U.S. Democrats to press for impeachment witnesses throughout trial

[Sujo]

30 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

 

Except it was the role of the House to call witnesses and take any claims of executive privilege to the courts.  Too busy for that.  Must vote to impeach this threat to national security. 

No. The congress investigates and charges. It was not a trial.

Very easy for trump to have this finished since day 1. Allow his witnesses to the perfect call give evidence.

 

Ask yourself why he does not want direct witnesses to testify and clear him.

[Sujo]

14 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

 

Yes, Democrats are famous for doubling down on their self-destructive disasters.

So you must be happy and want this to proceed for a long time.

[Eric Loh]

3 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

The announcements may indicate that GOP members have little confidence that their party will regain power in the House anytime soon.

Even before the 2018 house election, GOP has lost hope as seen by their reluctance to commit funding compare to the Dems. The toxicity of Trump’s political shenanigans caused the the Reps to lose the house majority and the Dems will likely to hold that position as the GOP crumbles and party stalwarts bailed. 

[earlinclaifornia]

49 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

 

Except it was the role of the House to call witnesses and take any claims of executive privilege to the courts.  Too busy for that.  Must vote to impeach this threat to national security. 

 

So now they have an incomplete case to present to the Senate (if they ever present it) with only one suitable witness claiming first-hand knowledge.  Nancy's stunt of stalling it has managed to confirm what it was all along -- superficial and political theater.  Unfinished business that the Senate is not likely to complete for them.  The House is now faced with having to present their case as is; and here lately, even Dem Senators are perturbed at Nancy's antics. 

This sham impeachment effort is going nowhere.  The fact that Nancy hasn't forwarded it to the Senate is just further evidence of that.  Democrats, filling their usual role of being the undisputed Champions of Unintended Consequences, have botched yet another of what they thought would be a slam dunk (like Hillary's primary election and the Mueller Report).  Nope.  

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/why-is-mitch-mcconnell-so-afraid-of-john-bolton/ar-BBYIf1E Witness factors. John said...

[mogandave]

31 minutes ago, Sujo said:

No. The congress investigates and charges. It was not a trial.

Very easy for trump to have this finished since day 1. Allow his witnesses to the perfect call give evidence.

 

Ask yourself why he does not want direct witnesses to testify and clear him.

Again, why did the House not compel the witnesses to testify when they had the authority? 
 

Ask yourself this: What was Nancy afraid of?

[earlinclaifornia]

3 hours ago, Laza 45 said:

Yea!.. remember Hillary's emails.. such a scandal! 

Just one more investigation of Hillary gone south. Another one bites the dust! Donny has how many? But who's counting.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it-found-nothing-of-consequence/ar-BBYNIRp?li=BBnb7Kz

[earlinclaifornia]

42 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Again, why did the House not compel the witnesses to testify when they had the authority? 
 

Ask yourself this: What was Nancy afraid of?

President’s obstruction

[mogandave]

24 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

President’s obstruction

Why does that frighten her?

[earlinclaifornia]

31 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Why does that frighten her?

How have you somehow deduced FEAR pray tell? Can't wait to hear your source or reasoning.

[earlinclaifornia]

4 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

How have you somehow deduced FEAR pray tell? Can't wait to hear your source or reasoning.

So far that 2 cents seems an overpayment to me.

[elmrfudd]

4 hours ago, Sujo said:

Witnesses to trump asking a foreign govt investigate a political rival. Bolton and pompeo were witness to it. Mulvaney admitted it.

 

So those witnesses would be a great start.

I would start with the fake whistlblower Eric ciamarella and ICIG Atkinson to see who backdated the forms fraudulently submitted. 

 

Atkinson was senior counsel to John Carlin. Carlin was Obamas NSD chief and chief of staff to Robert Mueller when he was the head of the fbi. Just a coincidence, the left will say of course.

 

 

Then we'll start on schiff and his staff to see who is perjuring themselves,if not all of them. 

 

Pucker up ladies. 

[Nyezhov]

Nobody has yet to ever tell me why the rules should be any different now than they were for the Clinton Impeachment.

 

LIke so many other people, I have tuned out the "urgent" impeachment because the folks who say it was urgent now say that it isnt. Is it urgent again?

[Ricohoc]

Anyone wishing to label Executive Privilege as "stonewalling" or "obstruction" is free to do so, but they must also acknowledge that every POTUS since George Washington has exercised this privilege granted under the Constitution.  The Executive Branch is a coequal branch of the federal government and does not fall under the authority of the Legislative Branch in its day-to-day dealings.  The Judicial Branch settles all disputes between those two branches.

