19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, there is no presumption of innocence in an impeachment

 

 

Prove it.

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The President of the United States Donal Trump.

 

 

[edit] I accept you may wish to deny that reality. 

 

Where did I deny anything ?

I simply asked you a question as I wasnt sure as to whether he was actually being impeached or whether theres just an investigation .

   I was unaware that the impeachment process had already began

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The concepts don't seem too clear to you:

 

"#only a court by verdict can render a person guilty or innocent."

 

In the impeachment process, trial in the Senate determines guilt, nothing to do with the courts. 

 

 

 

So Trump is presumed innocent until found guilty by trial in the Senate. And of course trial in the Senate is a court of law. That's why they have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court preside over the trial. That's why there is a vote. That's why a finding of guilt legally removes the president from office.

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Where did I deny anything ?

I simply asked you a question as I wasnt sure as to whether he was actually being impeached or whether theres just an investigation .

   I was unaware that the impeachment process had already began

BINGO!

 

Impeachment is a vote, not an ongoing clown show and kangaroo court.

13 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Prove it.

There is no proof of a negative. 

 

You assert a proof of innocence, prove it. 

 

Let the Constitution be your guide. 

11 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

So Trump is presumed innocent until found guilty by trial in the Senate. And of course trial in the Senate is a court of law. That's why they have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court preside over the trial. That's why there is a vote. That's why a finding of guilt legally removes the president from office.

The Senate is not a court of law.

 

Was that Civics 101 you mentioned earlier?

16 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Where did I deny anything ?

I simply asked you a question as I wasnt sure as to whether he was actually being impeached or whether theres just an investigation .

   I was unaware that the impeachment process had already began

I'm pleased you accept that he Impeachment process has already begun. 

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I'm pleased you accept that he Impeachment process has already begun. 

I shall go and now do a websearch to confirm that 

12 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

BINGO!

 

Impeachment is a vote, not an ongoing clown show and kangaroo court.

Impeachment is a right reserved for the House of Congress, refer ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 5 of the Constitution of United States. 

 

I have my copy with me, you should read yours. 

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The concepts don't seem too clear to you:

 

"#only a court by verdict can render a person guilty or innocent."

 

In the impeachment process, trial in the Senate determines guilt, nothing to do with the courts. 

 

 

 

 

 

i wrote senate in my reply to clarify that. i understand in impeachment the senate is the courtroom equivalent

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I'm pleased you accept that he Impeachment process has already begun. 

After doing a webseach , all I could find is that they are just still investigating the possibilities of carrying out an impeachment, rather than actually carrying out one , 

come on give it a rest tonight, it's getting even too silly for this forum.

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There is no proof of a negative. 

 

You assert a proof of innocence, prove it. 

 

Let the Constitution be your guide. 

That is why there is a presumption of innocence- because it's difficult to impossible to prove it.

 

Thank you for helping prove my point. The assistance wasn't needed but is still appreciated.

11 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

That is why there is a presumption of innocence- because it's difficult to impossible to prove it.

 

Thank you for helping prove my point. The assistance wasn't needed but is still appreciated.

And the impeachment continues.

 

Now might be a good time to read the constitution.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And the impeachment continues.

 

 

This has been going on for years , it began just after he got elected 

51 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And the impeachment continues.

 

Now might be a good time to read the constitution.

No, you're wrong. Impeachment occurs when a vote is taken. Until then, Trump is presumed innocent. What is happening now is an impeachment witch hunt investigation. This isn't rocket science.

 

 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Impeachment is a right reserved for the House of Congress, refer ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 5 of the Constitution of United States. 

 

I have my copy with me, you should read yours. 

Precisely. Honestly, you seem to be confused. My main argument in this thread is the presumption of innocence all Americans enjoy.

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

This has been going on for years , it began just after he got elected 

 

chronic impeachment

10 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

I don't want anyone locked up without due process, including Hillary Clinton, so you're irony simply doesn't apply.

 

As to your second paragraph: completely silly, as you know. If there is reasonable cause to investigate, law enforcement can and should investigate.

 

I agree with almost all of your third paragraph. But as you know, no American need be exonerated because we are presumed innocent. Now where are those exoneration records I asked about?

So you agree that Trump was wrong in calling HRC crooked and encouraging the "lock her up" chants?

 

I'm glad you agree these investigations are justified.

 

Data bases are not kept on exoneration.  However absence of sufficient evidence to charge or convict is not exoneration.  Mueller made that clear.

9 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

#a campaign slogan chant is just that. lots of juicy stuff coming out on wikileaks and other venues. i recall a movie "hillary's america" i would never be for denying hillary the presumption of innocence in the usa legal system.

 

#only a court by verdict can render a person guilty or innocent.  or in the case of oresidential impeachment the senate is the equivalent of the courtroom (i learned this on tvf)

 

 

#the mueller team did their best to find sufficient evidence but could not. their role is not to exonerate.

