is not a rational defense?

At that point there was NO OPTION for Trump to keep the illegal hold on the aid and all Trump would be doing is burying himself deeper by not releasing it ASAP!

You don't need to be a lefty to understand this simple concept, it has nothing to do with partisanship, it has to with having a head on your shoulders.

You keep claiming the "hold" was illegal, you have yet to SHOW that it is illegal. Many Presidents have done this many times in American history, which is why I doubt your claim.

It is obvious.

We have OMB staff quitting over this hold up and administration still has not provided any valid reason.

If there actually was one they OF COURSE would be providing it instead of defying congressional requests for documents and letting Trump get impeached.

Just use your head.

Then you have no case, since you didn't answer my request for backing up your claim that it was illegal.

You are blowing a lot of B.S. here.

 

[bripat9643]

I am not even convinced this is a real whistleblower. IMO, this is a person who colluded with Schiff to find anything that Schiff could use to try to impeach, no matter how weak. This would explain why Pelosi said they were going to impeach BEFORE the information from the whistleblower was actually released. She knew about it all along. She jumped the gun. She also made the assumption that the call with the Ukraine would be a sure quid pro quo, which it wasn't. The whole thing stinks to high heavens and now that she is saying she may not release the article of impeachment to the Senate, it stinks even more. A pure, unadulterated witch hunt...again.

There's no whistleblower? Yet everything in his/her complaint has been verified. Pelosi was against impeachment until after the WB became public. The call was a quid pro quo.

Do not take that tin foil hat off under any circumstances. I don't think you could handle the shock of what reality actually is.

More lies. The whistleblower's complaint was a pile of lies.

LOL

Lying fucking moron, almost everything in the whistleblower's complaint was confirmed in the House impeachment hearings.

Spare us your pathetic lying.

I've already posted a number of times about the invalid claims in his complaint.

LOLOL

As if your hollow denials carry any weight.

You're the lying fucking moron who actually just posted the impeached Trump does NOT have the Constitutional right to face his accuser AFTER claiming he does.

Are you saying I'm lying about posting examples of invalid whistleblower claims?

 

[Faun]

The opposite is true. The House inquiry was replete with first hand testimony. The facts those 17 witnesses testified to are not in dispute. There is more corroborating testimony that has not been heard due to Trump's obstruction. Dems want it to be placed in evidence............Repubs do not.

1. Trump directed the OMB to put a hold on military aid to Ukraine.
Pentagon official testifies White House directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
2. Members of the U.S. diplomatic corps for Ukraine were told to work with Slimy Rudy to extract the announcement of an investigation in to the Biden's for Baby Donald's personal political benefit.
Testimony and texts: How the Trump-Ukraine allegations fit together in a timeline
3. Amb. Marie Yovanovitch was removed from her position after a smear campaign was launched against her because she was an obstacle to the Trump/Giuliani scheme to extort Ukraine.
Giuliani brags about forcing out Trump's Ukraine ambassador
4. The transcript of the Trump/Zelensky call, which was attempted to be hidden in a code level secret server, is documentary evidence of Trump's efforts to extort Ukraine.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump's flawed 'read the transcript' defense

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

Wut?? They got the better by losing the House AND Senate?

Clinton was not convicted and his poll numbers went up

You were talking about the election, not his poll numbers. Mind keeping those goal posts where they were?

 

[Mac-7]

Thats an impressive indictment was of trump

I dont agree with you on the alleged facts but its obviously real to you

The problem is that your side has been crying wolf since the day trump was elected and dems let out a primal scream not heard since Abraham Lincoln was elected

You simply cant accept the results of the 2016 election

Does this mean Clinton didn't really lie under oath since Republicans had been crying wolf for 4 years until they discovered Monica Lewinsky?

Thats fair

But impeachment is a political process and mrs clintons husband got the better of the repubs in the next election

Wut?? They got the better by losing the House AND Senate?

Clinton was not convicted and his poll numbers went up

You were talking about the election, not his poll numbers. Mind keeping those goal posts where they were?

Ok, if you insist

 

[Faun]

Schiff and Nadler cannot call witnesses in the trial.

There was no purpose to call the whistleblower other than intimidation and diversion.

It's in the fucking constitution, asshole. If anyone is engaging in intimidation and diversion, it's Adolph Schiffler and the rest of the Dims. That's all they have. No facts.

Lying fucking moron, it is not in the Constitution.

Wrong, asshole:

Article [VI] (Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

LOLOL

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever??

Lying fucking moron, did you bother to read what YOU posted...??

"In all criminal prosecutions..."​

And as you said earlier...

It's not a legal trial, dumbass.

Like I said, lying fucking moron, your bullshit is not in the Constitution.

The funniest part is that YOU proved it's not.

Yes, we know the Dims can run a Soviet style show trial and not follow due process if they want. Then they have no basis for complaining when the Republicans don't allow them to call witnesses.

Um, lying fucking moron, Republicans are tasked with running this trial, not Democrats.

But thanks for admitting Republicans will be running a "Soviet style show trial."