U.S. Senate rejects Democratic bid for documents in Trump impeachment trial

[BobBKK]

5 hours ago, Saint Nick said:

R: "Our man is toooootally innocent!"

D : " We have documents and witnesses, who might say otherwise!"

R: "Oh yeah! We will not allow them! Because ...you know...our guy is toooooootally innocent!"

 

US- democracy at work!

The Republicans- the constitution lovers!

 

D we wont allow you due process in the House

R but we want to put up a defence and call witnesses

D Only secret meetings allowed and no witnesses from your side

R ok you had your turn we don't need new witnesses

 

D  UNFAIR UNFAIR UNFAIR

 

What a joke 





 

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Ricohoc said:

"Trying" to subpoena witnesses includes going to the courts to overturn claims of executive privilege.  Democrats were in too big of a hurry.  They didn't bother.  Hold the impeachment vote and move on.  If those witnesses were important, then it should have been important enough to get a ruling.

 

The list of Republican witnesses in the Intelligence Committee were summarily rejected by the Democrat majority.  The DAY of Republican witnesses, that is even included in the Dem House Rules, was ignored and did not happen.  Rejected by the Dem majority in the Judiciary Committee. 

 

The first day has passed without Democrats putting their case forward. 

 

If it's a strong case, present the case.  If they can't/won't do that, there's no reason to entertain any witnesses to dig further.  It seems that it would be beneficial to them to "show cause" for a need for more witnesses.  To this point, the Democrat case is empty.  Democrats are continuing their Stalinesque efforts to investigate the man to find a crime.  I doubt that the Senate will entertain this foolishness.

 

In the meantime, more amendments from the Delaying Dems have gone down to defeat.  At least 4 or 5 so far.  Chuckie says there are more amendment delays planned.

 

 

 

 

I didnt think you could do it, but congratulations, you posted more untruths here than in your first post.

 

Congress can subpeona but the issue is that while the court takes a year to decide as with mcgahn, the election will be over and trump will have done again what he is impeached for. Also, congress investigates only, subpoena from the senate is more powerful.

 

As with mcgahn, the court decided in favour of congtress, so all witnesses should comply. Further, bolton has said he will testify, so why not let him.

 

There were 3 or 4 republican witnesses allowed. 

 

White house lawyers very ill prepared. Death of a thousand fact checks by schiff who completely owned them.

[Benmart]

9 hours ago, neeray said:

Acquittal or not, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the American electorate knows that he's guilty. Guilty of orchestrating a New York gangster-style "offer-you-can't-refuse" to the Ukraine President in order to assist his less than guaranteed election win by attempting to gather dirt on his prime opponent who isn't even yet his prime opponent.

Unfortunately, had the Republicans not stymied this impeachment effort, more damaging dirt on this POTUS would have surfaced. Mr President, this dirty trick backfired on you and on your Trump-Republican party.

I am a member of this electorate you seem to speak for, and you don't speak for me. Your rant is just that, and if you are eligible, go out and vote in the next election. Otherwise, your words are as weak as your citizenship.

[MaxYakov]

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

5 hours ago, MaxYakov said:

Where did you get your U.S. Constitutional Law expertise, por favor? If you are a U.S. Constitutional law subject matter expert, you would know that impeachment is not a judicial court of law and does not operate under the same rules as one. This has purely been a political stunt and will go down in history as such on the face of the alleged "high crimes and misdemeanors" that the Democrats have fabricated.

 

Due to this effort by the Democrats to perform a soft coup w/r Trump, he will go on to get a second term and they could easily lose the House as well. There are people who thought Trump could not get elected. Are you one of them? What skin do you have in this game?  I have none but can, at least, reason and analyze what the Democrats are trying to do. Just watch Nancy Pelosi try to put together a coherent sentence. Trump will not get removed and everybody knows it, including the Democrats. 

 

This attempt to remove Trump was an action by Nancy Pelosi and her henchmen and will turn out to be "A Coup Too Far" and a stupid, delusional one at that. (if you get my drift).

 

 

Quite the opposite will happen. Due to his massive obstruction of justice, and his continued crimes and misdemeanors, he will not only lose the presidency, but the dems will gain a few more seats in the house, and gain control of the senate. It is called karma. It is called the law of just returns.

You don't even know what he is accused of according to the articles of Impeachment. It's "obstruction of Contgress", not "obstruction of justice". The other article is "abuse of power".

 

Educate yourself with this UK Guardian article, if that's possible. Since it's a left-wing rag you should relish it. I'm classifying you as an ignorant troll with poor US political judgment and questionable reading, research or understanding abilities.

[howbri]

10 hours ago, neeray said:

Acquittal or not, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the American electorate knows that he's guilty. Guilty of orchestrating a New York gangster-style "offer-you-can't-refuse" to the Ukraine President in order to assist his less than guaranteed election win by attempting to gather dirt on his prime opponent who isn't even yet his prime opponent.

Unfortunately, had the Republicans not stymied this impeachment effort, more damaging dirt on this POTUS would have surfaced. Mr President, this dirty trick backfired on you and on your Trump-Republican party.

Trump has had an anal examination for 3 + years and NOTHING resulted. Ref Ukraine, he's doing his job and checking on corruption before releasing money. You haters are blinded and give little @#$% for facts. The American people will re-elect Donald Trump in a landslide and defeat the globalist, socialist, self righteous elitists. MAGA MAGA MAGA!!!!

