U.S. lawmakers hear from 'corroborating' witness in Trump impeachment probe

[Boon Mee]

In other words, this pathetic Witch Hunt goes on and on. Are we going to have to listen to this lame <deleted> until January 2025? 

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, Boon Mee said:

In other words, this pathetic Witch Hunt goes on and on. Are we going to have to listen to this lame <deleted> until January 2025? 

Nope. Due process is being followed. Please tell us what is wrong with it.

[sirineou]

2 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

In other words, this pathetic Witch Hunt goes on and on. Are we going to have to listen to this lame <deleted> until January 2025? 

What happened to your trump Avatar did it get impeached?

[RPCVguy]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Shouldn't there be due process first?

You're thinking of the trial phase (in which Mitch has power to deny witnesses.) Now we are in the investigative phase - like in a grand jury while seeking an indictment. That is generally secret so as to avoid giving away testimony between witnesses. For Nixon and Clinton, there were outside investigations of the charges - conducted by the Justice Department. This time AG/Consigliere Barr declined to investigate.

Since this is an impeachment, count on there also being a House controlled series of Public hearings so as to allow testimony that Mitch would seek to quash to be aired fully during the lead up to the vote on Articles of Impeachment. Yes, and during the public hearings, the same GOP House members (41 of whom are already members of the committees hearing testimony) will again be able to ask questions. I expect their questions will involve more grandstanding than during the closed hearings... thanks to TV cameras giving them a national audience.

[Crazy Alex]

18 minutes ago, jm91 said:

Ah...sounds like a fox news talking point. 

You can not defend the orange cult leader so you attack the legal process. 

Due process isn't a talking point. It's the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

[Crazy Alex]

35 minutes ago, RPCVguy said:

You're thinking of the trial phase (in which Mitch has power to deny witnesses.) Now we are in the investigative phase - like in a grand jury while seeking an indictment. That is generally secret so as to avoid giving away testimony between witnesses. For Nixon and Clinton, there were outside investigations of the charges - conducted by the Justice Department. This time AG/Consigliere Barr declined to investigate.

Since this is an impeachment, count on there also being a House controlled series of Public hearings so as to allow testimony that Mitch would seek to quash to be aired fully during the lead up to the vote on Articles of Impeachment. Yes, and during the public hearings, the same GOP House members (41 of whom are already members of the committees hearing testimony) will again be able to ask questions. I expect their questions will involve more grandstanding than during the closed hearings... thanks to TV cameras giving them a national audience.

No, you're wrong. I was responding to a specific post. I stand by my response and note due process doesn't begin at the trial phase. For your reply to be valid, there couldn't be any rules to evidence-gathering. For example, questioning a witness then allowing cross-examination is a part of due process. Or is the House allowed to present secret witnesses and then not allow cross examination? These rules all along the way are what constitute due process.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Crazy Alex
additional content

[Tug]

23 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Shouldn't there be due process first?

Yes there should as the house gathers evidence without trump muddying the waters lies ect once all that is compleat Donald will be confronted with the facts then and only then will he be allowed to defend himself we are in the discovery phase now the accused aren’t allowed to see and attack the evidence against them 

[Crazy Alex]

2 minutes ago, Tug said:

Yes there should as the house gathers evidence without trump muddying the waters lies ect once all that is compleat Donald will be confronted with the facts then and only then will he be allowed to defend himself we are in the discovery phase now the accused aren’t allowed to see and attack the evidence against them 

Donald Trump has the same First Amendment rights we all have, yes? Ergo, when Adam Schiff leaks testimony, Donald Trump is allowed to respond, yes? And furthermore, Donald Trump can defend himself as information against him comes out, yes?

[alex8912]

4 hours ago, Saint Nick said:

Oh look...the Troll is out again!

"...if sometimes in the future..."

Jesus H. Christ, man!

Look in the mirror dude! 

[alex8912]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Difference is some of them act legally.

 

I do understand thats a foreign concept for trump supporters.

Can you name one or two??

[riclag]

12 hours ago, webfact said:

Democrats emerging from the session said Reeker's deposition corroborated previous testimony taken by the panels.

 

But they offered no details and it was not clear what Reeker may have corroborated.

The Ukraine Prez said no pressure,no blackmail! The dems have gone full TDS ! Is there a doctor in that house! The secrecy is sick

[RPCVguy]

49 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

No, you're wrong. I was responding to a specific post. I stand by my response and note due process doesn't begin at the trial phase. For your reply to be valid, there couldn't be any rules to evidence-gathering. For example, questioning a witness then allowing cross-examination is a part of due process. Or is the House allowed to present secret witnesses and then not allow cross examination? These rules all along the way are what constitute due process.

