Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[task0778]

So, Q&A starting tomorrow for 8 hours, and again on Thursday another 8 hours max. 16 hours in total. After that, I assume they'll vote on Friday whether to continue with witnesses or not. If they vote to hear witnesses, then I suspect they'll vote for each witness individually, and who knows who goes 1st. Might be Bolton, might not. Or they might vote to end the trial and vote for acquittal or removal.

Last I heard, there might be an agreement to depose Bolton with a list of questions that are acceptable to the president. Or Trump might invoke executive privilege, and who knows how that'll play out. No telling how all this will go.

IMHO, I don't see the Articles of Impeachment as sufficient to remove a duly elected president. Even I what Bolton alleges in his manuscript is true, Trump may have wanted to withhold the aid to Ukraine to get an investigation started in order to get dirt on Biden, but he also may have had other reasons that are legit. And it's a very bad precedent to set, a partisan impeachment process that denied the president his right to due process is NOT the right way to conduct this business.

 

[Olde Europe]

Ok. So you don't understand co-equal branches. Come back when you do. And my paragraph was not inconsistent. Votes by the Full House establish the rules for issuing subpoenas. Idiot.

You know, dummy, if you understood what "co-equal" means, you couldn't possibly come down to a position in which one branch holds all the cards and dictates the outcome, defying all precedent, including the U.S. v. Nixon ruling, and without a hint of respect for the other branch and its legitimately exercised Constitutional powers.

But you don't, you don't even realize (again) that your position is inconsistent, and you don't give a rat's posterior. After all, as a good authoritarian follower, and in full knowledge that Trump is an incompetent impostor and a fraud, you still find fluffing him every day more important than using your brain, for that might get into the way of the fluffing. And that's why you couldn't come up with five cents worth of thought. Isn't that so, Mucky?

 

[WEATHER53]

Getting dirt on Biden is once again liberals being more worked up on how the crime was discovered rather than the crime itself
Cart before horse
Fiction trumping fact
Suspicion superseding reality
Hope and dreams=dopes and screams

 

[Zorro!]

OUCH: Pam Bondi Rakes Hunter Biden Over the Coals, Exposing Burisma Corruption.

Our Beloved President Donald Trump was right to be concerned that Hunter Biden and his father engaged in corruption with the Ukrainian gas firm Burisma. Burisma hired Hunter Biden to its board as Joe Biden was the Obama point man on Ukraine, paying him handsomely. Later, Joe Biden pressured Ukraine's president to fire a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma at the time. The Democrat House impeachment managers referenced Hunter Biden and Burisma hundreds of times but insisted there was no scandal.

"When the House managers gave you their presentation when they submitted their brief, they repeatedly referenced Hunter Biden and Burisma. They spoke to you for over 21 hours and they referenced Biden or Burisma over 400 times," Bondi explained. "And when they gave these presentations, they said there was nothing, nothing to see, it was a sham."

"they’re here saying that the president must be impeached and removed from office for raising a concern."
​

Trump was far from alone in being concerned about the Bidens' conflict of interest. She quoted exhaustively from impeachment witnesses and news outlets, noting that Hunter Biden's hiring at the firm "raised eyebrows the world over."

The timeline of Hunter Biden's hiring at Burisma seems particularly damning. Bondi noted that Joe Biden began leading Ukraine policy in early 2014, around March. His son took the lucrative job in April 2014. Hunter Biden, Chris Heinz, and Devon Archer had all started a firm together.

"Public records show that April 16, 2014, Devon Archer meets with Vice President Biden at the White House. Just two days later, on April 18, 2014, is when Hunter Biden quietly joins Burisma, according to public reporting," Bondi noted. "Remember, this is just one month after the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office opened a money-laundering case into Burisma, Hunter Biden joins the board."​

She quoted from the German broadcaster Deutsche-Welle that the hiring "has raised eyebrows the world over," and noted BuzzFeed's reporting that the Burisma appointment "created a conflict of interest for Joe Biden."

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified — during the impeachment inquiry — that the Obama State Department was so concerned about Hunter Biden's hiring at Burisma that they raised the issue while prepping Yovanovitch for confirmation.

Other impeachment witnesses also testified that it seemed Hunter Biden lacked the credentials for the Burisma job and that the hiring created an "appearance of conflict of interest" at the very best.

Vindman & Williams agree that Hunter Biden & Burisma have "appearance of conflict of interest” pic.twitter.com/nc1bnULQw3

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) January 27, 2020

Central to Democrats' claim that Trump abused his power is the idea that the Hunter Biden-Burisma caper does not stink to high heaven — that there's nothing to see here. Pam Bondi's testimony ripped that idea to shreds.

 

[Nostra]

The House Clowns showed up without their homework, begged the Senate to do their job, and were then destroyed by Trump's team.

Not a good week for Nazi and the House Clowns.

 

[Zorro!]

HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN:

 

[joaquinmiller]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

 

[Zorro!]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Not a clue what you are talking about, and I suspect you don't either. What legal decision?

