Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[Cosmos]

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Any case since 1789.

Are they all the same? Do any involve an impeachment inquiry and how were they handled. I dimly remember an order to turn over tapes, and a Presidential resignation not long after.

After a whistle blower report (suppressed), I wouldn't support a claim of Exec Priv to prevent discovery of misconduct. How about you?

It's not up to me. This is why we have courts. Why didn't the idiots in the House running this sham take it to court?

 

[joaquinmiller]

What the Admin wants to keep us from hearing. The Senate will still acquit Trump, but the Senators will have to sit there and listen to it.

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

 

[Cosmos]

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

 

[Olde Europe]

I wanted to see if one of them would advocate a call for witnesses. Fat chance. They're calling for the destruction of anyone advocating witnesses.

I tried. Still, couldn't feign surprise. It's what subservient authoritarians do. They're now excommunicating John Eff'n Bolton, merely for offering up testimony, and the rightarded blabbosphere is overflowing with conspiracy theories to the fact that he, John Eff'n Bolton, "leaked" portions of his book.

There's one really funny thing about all that: The White House had Bolton's book since December, and, apparently, didn't inform McConnell about its content. Gawd, he WAS pissed, when the NYT scoop hit the news stands, and he was completely blindsided.

 

[Cosmos]

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

Face it. The House Democrats fucked up bigly. Because they are incompetent and stupid.

 

[Cosmos]

The White House had Bolton's book since December, and, apparently, didn't inform McConnell about its content

No they did not. Only a select group in the NSC had it.

 

[Cosmos]

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

That goes both ways, right? " Waaaaahhhhh, we want it and you won't give it to us so we're calling CNN!!!" doesn't do it either.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

 

[Nostra]

Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything? All they're doing is preserving Executive Privilege. That's something that EVERY President has had and will continue to have long after Trump is gone. The House has attempted to trample all over that.

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

No need for me to waste my time trying to educate someone who isn't capable of coherent thought.

I destroyed your lefty Obama judge the last time you brought that, so please bring it again so we can all have another good laugh.

The fact remains YOUR House Clowns tucked tail and ran when the WH challenged the subpoenas instead of going to court for a ruling. Why didn't they follow normal protocol?

 

[Cosmos]

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

When you have a link to that ruling, link us up. And it better be good because what you're asserting directly contradicts the WH defense team. And I think they've looked at this more thoroughly than you.

 

[WEATHER53]

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Any case since 1789.

Are they all the same? Do any involve an impeachment inquiry and how were they handled. I dimly remember an order to turn over tapes, and a Presidential resignation not long after.

After a whistle blower report (suppressed), I wouldn't support a claim of Exec Priv to prevent discovery of misconduct. How about you?

It's not up to me. This is why we have courts. Why didn't the idiots in the House running this sham take it to court?

Because they don’t have anything and they know it so they demand that someone else mine the nugget of gold for them or they will cry “not fair”

 

[joaquinmiller]

Bullshit. It's a blanket cover-up.

Various senators have denied a quid pro quo happened and/or denied aid was conditioned on Biden investigations. It's fairly apparent there is evidence to the contrary, and I want senators to have to sit there and listen to it.

"Who says the Admin wants to keep us from hearing anything?" You've got to be kidding.

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

Face it. The House Democrats fucked up bigly. Because they are incompetent and stupid.

Face it. A corrupt President was caught in a textbook impeachable offense, but the cult, or tribalism, or whatever the fuck it is, is so strong that Trump supporters are willing to accept it. Evidence is ignored, witnesses are smeared, and the argument boils down to, 'He's innocent because Democrats!' The moving goalposts are an insult, and if you're on the side calling for less evidence, you're being played.

 

[Cosmos]

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Any case since 1789.

Are they all the same? Do any involve an impeachment inquiry and how were they handled. I dimly remember an order to turn over tapes, and a Presidential resignation not long after.

After a whistle blower report (suppressed), I wouldn't support a claim of Exec Priv to prevent discovery of misconduct. How about you?

It's not up to me. This is why we have courts. Why didn't the idiots in the House running this sham take it to court?

Because they don’t have anything and they know it so they demand that someone else mine the nugget of gold for them or they will cry “not fair”

Correct. "Not fair" will be the basis of the Democrats' campaign platform. That party is nothing but idiots and crybabies. They should never be allowed to hold political power.

 

[joaquinmiller]

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

When you have a link to that ruling, link us up. And it better be good because what you're asserting directly contradicts the WH defense team. And I think they've looked at this more thoroughly than you.

The article has a link to the 75-page opinion. It was in all the papers.

