Trump has been EXONERATED of all charges.

[Nostra]

Not at all, the prescribed method was being followed but the Dems didn't want to go that way because it is time consuming. Oh well

The claim of executive blanket immunity is equal to no accountability. Do you want the next Democrat president to have no accountability?

You are lying again. They didn't make a claim of blanket executive immunity.

The subpoenas were challenged on the basis they were invalid due to the refusal of Nazi Pelousy to hold a vote to initiate impeachment proceedings.

That lie won't fly. Get a new one.

The Executive Branch has no standing in the process the House uses to initiate impeachment proceeding and the argument lacks merit. Witnesses can choose to plead the 5th and the Executive can claim privileged over specific answers and documents.

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

We have been over your lies already.

 

[Nostra]

If the court lacked information it was because the prosecution failed to provide it.
Neither the court nor the defense provides it for the nor allows more time to see if something can fall in their lap

No, it was because trump blocked witnesses and documents. The motherfuckers is guilty as sure as my name here is IM2. We all know it. You know it. The only reason you are using this infantile argument is that he has an R beside his name.

The House had testimony from 13 of their witnesses, and submitted thousands of documents. They got witnesses.

They showed up with what they claimed was an "overwhelming" case, and immediately cried that the Senate needed to do the job of the House by starting another investigation. That isn't the Senate's job, Dopey. The Senate votes on the case the House brings.

The trial wasn't a sham, they used the same rules as they used in the Clinton trial. The only part that was a sham was the bullshit case YOUR House Clowns showed up with.

You lost. Deal with it, Loser.

EXONERATED FOREVER!

The trial was a sham. Clinton had witnesses. Clinton di8d not bl0ock all information. So just face the fact that you will be getting this in your face until trumps ass is gone. I don't care when it is, the mother fucker is guilty, he scammed the system with McConnell and the senate trial was a sham with an outcome that was determined before the house was done with its inquiry. I didn't lose anything. And you didn't win anything.

Your house had 18 witnesses, presented testimony of 13 of them at trail.

Your lie won't fly. Get a new one, liar.

INNOCENT!

If trump was innocent he doesn't block witnesses and documents.

Period.

GUILTY!

Just like Obama and Fast and Furious?

 

[Nostra]

You are lying again. They didn't make a claim of blanket executive immunity.

The subpoenas were challenged on the basis they were invalid due to the refusal of Nazi Pelousy to hold a vote to initiate impeachment proceedings.

That lie won't fly. Get a new one.

The Executive Branch has no standing in the process the House uses to initiate impeachment proceeding and the argument lacks merit. Witnesses can choose to plead the 5th and the Executive can claim privileged over specific answers and documents.

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

Lies. Already proven to be lies.

 

[Nostra]

The best part is now the House has the time to hand out all those subpoenas even if they are challenged in court.

And I'm very prayerful that they will continue down that road. Cuz boy is it helping out Trumps approval rating. He'll be a shoe-in.

Thanks. You made my night!

Actually trumps approval rating probably won't get much higher. He's at 49 percent only because 95 percent of republicans approve of him. If he gets 49 percent on election night, he loses. Why you guys act like 49 percent is a majority shows the low intelligence level of the trump supporter.

What was his approval rating election night 2016?

Hmmmmm.....

 

[Nostra]

t

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

You also don't know anything about how lawyers defend their client. Boy, you'd be poor if you were a lawyer.

An innocent man does not block witnesses that can prove his innocence. Your excuses don't work.

Give up fucktard. You lost. You are making a fool of yourself in this thread.

 

[skookerasbil]

I'm laughing......

Tonight, would you rather be a GOP guy.....or a DUM?

 

[Nostra]

t

Subpoenas must be valid. They were challenged as being invalid due to the fact Nazi Pelousy didn't hold the required vote to initiate impeachment proceedings prior to them being issued.

You really are thick.

The subpoenas were valid.

