McConnell says Senate Republicans have not ruled out witnesses in Trump impeachment trial

[roobaa01]

hopefully the bidens will be called to testify for its godsend that hunter will face several criminal probes digging also into his ukraine affairs. foxnews today.

wbr

roobaa01

 

 

[Sujo]

29 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

hopefully the bidens will be called to testify for its godsend that hunter will face several criminal probes digging also into his ukraine affairs. foxnews today.

wbr

roobaa01

 

 

Trump has been impeached. Next is trial stage. What evidence can bidens provide in relation to charges against trump?

[candide]

25 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

hopefully the bidens will be called to testify for its godsend that hunter will face several criminal probes digging also into his ukraine affairs. foxnews today.

wbr

roobaa01

 

 

You forgot to give credits to Hannity! ????

Same pattern as for the Senate trial: try to sneak Biden's alledged corruption case in another unrelated case: in this case a complaint related to paternity.

Why no direct investigation into Hunter? What is the DOJ doing? Dereliction of duty?

[roobaa01]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Trump has been impeached. Next is trial stage. What evidence can bidens provide in relation to charges against trump?

vote is no impeachment, impeachment is a process thus the president was not impeached.

 

wbr

roobaa01

[simple1]

11 hours ago, roobaa01 said:

vote is no impeachment, impeachment is a process thus the president was not impeached.

 

wbr

roobaa01

trump has been charged with impeachment in the House. As we know trump administration is obstructing the Senate process for impeachment by refusing to make witnesses and documentation available, thereby undermining the Constitution. One would have thought obstructing Constitutional processes would itself be be sufficient for a guilty verdict against trump. IMO McConnell should be removed from his role as AG for his corrupt obstruction activities in support of trump.

Edited December 25, 2019 by simple1

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, simple1 said:

trump has been charged with impeachment in the House. As we know trump administration is obstructing the Senate process for impeachment by refusing to make witnesses and documentation available, thereby undermining the Constitution. One would have thought obstructing Constitutional processes would itself be be sufficient for a guilty verdict against trump. IMO McConnell should be removed from his role as AG for his corrupt obstruction activities in support of trump.

Fortunately Australians don't get a say in American politics.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, Sujo said:

Trump has been impeached. Next is trial stage. What evidence can bidens provide in relation to charges against trump?

Doesn't really matter if they go straight to a vote, does it?

[simple1]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Fortunately Australians don't get a say in American politics.

So why do you keep posting support for trump. Could be wrong but don't believe you have US citizenship. In any case posting one's opinions is a function of the forum and not constrained by nationality. BTW I have UK, Oz and NZ citizenship..

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, simple1 said:

So why do you keep posting support for trump. Could be wrong but don't believe you have US citizenship. In any case posting one's opinions is a function of the forum and not constrained by nationality. BTW I have UK, Oz and NZ citizenship..

I could ask why you keep posting against Trump, then. I never said you couldn't say whatever you like, just pointing out that he won't be removed because of your wishes as you have no say, any more than I, in American politics.

I originally started by preferring anyone over her, then when Trump won and the tidal wave of hatred started I supported/ support him as the underdog. I don't support him as a person, but IMO he's no worse than any other politician and better than many.

It's tragic to me that the Dems spend so much time attacking him when if they worked with him the US and the world would be so much better off.

Sure, he does things I don't like, but no politician ever ticks all the boxes. I certainly believe that the world is better off with him as POTUS than it would have been with her.

What has he done that I support- opting out of that revolting Pacific trade deal, opting out of the Iranian charade, opting out of the Paris accord, installing 2 conservative members of SCOTUS, building the wall, re negotiating NAFTA, trying to do a deal with Nth Korea, sticking it to the countries wanting a cheap ride under US military protection, whatever he did against IS, standing up for his country instead of apologising for it.

The things he has done that I don't like I can live with for the things I do like.

[mogandave]

40 minutes ago, simple1 said:

trump has been charged with impeachment in the House. As we know trump administration is obstructing the Senate process for impeachment by refusing to make witnesses and documentation available, thereby undermining the Constitution. One would have thought obstructing Constitutional processes would itself be be sufficient for a guilty verdict against trump. IMO McConnell should be removed from his role as AG for his corrupt obstruction activities in support of trump.