 

you could also say the scientific forensic research community using the the latest technology (dna, etc etc) could not prove  jesus was born out of an immaculate conception but that does not mean it did not happen.

 

 

 

i have no great love for trump but the concepts are clear to see

 

Yes, Mueller's investigation did not find sufficient evidence to charge Trump, or to exonerate him.  The report made this clear.  Why are people so hung up on it?

 

Mixing faith with evidence based investigations is a bad idea.

On 11/4/2019 at 11:16 PM, Crazy Alex said:

That is why there is a presumption of innocence- because it's difficult to impossible to prove it.

 

Thank you for helping prove my point. The assistance wasn't needed but is still appreciated.

There is no presumption of innocence in impeachment.

 

The president is not like any normal citizen as he cannot be charged with a crime. So there is no presumption to give as its not part of the criminal process.

 

The standard of whether to impeach him is solely with congress. It is for them only and they alone determine it.

 

The can consider presumption of innocence or not. Its up to whatever and however they want it.

Now, if you keep wantingto run down this irrelevant wrong rabbit hole.

 

All evidence so far shows his guilt. He has decided not to allow evidence that may exonerate himself.

 

So with all evidence against him and nothing for him congress has no alternative but to go with the evidence they have.

 

Impeach.

10 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Now, if you keep wantingto run down this irrelevant wrong rabbit hole.

 

All evidence so far shows his guilt. He has decided not to allow evidence that may exonerate himself.

 

So with all evidence against him and nothing for him congress has no alternative but to go with the evidence they have.

 

Impeach.

Well, I really wish they'd get on with it and stop waffling.

Sooner impeached sooner cleared by the senate sooner get on with the election campaign, sooner 2020 to 2024.

Thanks Dems, you are really helping with the re election of someone you claim to despise.

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, I really wish they'd get on with it and stop waffling.

Sooner impeached sooner cleared by the senate sooner get on with the election campaign, sooner 2020 to 2024.

Thanks Dems, you are really helping with the re election of someone you claim to despise.

So you dont think congress should do its job? 

 

Remind me how long was the clinton investigation.

 

Congress investigates. It should investigate fully and then lay out all impeachment charges.

 

Of course it would sure go a lot faster if trump stopped obstructing justice. So you only have him to blame for any delay.

9 hours ago, Sujo said:

So you dont think congress should do its job? 

 

Remind me how long was the clinton investigation.

 

Congress investigates. It should investigate fully and then lay out all impeachment charges.

 

Of course it would sure go a lot faster if trump stopped obstructing justice. So you only have him to blame for any delay.

Congress really hasn't done ANYTHING but try and impeach the President since the 2016 election.  So, yes, I think it's past time for them to do their jobs.   

17 minutes ago, khaowong1 said:

Congress really hasn't done ANYTHING but try and impeach the President since the 2016 election.  So, yes, I think it's past time for them to do their jobs.   

Oh really?

 

Quote

 

Democrats in Congress are getting things done. Trump and Republicans are just ignoring them.

 

House Democrats are passing bills at a rapid pace, while Trump complains they’re “getting nothing done.”

 

President Donald Trump is angry at House Democrats for “getting nothing done in Congress.” He may want to quarrel with his own party instead.

 

 

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/24/18637163/trump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress

49 minutes ago, khaowong1 said:

Congress really hasn't done ANYTHING but try and impeach the President since the 2016 election.  So, yes, I think it's past time for them to do their jobs.   

Democrats in Congress are getting things done. Trump and Republicans are just ignoring them.

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/24/18637163/trump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress

 

And remember that government shutdown? The longest in history? Good thing the Democrats realized how unpopular that was making them and backed down...oh wait a minute.

9 hours ago, khaowong1 said:

Congress really hasn't done ANYTHING but try and impeach the President since the 2016 election.  So, yes, I think it's past time for them to do their jobs.   

Absolute rubbish! There are literally HUNDREDS of bills Congress has passed sitting on Moscow Mitch's desk. Moscow Mitch has PROUDLY declared those bills are dead on arrival cuz they don't fit his narrative of how the world should be. Several of those bills are meant to protect the U.S. election process from foreign intervention.

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

Absolute rubbish! There are literally HUNDREDS of bills Congress has passed sitting on Moscow Mitch's desk. Moscow Mitch has PROUDLY declared those bills are dead on arrival cuz they don't fit his narrative of how the world should be. Several of those bills are meant to protect the U.S. election process from foreign intervention.

USMCA....

Posts containing unsubstantiated information have been removed as well as the replies.  If you are unable to post a link to substantiate your information, don't bother posting. 

 

 

Edit: Some posts not related to this impeachment probe have been removed.