 

Those same accusers should also realize that Trump is the first POTUS never to have a formal House vote to begin impeachment hearings.  In Trump's case, it was a unilateral announcement -- without a vote -- by Pelosi.  Trump was also the first POTUS not allowed to have attorneys present to question witnesses or to have his attorneys or his party call witnesses in the House impeachment hearings.

 

Despite House rules written by the Democrats that allowed for a single day of Republican witnesses, that day was ignored and not allowed.  Democrats rejected all other Republicans witnesses in the House hearings and even stopped witnesses from answering some questions that were posed by Republicans.

 

Trump is the first POTUS denied these procedural precedents of due process in impeachment hearings.

 

This event, orchestrated solely by Democrats -- many of which were done in secret and without transcripts being released -- have caused some legal scholars to label the entire process as illegitimate.  Regardless of anyone's view regarding legitimacy, It certainly wasn't fair, wasn't bi-partisan, did not afford due process to the accused, and did not provide due process to the POTUS.

 

Any citizen subjected to such biased and one-sided judgment would certainly seek to exercise as much and as many constitutional  safeguards as possible.  Hence, Trump chose to exercise his Executive Privilege granted under the Constitution. The entire process has been quite Stalinesque.

 

As to presidential voting polls -- regardless of their origin, they are only worth browsing if state-by-state polls.  The popular vote does not determine the winner of the presidency, so a national poll is worthless.  Ask Hillary.  Since the Electoral Vote is state-by-state, those are the polls that MIGHT have some legitimacy depending on the sampling sizes of Republicans, Democrats and Independents and the way the poll is conducted. 

 

National polls that deal with a specific demographics (males, college educated, Black and Latino voters) are usually pretty close to being reliable if done by a reputable polling company.  I pretty much ignore them all.

 

One need only look at arenas full of supporters for Trump and determine that to be a poll worth reasonable consideration.  Then compare it to what shows up for any of the Democrats -- or even all of the Democrats combined.  In most of the Dem rallies, you could shoot a cannon through the building and not hit anyone.

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, earlinclaifornia said:

How have you somehow deduced FEAR pray tell? Can't wait to hear your source or reasoning.

I’m sorry, when you responded to my post I thought you were saying Nancy was afraid of: “President’s obstruction”

 

If that wasn’t what you meant, what what did you mean? 
 

Why did Nancy relinquish her authority to use the court to supersede the President’s executive privilege?

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, Nyezhov said:

Nobody has yet to ever tell me why the rules should be any different now than they were for the Clinton Impeachment.

 

LIke so many other people, I have tuned out the "urgent" impeachment because the folks who say it was urgent now say that it isnt. Is it urgent again?

Testimony was from recorded witnesses and several were called back as well. Seems like the rules are now different if none are called. 

Edited January 10, 2020 by earlinclaifornia
spelling

[earlinclaifornia]

1 minute ago, mogandave said:

I’m sorry, when you responded to my post I thought you were saying Nancy was afraid of: “President’s obstruction”

 

If that wasn’t what you meant, what what did you mean? 
 

Why did Nancy relinquish her authority to use the court to supersede the President’s executive privilege?

Waiting for the courts to probably get to the Supreme court like trump has with revealing his taxes most likely would occur AFTER his election loss.

[mogandave]

Just now, earlinclaifornia said:

Testimony was from recorded witnesses and severl were called back. Seems like the rules are now different if none are called. 

The Senate has already confirmed they will run the trial using the same rules that were used for the Clinton trial. 
 

The House has no authority over the trial. 

[earlinclaifornia]

43 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

Anyone wishing to label Executive Privilege as "stonewalling" or "obstruction" is free to do so, but they must also acknowledge that every POTUS since George Washington has exercised this privilege granted under the Constitution.  The Executive Branch is a coequal branch of the federal government and does not fall under the authority of the Legislative Branch in its day-to-day dealings.  The Judicial Branch settles all disputes between those two branches.

 

Those same accusers should also realize that Trump is the first POTUS never to have a formal House vote to begin impeachment hearings.  In Trump's case, it was a unilateral announcement -- without a vote -- by Pelosi.  Trump was also the first POTUS not allowed to have attorneys present to question witnesses or to have his attorneys or his party call witnesses in the House impeachment hearings.

 

Despite House rules written by the Democrats that allowed for a single day of Republican witnesses, that day was ignored and not allowed.  Democrats rejected all other Republicans witnesses in the House hearings and even stopped witnesses from answering some questions that were posed by Republicans.

 

Trump is the first POTUS denied these procedural precedents of due process in impeachment hearings.

 

This event, orchestrated solely by Democrats -- many of which were done in secret and without transcripts being released -- have caused some legal scholars to label the entire process as illegitimate.  Regardless of anyone's view regarding legitimacy, It certainly wasn't fair, wasn't bi-partisan, did not afford due process to the accused, and did not provide due process to the POTUS.