How is it that using Executive Privilege to not release documents or allow staff to provide testimony is obstructing Congress? 
 

Particularly when all (or at least the last several) have done the exact same thing, and (for the most part) te same reasons.
 

 

[earlinclaifornia]

On 12/25/2019 at 6:17 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

What about a woman that cheats on their spouse?

Never would trust her.

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I could ask why you keep posting against Trump, then. I never said you couldn't say whatever you like, just pointing out that he won't be removed because of your wishes as you have no say, any more than I, in American politics.

I originally started by preferring anyone over her, then when Trump won and the tidal wave of hatred started I supported/ support him as the underdog. I don't support him as a person, but IMO he's no worse than any other politician and better than many.

It's tragic to me that the Dems spend so much time attacking him when if they worked with him the US and the world would be so much better off.

Sure, he does things I don't like, but no politician ever ticks all the boxes. I certainly believe that the world is better off with him as POTUS than it would have been with her.

What has he done that I support- opting out of that revolting Pacific trade deal, opting out of the Iranian charade, opting out of the Paris accord, installing 2 conservative members of SCOTUS, building the wall, re negotiating NAFTA, trying to do a deal with Nth Korea, sticking it to the countries wanting a cheap ride under US military protection, whatever he did against IS, standing up for his country instead of apologising for it.

The things he has done that I don't like I can live with for the things I do like.

He hasnt done anything that has benefitted the country.

[earlinclaifornia]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Doesn't really matter if they go straight to a vote, does it?

I hope they try that but see now Senator say's Mitch has her wondering why he is in concert with WH. Next crack soon to follow.

[earlinclaifornia]

On 12/25/2019 at 8:33 AM, Cryingdick said:

 

The assumption here is that Bolton is <deleted> off with Trump and will say damning things. You have to remember that Bolton is one of the most rabid right wingers out there and even if he despises Trump, it isn't likely he wants to live in an America ruled by Liz Warren.

 

So if witnesses are called be prepared for a few surprises. The dems could be walking into an ambush.

Truth has never been my enemy. Bolton has already said through his lawyers he has much more to add,

[earlinclaifornia]

On 12/25/2019 at 8:39 AM, Cryingdick said:

 

I remember somebody saying there was no election interference.. The republicans don't eat their own in the way dems do.

 

 

 

Thats is the best post ever from you. Many instances the Republicans eating thier own. LOL

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, mogandave said:

How is it that using Executive Privilege to not release documents or allow staff to provide testimony is obstructing Congress? 
 

Particularly when all (or at least the last several) have done the exact same thing, and (for the most part) te same reasons.
 

 

No they havent. Others released some documents and witnesses where not stopped from testifying.

 

trump has issued a blanket ban on everything. Thats not executive privilege, thats obstruction.

[mogandave]

33 minutes ago, Sujo said:

No they havent. Others released some documents and witnesses where not stopped from testifying.

 

trump has issued a blanket ban on everything. Thats not executive privilege, thats obstruction.

Quit lying, he released the transcript, yes? 
 

What he’s doing is no different from what any other President using Executive Privilege has done,. You can pretend that it is, but that changes nothing. 

[simple1]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I could ask why you keep posting against Trump, then. I never said you couldn't say whatever you like, just pointing out that he won't be removed because of your wishes as you have no say, any more than I, in American politics.

I originally started by preferring anyone over her, then when Trump won and the tidal wave of hatred started I supported/ support him as the underdog. I don't support him as a person, but IMO he's no worse than any other politician and better than many.

It's tragic to me that the Dems spend so much time attacking him when if they worked with him the US and the world would be so much better off.

Sure, he does things I don't like, but no politician ever ticks all the boxes. I certainly believe that the world is better off with him as POTUS than it would have been with her.

What has he done that I support- opting out of that revolting Pacific trade deal, opting out of the Iranian charade, opting out of the Paris accord, installing 2 conservative members of SCOTUS, building the wall, re negotiating NAFTA, trying to do a deal with Nth Korea, sticking it to the countries wanting a cheap ride under US military protection, whatever he did against IS, standing up for his country instead of apologising for it.