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

You also don't know anything about how lawyers defend their client. Boy, you'd be poor if you were a lawyer.

An innocent man does not block witnesses that can prove his innocence. Your excuses don't work.

Yada......yada.....yada.....

come up with new bullshit, Idiot.

 

[Nostra]

t

Umm. Are you a judge? Didn't think so. You can say that til you're blue in the face, but it's up to the courts to decide.

The subpoenas were valid. If trump was innocent he doesn't challenge subpoenas. He lets the people testify the prove his innocence and he releases the documents to prove his innocence also. Your excuses don't work.

You also don't know anything about how lawyers defend their client. Boy, you'd be poor if you were a lawyer.

An innocent man does not block witnesses that can prove his innocence. Your excuses don't work.

It's not an excuse. He looked to his counsel for them to take care of it. They guided the defense - not him. *eyeroll*

An innocent man does not block witnesses that can prove his innocence.

Same lies over and over.

Get a new set of lies.

 

[Billiejeens]

More than enough to prove the failed Ukraine Shakedown.

Actually, Biden's confessed 'shakedown' / extortion was successful.


.

It's so much bigger than the bidens.

 

[Nostra]

Once again you are claiming Trump was guilty until proven innocent. Do you even know what country this is?

And again, I never said any such thing. You're hallucinating again.

Yes you did. You are claiming the presumption of innocence doesn't apply to impeachment, right?

That's a yes or no question.

I am not responsible for your delusions, dumbfuck. I never said what you falsely attributed to me. But no harm done, it's not like the forum doesn't already know you're batshit crazy.

Can I assume from your post that a simple yes or no question is beyond your cognitive abilities?

If not, let me try again.............

Does the presumption of innocence apply to impeachments?

Yes, or no?

Simple question dumbed down for a simpleton. I hope it isn't still over your head. Ask for help if you need it.

No, it doesn't. Again, for the reading impaired, presumption of innocence applies to criminal cases. How many more times need I say that until it penetrates your armor of ignorance?

So you admit the presumption of innocence doesn’t apply to impeachments, in your warped mind.

once again you are back to “guilty until you prove your innocence”.

Aaaaaand you will now try to deny that is your position....in 3....2.....

 

[Nostra]

The House is where witnesses are called and cross examined.

Both chambers call witnesses.

The Senate used the same rules as the Clinton impeachment.

Your whining is irrelevant.

Poor, lying fucking moron. The Clinton impeachment allowed witnesses in the trial. This one didn't.

Poor lying little yellow coward. There were NO new witnesses allowed in the Clinton impeachment.case. The ONLY witnesses heard from had already testified in the House. You know, where they’re SUPPOSED to. Epic fail.

But there were witnesses who were called in to testify, Twinky. There were none in Impeached Trump's trial.

Other than 13....

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

No - the Senate determined that there was no need for ADDITIONAL witnesses. They brought a weak ass case in which they claimed they had overwhelming evidence. Please think about that real hard. It's easy to see why the senate said no more witnesses are needed. The dem's said they had overwhelming evidence, they reviewed it, found it to be lacking merit and voila - Exonerated forever.

Regardless of their excuses, for the first time in U.S. history, the Senate held an impeachment trial and refused to let witnesses testify.

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

So you dims now understand what happens when you fuck with the bull?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nostra]

No - the Senate determined that there was no need for ADDITIONAL witnesses. They brought a weak ass case in which they claimed they had overwhelming evidence. Please think about that real hard. It's easy to see why the senate said no more witnesses are needed. The dem's said they had overwhelming evidence, they reviewed it, found it to be lacking merit and voila - Exonerated forever.

Regardless of their excuses, for the first time in U.S. history, the Senate held an impeachment trial and refused to let witnesses testify.

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

Man, it’s amazing you continue to think anyone is buying your bullshit. Do you wonder why not a single one of the other Dimwingers are in this thread trying to defend your idiocy?