 

[joaquinmiller]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Not a clue what you are talking about, and I suspect you don't either. What legal decision?

Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

 

[Cosmos]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Ok. So what then? Let's just stipulate the inquiry is valid. (Choking) They want these people to come in and testify, they still have to subpoena them. The WH is not subservient to the Congress. You have to have a subpoena. Then you have to negotiate with the WH over what they'll testify to and any other limits. Or have a court enforce it. Or maybe Fatass can chase them down and have them arrested so he can keep them in the Capitol dungeon until they talk. Those are the options. And even then, none of these WH people is likely to testify to anything we haven't already heard.

 

[Cosmos]

Ok. So you don't understand co-equal branches. Come back when you do. And my paragraph was not inconsistent. Votes by the Full House establish the rules for issuing subpoenas. Idiot.

You know, dummy, if you understood what "co-equal" means, you couldn't possibly come down to a position in which one branch holds all the cards and dictates the outcome, defying all precedent, including the U.S. v. Nixon ruling, and without a hint of respect for the other branch and its legitimately exercised Constitutional powers.

But you don't, you don't even realize (again) that your position is inconsistent, and you don't give a rat's posterior. After all, as a good authoritarian follower, and in full knowledge that Trump is an incompetent impostor and a fraud, you still find fluffing him every day more important than using your brain, for that might get into the way of the fluffing. And that's why you couldn't come up with five cents worth of thought. Isn't that so, Mucky?

You're right. I don't give a rat's posterior what you say, OldeNaziBastard. I don't need to deal with your chickenshit butthurt problems. If I have to sit here and read the same garbage Wobbly cranks out, we'll just sideline you.

 

[joaquinmiller]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Ok. So what then? Let's just stipulate the inquiry is valid. (Choking) They want these people to come in and testify, they still have to subpoena them. The WH is not subservient to the Congress. You have to have a subpoena. Then you have to negotiate with the WH over what they'll testify to and any other limits. Or have a court enforce it. Or maybe Fatass can chase them down and have them arrested so he can keep them in the Capitol dungeon until they talk. Those are the options. And even then, none of these WH people is likely to testify to anything we haven't already heard.

Several witnesses did testify under subpoena. Several ignored subpoenas. One, I think, challenged a subpoena, and after delays, the House withdrew it. The McGahn subpoena was issued in April. The ruling, in favor of the House, was issued at the end of November, and immediately appealed by the Administration.

Arguments of House process notwithstanding, the Senate has an Impeachment trial in progress. It's understandable, at this point, that Trump supporters would want the House to spend a year-and-a-half in court first. It certainly beats arguing facts or hearing testimony about those facts.

 

[Cosmos]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Ok. So what then? Let's just stipulate the inquiry is valid. (Choking) They want these people to come in and testify, they still have to subpoena them. The WH is not subservient to the Congress. You have to have a subpoena. Then you have to negotiate with the WH over what they'll testify to and any other limits. Or have a court enforce it. Or maybe Fatass can chase them down and have them arrested so he can keep them in the Capitol dungeon until they talk. Those are the options. And even then, none of these WH people is likely to testify to anything we haven't already heard.

Several witnesses did testify under subpoena. Several ignored subpoenas. One, I think, challenged a subpoena, and after delays, the House withdrew it. The McGahn subpoena was issued in April. The ruling, in favor of the House, was issued at the end of November, and immediately appealed by the Administration.

Arguments of House process notwithstanding, the Senate has an Impeachment trial in progress. It's understandable, at this point, that Trump supporters would want the House to spend a year-and-a-half in court first. It certainly beats arguing facts or hearing testimony about those facts.

Well, this isn't the Senate's fault. This crap all should have been settled in the House Judiciary as is customary. Then they only tie-up one House committee instead of the entire Senate. Pelosi and Schiff did this. Why should the Senate be held responsible to clean up their mess?

 

[joaquinmiller]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Ok. So what then? Let's just stipulate the inquiry is valid. (Choking) They want these people to come in and testify, they still have to subpoena them. The WH is not subservient to the Congress. You have to have a subpoena. Then you have to negotiate with the WH over what they'll testify to and any other limits. Or have a court enforce it. Or maybe Fatass can chase them down and have them arrested so he can keep them in the Capitol dungeon until they talk. Those are the options. And even then, none of these WH people is likely to testify to anything we haven't already heard.

Several witnesses did testify under subpoena. Several ignored subpoenas. One, I think, challenged a subpoena, and after delays, the House withdrew it. The McGahn subpoena was issued in April. The ruling, in favor of the House, was issued at the end of November, and immediately appealed by the Administration.

Arguments of House process notwithstanding, the Senate has an Impeachment trial in progress. It's understandable, at this point, that Trump supporters would want the House to spend a year-and-a-half in court first. It certainly beats arguing facts or hearing testimony about those facts.