The GOP members of the investigating committees are there to ask questions as are their staffers. They are just as capable of leaking - so why are there so few comments beyond attacking the process? The leaks are mostly one way because there isn't much of substance that has been found worthy of being leaked. Instead they attack the process. About the process... those are the rules created in 2015 while the GOP controlled the house and insisted on investigating Benghazi. The GOP created the rules, and doesn't like living by those rules.

[Crazy Alex]

Just now, RPCVguy said:

The GOP members of the investigating committees are there to ask questions as are their staffers. They are just as capable of leaking - so why are there so few comments beyond attacking the process? The leaks are mostly one way because there isn't much of substance that has been found worthy of being leaked. Instead they attack the process. About the process... those are the rules created in 2015 while the GOP controlled the house and insisted on investigating Benghazi. The GOP created the rules, and doesn't like living by those rules.

The discussion we are having isn't about leaks. It's about due process. Obviously, you now get the points I made and agree due process doesn't start at the trial phase. I'm glad we agree on that and can move on to other topical points.

[Slip]

 

2 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

The discussion we are having isn't about leaks. It's about due process. Obviously, you now get the points I made and agree due process doesn't start at the trial phase. I'm glad we agree on that and can move on to other topical points.

You wot?

53 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Donald Trump has the same First Amendment rights we all have, yes? Ergo, when Adam Schiff leaks testimony, Donald Trump is allowed to respond, yes? And furthermore, Donald Trump can defend himself as information against him comes out, yes?

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

The discussion we are having isn't about leaks. It's about due process. Obviously, you now get the points I made and agree due process doesn't start at the trial phase. I'm glad we agree on that and can move on to other topical points.

The ‘due process’ is equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans sitting on the committees undertaking the investigations.

[jm91]

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

In other words, this pathetic Witch Hunt goes on and on. Are we going to have to listen to this lame <deleted> until January 2025? 

Nice diversion. - congress doing their duty and  following the rules that were established when the house investigated Sec. of State Clinton. 

You know that thing conservatives have given up on - the rule of law. 

 

You can not defend the orange cult leaders behavior..so you divert. 

[jm91]

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

Due process isn't a talking point. It's the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

Your spin on it is pure fox news propaganda. 

As pointed out congress is evidence gathering - like a grand jury or police interview. 

 

But nice attempt at spin. 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

What happened to your trump Avatar did it get impeached?

The funniest post for months.

[Crazy Alex]

18 minutes ago, Slip said:

 

You wot?

 

Please elaborate, as I welcome the opportunity to debate issues.

[Crazy Alex]

16 minutes ago, jm91 said:

Your spin on it is pure fox news propaganda. 

As pointed out congress is evidence gathering - like a grand jury or police interview. 

 

But nice attempt at spin. 

 

Specifically, what spin have I offered? Please note I will defer to you regarding what is said on Fox News.

[CharlieH]

reported post removed.

 

If you post material from other places please include the source link.

[Crazy Alex]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The ‘due process’ is equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans sitting on the committees undertaking the investigations.

Yep. I'm not arguing against that. I would also add to that both parties are able to question witnesses. That's due process. It's also the point I made. It was someone else who alluded to due process beginning with the trial. That is obviously not true.

[jm91]

9 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yep. I'm not arguing against that. I would also add to that both parties are able to question witnesses. That's due process. It's also the point I made. It was someone else who alluded to due process beginning with the trial. That is obviously not true.

You are engaging in misdirection. 

 

The issue is that more evidence is showing the orange cult leader engaged in possibly illegal activities. 

If he did engage in illegal activities then he should be impeached by the house, convicted by the senate, arrested and tried in criminal court.  

The reality is that followers of the cult of the orange personality are IMHO unburdened by the thought process and will defend trump no matter the evidence. It is sad that the rule of law - the foundation of the USA and most democracies - means so little to current republicans. 

[Scott]

Off-topic, baiting posts and replies removed.   You might want to re-read the OP and stay on topic.  

 

[earlinclaifornia]

18 hours ago, rgraham said:

In the meantime President Trump is the only elected official working in DC.

 

As is lineing his pockets working.

[WayWokeWhiteGuy]

On 10/29/2019 at 1:42 PM, earlinclaifornia said:

As is lineing his pockets working.

 

Exactly, using the Presidency for personal gain.

[bristolboy]

On 10/28/2019 at 8:13 PM, Crazy Alex said:

No, you're wrong. I was responding to a specific post. I stand by my response and note due process doesn't begin at the trial phase. For your reply to be valid, there couldn't be any rules to evidence-gathering. For example, questioning a witness then allowing cross-examination is a part of due process. Or is the House allowed to present secret witnesses and then not allow cross examination? These rules all along the way are what constitute due process.

There is no cross examination in the grand jury process. Nothing. Nada. Zip.