 

Any citizen subjected to such biased and one-sided judgment would certainly seek to exercise as much and as many constitutional  safeguards as possible.  Hence, Trump chose to exercise his Executive Privilege granted under the Constitution. The entire process has been quite Stalinesque.

 

As to presidential voting polls -- regardless of their origin, they are only worth browsing if state-by-state polls.  The popular vote does not determine the winner of the presidency, so a national poll is worthless.  Ask Hillary.  Since the Electoral Vote is state-by-state, those are the polls that MIGHT have some legitimacy depending on the sampling sizes of Republicans, Democrats and Independents and the way the poll is conducted. 

 

National polls that deal with a specific demographics (males, college educated, Black and Latino voters) are usually pretty close to being reliable if done by a reputable polling company.  I pretty much ignore them all.

 

One need only look at arenas full of supporters for Trump and determine that to be a poll worth reasonable consideration.  Then compare it to what shows up for any of the Democrats -- or even all of the Democrats combined.  In most of the Dem rallies, you could shoot a cannon through the building and not hit anyone.

Cult speak. Want to see that summary again of Biden trump from all polling just let me know.

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, elmrfudd said:

I would start with the fake whistlblower Eric ciamarella and ICIG Atkinson to see who backdated the forms fraudulently submitted. 

 

Atkinson was senior counsel to John Carlin. Carlin was Obamas NSD chief and chief of staff to Robert Mueller when he was the head of the fbi. Just a coincidence, the left will say of course.

 

 

Then we'll start on schiff and his staff to see who is perjuring themselves,if not all of them. 

 

Pucker up ladies. 

Where can I find proof please?

[mogandave]

1 minute ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Waiting for the courts to probably get to the Supreme court like trump has with revealing his taxes most likely would occur AFTER his election loss.

So? He has less of a reason to allow testimony than he did before he was “almost” impeached. 
 

All the left cares about is the election anyway.

[Ricohoc]

1 minute ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Cult speak. Want to see that summary again of Biden trump from all polling just let me know.

If that was the case, you could easily refute each part of it with what you consider to be the facts of the matter. 

[earlinclaifornia]

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

So? He has less of a reason to allow testimony than he did before he was “almost” impeached. 
 

All the left cares about is the election anyway.

But he now says he want witnesses! At least today anyways.

[Ricohoc]

1 hour ago, elmrfudd said:

I would start with the fake whistlblower Eric ciamarella and ICIG Atkinson to see who backdated the forms fraudulently submitted. 

 

Atkinson was senior counsel to John Carlin. Carlin was Obamas NSD chief and chief of staff to Robert Mueller when he was the head of the fbi. Just a coincidence, the left will say of course.

 

 

Then we'll start on schiff and his staff to see who is perjuring themselves,if not all of them. 

 

Pucker up ladies. 

Correct.

 

It's my understanding that there were questions about Atkinson at the time that it all hit.  Appears to be some talk that the Senate Judiciary Committee will look at Atkinson and his role.

[earlinclaifornia]

2 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

If that was the case, you could easily refute each part of it with what you consider to be the facts of the matter. 

When I see so many I do just give up. Sorry not going to correct all that you are trying expel as truth.

Edited January 10, 2020 by earlinclaifornia
selling

[mogandave]

1 minute ago, earlinclaifornia said:

But he now says he want witnesses! At least today anyways.

He said he wanted witnesses before, what does that have to do with anything?

[earlinclaifornia]

1 minute ago, Ricohoc said:

Correct.

 

It's my understanding that there were questions about Atkinson at the time that it all hit.  Appears to be some talk that the Senate Judiciary Committee will look at Atkinson and his role.

Also proof?

[earlinclaifornia]

Just now, mogandave said:

He said he wanted witnesses before, what does that have to do with anything?

On again than off then on if you recall

[Ricohoc]

Just now, earlinclaifornia said:

When I see so many I do just give up. Sorry not going to correct all that you are trying expel as truth.

And now you're being intellectually dishonest -- or just lazy.  Pretty pathetic either way.

[earlinclaifornia]

Just now, Ricohoc said:

And now you're being intellectually dishonest -- or just lazy.  Pretty pathetic either way.

Go and attack what you disagree with. Typical.

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, elmrfudd said:

I would start with the fake whistlblower Eric ciamarella and ICIG Atkinson to see who backdated the forms fraudulently submitted. 

 

Atkinson was senior counsel to John Carlin. Carlin was Obamas NSD chief and chief of staff to Robert Mueller when he was the head of the fbi. Just a coincidence, the left will say of course.

 

 

Then we'll start on schiff and his staff to see who is perjuring themselves,if not all of them. 

 

Pucker up ladies. 

Will you please share these websites your getting all the information? Unless it is INFOWARS LOL