 

[Nostra]

No - the Senate determined that there was no need for ADDITIONAL witnesses. They brought a weak ass case in which they claimed they had overwhelming evidence. Please think about that real hard. It's easy to see why the senate said no more witnesses are needed. The dem's said they had overwhelming evidence, they reviewed it, found it to be lacking merit and voila - Exonerated forever.

Regardless of their excuses, for the first time in U.S. history, the Senate held an impeachment trial and refused to let witnesses testify.

Because they threw it out. It was bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you say. Still, it's the only impeachment trial ever to not allow witnesses to testify.

There was VIDEO of WITNESS TESTIMONY. That is Witness TESTIMONY. You're being obtuse or willfully ignorant. Enough of your bullshit.

Witnesses are called in to testify so they can be questioned. That never happened in Impeached Trump's trial. First time evah.

Lies.

 

[Nostra]

Suck it, Dimwingers. Your clusterfuck has blown up in your faces.

Now it's over, and you are losers.

There was no exoneration.

Most Republican Senators said Trump did it.

Trump tried to bribe a foreign official to interfere with our election process.

This is a fact.

It will always be a fact.

Trump will always be impeached.

Most Republican Senators said he did it?

Did what?

Link to these 27 Senators by name?

 

[Nostra]

Not in the trial, they didn't. The Senate voted against allowing any witnesses to testify.

The voted against ADDING ADDITIONAL WITNESSES, Dummy. To ADD witnesses there has to already BE witnesses.

You lose again...............

WASHINGTON – A razor-thin majority of Senate Republicans on Friday voted against a Democratic proposal to admit additional witnesses and documents into President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.


Senate votes against calling new witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial

I'm LMFAO at how Faun has ignored this post about ADDITIONAL WITNESSES.

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

LOL

And still -- only impeachment trial in history to not call a single witness.

Your lie has been debunked

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Not Guilty does not mean exoneration

He was exonerated, Sport.

Deal with it. You lost, again.

No, he was not exonerated, he was acquitted.... just a technical difference between finding a person not guilty, vs them being innocent.

Two different meanings.... acquitted is a finding that the prosecution did not have enough evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt of their guilt...

An exoneration is when evidence is presented that PROVES innocence...

As example, if DNA evidence was found that completely exonerated a person of a crime, like DNA evidence that shows a man accused of raping a victim, could not have been the rapist etc...

In order for an acquittal you need to have a trial...in order to have a trial a crime must have been committed. no criminal action charged against Trump.

High crimes and misdemeanors do not require them to be a statutory crime.... that's been proven and every legal scholar that exists, except the President's motley crew, knows the precedent... And the founders specifically state it's a breach of the public trust with the power we give them... an abuse of power.... which can be a statutory crime or simply not honoring their oath of office.....or even something like using his office for cheating in an upcoming election.

And now we know none of that happened.

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Suck it, Dimwingers. Your clusterfuck has blown up in your faces.

Now it's over, and you are losers.

There was no exoneration.

Most Republican Senators said Trump did it.

Trump tried to bribe a foreign official to interfere with our election process.

This is a fact.

It will always be a fact.

Trump will always be impeached.

No republican senators said he did anything, except that faggot Romney. So suck it dim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They said he did it but it was not grave enough. Republicans think cheating in elections is OK.

Dims do nothing but lie. He did nothing wrong. He was cleared. But you’re going to find out about all the garage in your group. You like Adam shitt? You like polosi and Schrumer? Then you are garbage too. You lost in 16, lost your fake impeachment trial, and your gonna lose again in 2020. You are over. Now try to get some rest. You sound sad [emoji20].


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[the other mike]

It was a good speech today ......no prompters just a few notes. It was hilarious when he referred to firing "sleaze-bag" James Coney.

 

[Dr Grump]

the Democrats admitted was the 1st politically partisan impeachment..

RATFLMOA!!!! Clinton wasn't politically motivated??? I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn....