Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[easyt65]

I suppose you want others to believe what the Trump Administration and his lawyers okay with obscuring facts in evidence, and trump's 15,000 lies and efforts to mislead the public are fine because other presidents did it.

Let me remind you that Obama, Bush II and Clinton are longer in offices of trust, and are irrelevant to the Senate Trial on going. See my signature line, too bad you and trump won't follow this sage advice:

1. Thanks for the demonstration of how Democrats and snowflakes attempt to project and tell what other people believe as they lies their asses off due to a lack of crimes, evidence, and witnesses.

2. Oh, Obama is very much relevant in the Impeachment case in the Senate - NADLER made him a very important part of the case when on Day 1 when he CONFIRMED Joe Biden extorted the former Ukraine PM, declaring he 'put pressure on the Ukraine PM to fire the former Ukraine Prosecutor. Combine that with Joe Biden's videotaped confession, and you have Nadler confirming the extortion. Nadler went on to say that Biden did so with the full knowledge of Obama, the direction even of Obama as part of his priority / directive....which means NADLER, attempting to minimize the importance of Biden's videotaped confession of extortion only managed to implicate Obama.

And with the continuous flow of evidence exposing more and more about how Obama initiated the illegal investigation of Trump and his team Obama only gets drawn further and further into all of this mess.

Dream on, snowflake...

 

[The Original Tree]

Notice how stressed the Democrats are and how Calm The GOP is?

 

[The Original Tree]

McDonnell just took a stab at Paul

huh?

McConnell

I didn't catch that.....so what happened? Was it over The Fake Whistleblower everyone is protecting in VIOLATION of THE LAW and DUE PROCESS?

 

[jc456]

I know exactly what a Warrant and Subpoena are...

Yeah, Rosenstein gave that same arrogant lecture under oath after he had already knowingly engaged in FISA Court Abuses to help the Obama administration / FBI start illegally spying on Carter Page.....

So, why was he not prosecuted if he lied on a warrant? I believe you are not thinking through these issues and are simply echoing the company line.

yeah right? kind of why we have the Inspector General and DOJ looking into it. huh?

 

[jc456]

Notice how stressed the Democrats are and how Calm The GOP is?

the demofks lack respect, they don't believe in the body to which they speak.

 

[jc456]

Finally! thank you Senator Cruz!!!

is quid pro quo illegal?

 

[ColonelAngus]

How the fuck does Schiff keep getting re-elected? What an absolute lying sack of dicks.

Well his district is LA, adjacent to Baggy Lips Waters if that helps clear it up for you. You know one of those districts where shitting in the streets is common place. How ever many bottles of Thunderbird it takes.
Lucky for them Thunderbird is really cheap by the train load and hypdermics are cheap when bought by the gross too.

WEST HOLLYWOOD.

ugn

 

[jc456]

schitt's just miss quoted dershowitz. too fking funny. the man has no fking conscience. Open mic. I heard this already.

Dershowitz names three different types of quid pro quos. goes through with an example of the second one.

Schitts' gets up and says Dershowitz called all quid pro quos the same. he's just a fking liar. I'm insulted as a citizen that someone lies on the senate floor.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Adam Schiff Said John Bolton Lacks ‘Credibility’ and Is Prone to ‘Conspiracy Theories.’

 

[The Original Tree]

Notice how stressed the Democrats are and how Calm The GOP is?

the demofks lack respect, they don't believe in the body to which they speak.

They also by their OWN Statements, do not Respect The Judicial Branch, The Rights of The Executive Branch, The Constitution, and Due Process.

Remember, MAXINE WATERS said. There is NO LAW, we can make it up however we want and impeach Trump on whatever we want.

And then they threatened Never Ending Impeachment.

 

[BS Filter]

Shifty is making up stories again. Sicko.

 

[jc456]

Seems a simple question with an obvious answer stumps those who know and will not admit that Trump&Co. have been the least transparent in living memory.

Are you vying against DL for the title of 'Biggest Liar on the USMB'?

Sorry, but President 'Most Transparent Administration Evuh' and his criminal administration was named 'most criminally non-compliant with the FOIA and Federal Records Act in US history'.


Obama administration sets new record for withholding FOIA requests

"The Obama administration set a record again for censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data"

It's sad how Democrats and their surrogate propaganda-pushing media have betraryed / let down their loyal snowflakes, leaving them with nothing but lies to parrot in defense of the criminal Democrats and fake news media/

I suppose you want others to believe what the Trump Administration and his lawyers okay with obscuring facts in evidence, and trump's 15,000 lies and efforts to mislead the public are fine because other presidents did it.

Let me remind you that Obama, Bush II and Clinton are longer in offices of trust, and are irrelevant to the Senate Trial on going. See my signature line, too bad you and trump won't follow this sage advice:

• Learn from the Past
• Live in the Present
• Plan for the Future

TALKING POINTS!

 

[easyt65]

Chief Justice AGAIN violates the Constitutional Right to face one's accuser by refusing to read name of Whistle blower in answering Rand Paul's written question.