The things he has done that I don't like I can live with for the things I do like.

We fundamentally disagree. The items you consider to be trump's achievements I view as strategic errors of judgement i.e. withdrawal from Paris Agreement, Iranian deal and TPP. Politicising moving the US Justice system to conservative ideologues is wrong as trump did not gain the mandate by way of majority support from US votes. Reversing US legislation for protection of the environment. NAFTA 2.0 appears to be only marginally advantageous to the US whilst damaging relations with near neighbours and on and on - too may to mention...

[GroveHillWanderer]

23 hours ago, roobaa01 said:

reuters is promoting wrong information to the public for imo the president is !!!! not impeached !!!.

 impeachment is not a vote, impeachment is a process.

 

wbr

roobaa01

You obviously don't understand how this works. Impeachment is indeed a process but it comes to an end when the house votes on whether to approve articles of impeachment. The house has taken that vote, the articles of impeachment were approved and the President has been impeached.

 

If and when the Speaker forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, there will then be a trial.

 

The impeachment process has already  been completed.

Edited December 26, 2019 by GroveHillWanderer

[riclag]

16 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You obviously don't understand how this works. Impeachment is indeed a process but it comes to an end when the house votes on whether to approve articles of impeachment. The house has taken that vote, the articles of impeachment were approved and the President has been impeached.

 

If and when the Speaker forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, there will then be a trial.

 

The impeachment process has already  been completed.

 IMOP It lacks precedence,no crimes ,no evidence.it doesn't past the sniff test like all impeachmens,its feels like another radical  "dem" house protest,not a bi partisan vote! I believe Americans are tired of this attack on our voting rights.Nov can't come soon enough!

Edited December 26, 2019 by riclag

[Thomas J]

The entire "impeachment" has been a joke.  The Democrats literally have been saying that Trump should be impeached since the day he was elected.  The exercise has been to keep Trump on the defensive so to hamper any efforts Trump would embark on to help the USA.  In terms of McConnell, the Adam Schiff script was totally one sided with Republicans not able to call witnesses.  Perhaps the Democrats will rue the day they started this since now the Republicans control the script and can call witnesses.  I wonder how they will react if people like Joe Biden, or Hunter Biden is called.  Perhaps they can even get Adam Schiff and ask him why certain evidence was omitted.  I have yet to hear a single Democrat provide an act that Trump did that was a high crime except for their subjective statement that "he abused his power"  Oh and Obama did not? 

[Sujo]

16 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

The entire "impeachment" has been a joke.  The Democrats literally have been saying that Trump should be impeached since the day he was elected.  The exercise has been to keep Trump on the defensive so to hamper any efforts Trump would embark on to help the USA.  In terms of McConnell, the Adam Schiff script was totally one sided with Republicans not able to call witnesses.  Perhaps the Democrats will rue the day they started this since now the Republicans control the script and can call witnesses.  I wonder how they will react if people like Joe Biden, or Hunter Biden is called.  Perhaps they can even get Adam Schiff and ask him why certain evidence was omitted.  I have yet to hear a single Democrat provide an act that Trump did that was a high crime except for their subjective statement that "he abused his power"  Oh and Obama did not? 

No one stopped repubs calling witnesses to what trump is accused of doing.

 

no one has stopped trump doing his job, nearly 400 bills waiting for him to sign off on.

 

bidens and schiff are not witness to what trump has been impeached for. But bolton, perry, mulvaney, giuliani are, so call them.

 

you obviously dont know the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors. The high part refers to the office of president, not the crime. There does not need be a crime committed, never has been.

 

so you opinion is not based on fact or reality.

[mogandave]

6 hours ago, Sujo said:

No he did not release a transcript.

 

Okay, but he did release the “not a transcript” which is a document, you said he didn’t release any documents, which makes you a——incorrect. 

 

Quote

 

You can say anything you want but facts do not agree with your opinion. All others provided documents and allowed testimony. Trump has done the oposite.

 

Not everything is covered by executive privilege. Giuliano is not subject to it as he has no role in the whitehouse. A blanket ban is obstruction. No other president has done that.

There wasn’t a blanket ban, a lot of people testified.

 

But clearly the House had all the evidence they needed to prove the charges or:

1. The House would have taken Trump to court for more “documents” and witnesses 

 

or

 

2. The House would not have pseudo-impeached him

 

Next!

 

[mogandave]

6 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You obviously don't understand how this works. Impeachment is indeed a process but it comes to an end when the house votes on whether to approve articles of impeachment. The house has taken that vote, the articles of impeachment were approved and the President has been impeached.

 

If and when the Speaker forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, there will then be a trial.

 

The impeachment process has already  been completed.

You obviously don’t understand how this works.

 

If the President has been impeached, it’s no longer the responsibility of the House, and it is already before the Senate. 
 

There is nothing that says the Senate has to wait for the House to deliver it.  Nor is there anything requiring the Senate to wait for House participation to proceed with the trial. 

[metisdead]

Some off topic trolling posts and replies have been removed.   

 

A post containing an inflammatory music video has been removed. 

 

A post containing incorrect information has been reported and removed. 

 

[candide]

Pelosi is smart and cold-blooded (unlike the other guy). There are plenty of good tactical reasons for holding the articles, at least for some time. Well played.

Excellent article about it in... Fox News website. ????

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-impeachment-articles-senate-reporters-notebook

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

the President has been impeached, it’s no longer the responsibility of the House, and it is already before the Senate. 
 

There is nothing that says the Senate has to wait for the House to deliver it.  Nor is there anything requiring the Senate to wait for House participation to proceed with the trial. 

I'm sorry but you've got that wrong. According to the House Rules Manual, the House has to designate managers to carry the articles of impeachment to the Senate and present them.

 

Until they've done that, the Senate can't act because they have not been presented with anything to act on.

 

As has been frequently pointed out, the impeachment process is analogous to Grand Jury proceedings. Even after a Grand Jury has voted to indict someone, the indictment still has to be formally and publicly presented to a court before the court can schedule a trial.

Edited December 26, 2019 by GroveHillWanderer

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

I'm sorry but you've got that wrong. According to the House Rules Manual, the House has to designate managers to carry the articles of impeachment to the Senate and present them.

 

Until they've done that, the Senate can't act because they have not been presented with anything to act on.

 

As has been frequently pointed out, the impeachment process is analogous to Grand Jury proceedings. Even after a Grand Jury has voted to indict someone, the indictment still has to be formally and publicly presented to a court before the court can schedule a trial.

Yes, people point out any number of things here, doesn’t make it so. 
 

Everyone here was  “frequently pointing out” how Trump was going to be impeached for campaign finance laws over a year ago. 
 

In any event, the House rules only control what the House does, they have nothing to do with the Senate. 
 

Your “impeachment expert”, the Harvard Law professor that testified in court that the phone call was an impeachable offense sides with me. 
 

 

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, candide said:

Pelosi is smart and cold-blooded...

Well, at least you’re half right...

[Cryingdick]

2 hours ago, candide said:

Pelosi is smart and cold-blooded (unlike the other guy). There are plenty of good tactical reasons for holding the articles, at least for some time. Well played.

Excellent article about it in... Fox News website. ????

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-impeachment-articles-senate-reporters-notebook

 

All of the things listed seem more like running damage control after the fact than some cunning plan. I love the one about Pelosi sending it to the senate right before the election. I guess if your candidate is in the senate at that time that would work out great. 

 

Thwarting Trump from claiming exoneration is another flawed one. Trump will say the evidence didn't even meet the bar of sending the articles. 

 

I don't see any stroke of pure genius in any of it.  Most of the theories are either damage control or hail Mary's praying that Trump slips up. To give another football analogy this is like Nancy doing an onside kick when the team is way behind in the fourth quarter. The ball (articles) has to be kicked off to the senate to have a chance to score. However releasing the ball is a very low probability play.  

 

This reeks of desperation. 

 

The mood in America now is incredible. This was a great Christmas season. People are enjoying their presents and drinking egg nog. Merry Christmas to one and all and God Bless.