Federal Judge Rules Impeachment Inquiry Is Legal

 

[Cosmos]

Bullshit? So do you or do you not agree with the use of Executive Privilege?

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

Face it. The House Democrats fucked up bigly. Because they are incompetent and stupid.

Face it. A corrupt President was caught in a textbook impeachable offense, but the cult, or tribalism, or whatever the fuck it is, is so strong that Trump supporters are willing to accept it. Evidence is ignored, witnesses are smeared, and the argument boils down to, 'He's innocent because Democrats!' The moving goalposts are an insult, and if you're on the side calling for less evidence, you're being played.

Well..........NO. Just because you say it's so doesn't make it so. This is why we have inquiries and trials. The Democrats have totally sucked at both. They have no idea what they're doing. That's obvious even to a non-legal like me. It's ok. 2024 is not that far away. Maybe by some miracle the Democrats will clean up their shit by then.

 

[Cosmos]

The subpoenas were invalid. This has been explained to you in great detail. That's why the House Clowns withdrew them and didn't go to court. They new they would lose.

You should be upset with your House Clowns for their clusterfuck.

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

When you have a link to that ruling, link us up. And it better be good because what you're asserting directly contradicts the WH defense team. And I think they've looked at this more thoroughly than you.

The article has a link to the 75-page opinion. It was in all the papers.

Federal Judge Rules Impeachment Inquiry Is Legal

Oh, puleeze. That would get tossed in a real court in a NY minute.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Go ahead and explain to me, again, in great detail, how the President's lawyers said they weren't legal. When you're done, I'll link, again, the Court decision on the validity of the impeachment inquiry.

You do know lawyers just say crap sometimes, don't you?

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

When you have a link to that ruling, link us up. And it better be good because what you're asserting directly contradicts the WH defense team. And I think they've looked at this more thoroughly than you.

The article has a link to the 75-page opinion. It was in all the papers.

Federal Judge Rules Impeachment Inquiry Is Legal

Oh, puleeze. That would get tossed in a real court in a NY minute.

It was issued October 25, 2019. How long is a NY minute?

 

[WEATHER53]

Democrats-we make life fair or really cry about it
Lib 101

 

[joaquinmiller]

In which case? I haven't seen anyone invoke it yet, although Lindsey Graham was encouraging the admin to do it. I have read a couple of crackpot letters from the White House to the House - saying we're not giving you anything. Are you thinking about that?

Actually, yeah. I'll bet even you could figure out that when the President says, "we're not giving you anthing" or "we're not cooperating", he's asserting Privilege, notwithstanding any legal proceedings he has to go through to make it official.

That's the thing about legal claims. They have to be made legally. "Nancy, you so mean" doesn't do it.

Face it. The House Democrats fucked up bigly. Because they are incompetent and stupid.

Face it. A corrupt President was caught in a textbook impeachable offense, but the cult, or tribalism, or whatever the fuck it is, is so strong that Trump supporters are willing to accept it. Evidence is ignored, witnesses are smeared, and the argument boils down to, 'He's innocent because Democrats!' The moving goalposts are an insult, and if you're on the side calling for less evidence, you're being played.

Well..........NO. Just because you say it's so doesn't make it so. This is why we have inquiries and trials. The Democrats have totally sucked at both. They have no idea what they're doing. That's obvious even to a non-legal like me. It's ok. 2024 is not that far away. Maybe by some miracle the Democrats will clean up their shit by then.

I'm hoping.

They put on a good case. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't hold him under until he stops thrashing.

 

[Cosmos]

You still hung up on that? Have you ever read the Constitution where is says the HOUSE has the sole power to impeach the President? Not the Intel Committee Chair, Not the Judiciary Chair, not the Speaker of the House. It says, the "House". That means the HOUSE has to vote to authorize the subpoenas. They didn't do it because they were trying to be cute and run their little inquiry in the basement. Morons.

There's a federal court ruling saying the House inquiry was valid, relying on precedent When you have one from a higher court contradicting it, link us up.

When you have a link to that ruling, link us up. And it better be good because what you're asserting directly contradicts the WH defense team. And I think they've looked at this more thoroughly than you.

The article has a link to the 75-page opinion. It was in all the papers.

Federal Judge Rules Impeachment Inquiry Is Legal

Oh, puleeze. That would get tossed in a real court in a NY minute.

It was issued October 25, 2019. How long is a NY minute?

That ruling should have been appealed and a stay issued to stop the inquiry. I have no idea what was done about it. But to me it clearly violates the Constitution. In plain language.