Paul argued that the name of the Whistle Blower is not only key to the Impeachment case which began due to their complaint being filed but because he wants Americans to know who the key Deep State players are who began plotting the coup attempt against the President. Paul's comment is based on the Whistle Blower's Lawyer's own confession that he began calling for the coup against Trump after the 2016 election.

The Whistle Blower law does NOT afford any whistle blower anonymity or immunity, which the Chief Justice should know, and the Constitution also gives Americans the right to face our accusers, another Constitutional fact that the Chief Justice should know.

So who is 'pulling his strings' on this one?



RAND V. ROBERTS, PART II
Paul fumes after Roberts again refuses to read whistleblower question

Trump Senate impeachment trial live updates: Day 2 of questioning

 

[The Original Tree]

Chief Justice AGAIN violates the Constitutional Right to face one's accuser by refusing to read name of Whistle blower in answering Rand Paul's written question.

Paul argued that the name of the Whistle Blower is not only key to the Impeachment case which began due to their complaint being filed but because he wants Americans to know who the key Deep State players are who began plotting the coup attempt against the President. Paul's comment is based on the Whistle Blower's Lawyer's own confession that he began calling for the coup against Trump after the 2016 election.

The Whistle Blower law does NOT afford any whistle blower anonymity or immunity, which the Chief Justice should know, and the Constitution also gives Americans the right to face our accusers, another Constitutional fact that the Chief Justice should know.

So who is 'pulling his strings' on this one?



RAND V. ROBERTS, PART II
Paul fumes after Roberts again refuses to read whistleblower question

Trump Senate impeachment trial live updates: Day 2 of questioning

I don't understand how Roberts is getting away with this. It is clear that it's a violation of Due Process for something like Impeachment to Allow The President Due Process and to face his Accuser.

There is nothing in US Code that allows The Identity of a Whistleblower alleging a crime to be given immunity from cross examination.

That is a Fundamental Constitutional Right.

 

[Rye Catcher]

The Senate shall have sole power, not the Chief Justice. Democrats give the Constitution lip service, but in reality they despise it.

So you are also saying the Chief Justice just violated it as well by blocking Sen Paul?

The Senate can override any ruling by the Chief Justice with 51 votes.

True, and there may be consequences in doing so.

Hypothetical Scenario: A challenge to the Senate Rule of 51 votes overruling the CJ can be sued in the Dist. Court of DC, and could quickly rise to the Supreme Court. The CJ would rightly recuse himself, and the possibility that the Justices would vote to overrule the 51 vote rule and it should that 2/3 + 1 would be necessary to avoid partisan controversy.

 

[BS Filter]

The Senate shall have sole power, not the Chief Justice. Democrats give the Constitution lip service, but in reality they despise it.

So you are also saying the Chief Justice just violated it as well by blocking Sen Paul?

The Senate can override any ruling by the Chief Justice with 51 votes.

True, and there may be consequences in doing so.

Hypothetical Scenario: A challenge to the Senate Rule of 51 votes overruling the CJ can be sued in the Dist. Court of DC, and could quickly rise to the Supreme Court. The CJ would rightly recuse himself, and the possibility that the Justices would vote to overrule the 51 vote rule and it should that 2/3 + 1 would be necessary to avoid partisan controversy.

The Senate makes their rules, not the Supreme Court.

 

[jc456]

duckworth was sleeping during the lawyers explanation of the aid. too fking funny.

 

[The Original Tree]

Schiff begging the Senate to Subpoena Mulvaney and Bolton saying "Ask John Bolton" an I could swear I heard someone whisper, "why didn't you ask John Bolton?"

 

[Rye Catcher]

The Senate shall have sole power, not the Chief Justice. Democrats give the Constitution lip service, but in reality they despise it.

So you are also saying the Chief Justice just violated it as well by blocking Sen Paul?

The Senate can override any ruling by the Chief Justice with 51 votes.

True, and there may be consequences in doing so.

Hypothetical Scenario: A challenge to the Senate Rule of 51 votes overruling the CJ can be sued in the Dist. Court of DC, and could quickly rise to the Supreme Court. The CJ would rightly recuse himself, and the possibility that the Justices would vote to overrule the 51 vote rule and it should that 2/3 + 1 would be necessary to avoid partisan controversy.

The Senate makes their rules, not the Supreme Court.

Yep. And I believe McConnell's abuse of the rules are examples of Malfeasance.

Malfeasance is a comprehensive term used in both civil and Criminal Law to describe any act that is wrongful. It is not a distinct crime or tort, but may be used generally to describe any act that is criminal or that is wrongful and gives rise to, or somehow contributes to, the injury of another person.

It has become a pattern used by Moscow Mitch and his use of misfeasance in bringing bills passed by the House for debate and a vote, and in not putting forth for an up or down vote to Obama's nomination for the supreme court. It is dishonest and wrong.

a misfeasance is the act of performing a legal action, but in an improper way; Moscow Mitch has no integrity.

 

[WEATHER53]

Libs blame their failures on others while asking the same others to do Libs work for them.
We call that double Dutch fu**ed up.