Well, this isn't the Senate's fault. This crap all should have been settled in the House Judiciary as is customary. Then they only tie-up one House committee instead of the entire Senate. Pelosi and Schiff did this. Why should the Senate be held responsible to clean up their mess?

It's not a question of fault. The Senate is responsible for conducting a fair trial. Some people think that means a rigorous search for truth and some don't.

Trump's legal arguments are bogus. They're not going to win a single case, but they can drag it out for years. I think Obstruction of Congress is a valid charge, and that an honest Senate - aware of its own powers and prerogatives - would stuff it up Trump's ass when they show him the door. (Which won't happen, in this life or the next.)

 

[Cosmos]

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

Ok. So what then? Let's just stipulate the inquiry is valid. (Choking) They want these people to come in and testify, they still have to subpoena them. The WH is not subservient to the Congress. You have to have a subpoena. Then you have to negotiate with the WH over what they'll testify to and any other limits. Or have a court enforce it. Or maybe Fatass can chase them down and have them arrested so he can keep them in the Capitol dungeon until they talk. Those are the options. And even then, none of these WH people is likely to testify to anything we haven't already heard.

Several witnesses did testify under subpoena. Several ignored subpoenas. One, I think, challenged a subpoena, and after delays, the House withdrew it. The McGahn subpoena was issued in April. The ruling, in favor of the House, was issued at the end of November, and immediately appealed by the Administration.

Arguments of House process notwithstanding, the Senate has an Impeachment trial in progress. It's understandable, at this point, that Trump supporters would want the House to spend a year-and-a-half in court first. It certainly beats arguing facts or hearing testimony about those facts.

Well, this isn't the Senate's fault. This crap all should have been settled in the House Judiciary as is customary. Then they only tie-up one House committee instead of the entire Senate. Pelosi and Schiff did this. Why should the Senate be held responsible to clean up their mess?

It's not a question of fault. The Senate is responsible for conducting a fair trial. Some people think that means a rigorous search for truth and some don't.

Trump's legal arguments are bogus. They're not going to win a single case, but they can drag it out for years. I think Obstruction of Congress is a valid charge, and that an honest Senate - aware of its own powers and prerogatives - would stuff it up Trump's ass when they show him the door. (Which won't happen, in this life or the next.)

Well, it looks like Mitch just came out and said they don't have the votes to block witnesses. So this thing is going to drag out. That's ok though. Like I've said, I'll be real interested to hear a good accounting of the Biden crime family corruption that led to this inquiry. I hope the WH defense team agrees with me.

 

[Cosmos]

It's not a question of fault. The Senate is responsible for conducting a fair trial. Some people think that means a rigorous search for truth and some don't.

Like I just said. That is supposed to occur in the House Judiciary, not the Senate. But you know, Pelosi has her own agenda............Who the fuck knows. Maybe she had Christmas tickets for DisneyWorld.

 

[Cosmos]

This is gonna fuck Bolton over good. He'll have to spill his guts on what's in the book a month and a half before it's released. That ought to put a damper on sales. LOL. Karma.

 

[joaquinmiller]

It's not a question of fault. The Senate is responsible for conducting a fair trial. Some people think that means a rigorous search for truth and some don't.

Like I just said. That is supposed to occur in the House Judiciary, not the Senate. But you know, Pelosi has her own agenda............Who the fuck knows. Maybe she had Christmas tickets for DisneyWorld.

Nah, that was just to spoil Trump's holidays. Lay in more popcorn.

 

[Olde Europe]

You're right. I don't give a rat's posterior what you say, OldeNaziBastard. I don't need to deal with your chickenshit butthurt problems. If I have to sit here and read the same garbage Wobbly cranks out, we'll just sideline you.

I see, fecal freak, you might now have had a glimpse at what "co-equal" actually means, and is supposed to entail. If you think about it for a while (I know, but...), you might even realize why the House threw that potato into the other, GOP-controlled chamber of that same co-equal branch, for them to deal with the obstructionist's obstruction. Maybe, or so would be the hope, Trump could show some more respect in that friendlier environment, and the Senate might live up to their much-touted stature, "deliberative body" and all. As it turned out, though, Trump's contempt knows no limits, and neither does his disrespect for the Constitution. Whether or not the Senate musters the integrity to conduct a "trial" deserving that description remains to be seen.

Thanks for the compliments, though - I couldn't hope to deliver the clobbering you so richly deserve as eloquently and poignantly as Wobbly. Your shameful subservience remains the same, though, as does your imperviousness to reason, evidence, and facts.

 

[Nostra]

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.

LOL. They put on a laughable case. And it would be funny if not for all the damage it has caused.

You know, mucky, they mentioned and quoted that legal decision you hadn't heard about several times in that 'laughable' case. And the Trump defense ignored it and lied about the implications. In its Saturday presentation, Trump's defense told lies that would have had them sanctioned in a Court of law. Laughable case. That's a joke.

I find it interesting you always have numerous claims to make.............and you are not able to bring a single link to back any of them up.

Hmmmm......................