[Mavideol]

7 hours ago, BobBKK said:

I certainly am and Greetings to you too!  false equivalency Trump was elected fairly. 

Trump was elected fairly? where and when? and Vlad has nothing to do with that "fair" election 555

[Mavideol]

sure Trump and the gang have nothing to worry about, the witnesses, requested by the Dems, to testify are ALL Trump's appointees, let them come and tell the truth, nothing to worry, if they were Dems sure they had some basis for refusal but here no, they are Reps (sarcasm intended) .....

The little credibility the USA had after Trump was elected in 2016 it's gone down hill, barely no credibility on the word stage, some word leaders (including his friend Vlad) laughing/joking about him

[Chiphigh]

9 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

Trump was elected fairly? where and when? and Vlad has nothing to do with that "fair" election 555

Can you please provide factual reference to the claim that you have made? If not, this would be a good time to return to reality. 

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

Can you please provide factual reference to the claim that you have made? If not, this would be a good time to return to reality. 

No evidence of Russian interference has ever been provided to Americans by the intelligence agencies.  No proof ever provided as to who or how the emails were hacked.  Yet the libs swallow it up whole without ever seeing any hard evidence nor do they even ask any hard questions.  But the Ruskies (and specifically Putin) did it, trust me.  Yeah, right.  I call BS on the entire claim.  It's all part of the plot.

[candide]

2 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 

D we wont allow you due process in the House

R but we want to put up a defence and call witnesses

D Only secret meetings allowed and no witnesses from your side

R ok you had your turn we don't need new witnesses

 

D  UNFAIR UNFAIR UNFAIR

 

What a joke 
 

The usual set of fake arguments directly from Trump's tweets.

[johnnysunshine]

I did not see any mention of the "Deep State."   

Wake up folks and look at the big picture.   

This is not about the election 2020 nor is at about the impeachment circus.

MSM is really grateful to see comments like these...almost gives them credibility...almost!

[Chiphigh]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

The usual set of fake arguments directly from Trump's tweets.

What was "fake"? 

[Tippaporn]

7 minutes ago, candide said:

2 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 

D we wont allow you due process in the House

R but we want to put up a defence and call witnesses

D Only secret meetings allowed and no witnesses from your side

R ok you had your turn we don't need new witnesses

 

D  UNFAIR UNFAIR UNFAIR

 

What a joke 
 

The usual set of fake arguments directly from Trump's tweets.

Not fake, just exceedingly truthful.

[metisdead]

A post containing profanity has been removed. 

[Tippaporn]

Excellent arguments.

 

 

[candide]

5 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

What was "fake"? 

It was an investigation, not a trial so there was due process. It is not the norm that suspects interview witnesses during investigations.

There was no secret, Republican members of the three committees were also presents and had equal time to ask questions.

All witnesses would could have witnessed something have been accepted, except for the whistleblower who wanted to remain anonymous. No written questions has been sent by the Republicans. And oh the hypocrisy! The only witnesses they called were:

- people who could not have witnessed anything, such as Biden

- the whistleblower, who had the right to remain anonymous

- a few true witnesses, but they had already been called before by the Dems, so there was no risk that they could bring any new information.

Etc...

[candide]

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Not fake, just exceedingly truthful.

 

Just now, candide said:

It was an investigation, not a trial so there was due process. It is not the norm that suspects interview witnesses during investigations.

There was no secret, Republican members of the three committees were also presents and had equal time to ask questions.

All witnesses would could have witnessed something have been accepted, except for the whistleblower who wanted to remain anonymous. No written questions has been sent by the Republicans. And oh the hypocrisy! The only witnesses they called were:

- people who could not have witnessed anything, such as Biden

- the whistleblower, who had the right to remain anonymous

- a few true witnesses, but they had already been called before by the Dems, so there was no risk that they could bring any new information.

Etc...

 

[Kelsall]

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Excellent arguments.

 

 

Trump's legal team is outstanding.  They have already started mopping the floor with the House managers as this video shows.

[Thingamabob]

This farce is handing the election to Trump on a plate. Before then, however, many of us would like to know more about what the Bidens have been up to in Ukraine, with particular reference to how they got so rich so quickly.

[candide]

3 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

This farce is handing the election to Trump on a plate. Before then, however, many of us would like to know more about what the Bidens have been up to in Ukraine, with particular reference to how they got so rich so quickly.

Reference to which fake news tweet from Trump?

[mogandave]

9 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Evidence? Documents? Witnesses? Why on earth would we want a fair trial?

 

I believe the senate and the GOP are going to pay a very heavy price for their nonsense, and their unwillingness to at least hear the evidence, come November. I think we will be looking at a democratically controlled senate, house, and executive branch this time around. And the GOP deserves that trouncing. The people are tired of the nonsense.

The dems can use all the witnesses, documents and all other manner of evidence they used to impeach him, which as I understand was overwhelming, yes?

 

 

[Tippaporn]

19 minutes ago, candide said:

29 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Not fake, just exceedingly truthful.

It was an investigation, not a trial so there was due process. It is not the norm that suspects interview witnesses during investigations.

There was no secret, Republican members of the three committees were also presents and had equal time to ask questions.

All witnesses would could have witnessed something have been accepted, except for the whistleblower who wanted to remain anonymous. No written questions has been sent by the Republicans. And oh the hypocrisy! The only witnesses they called were:

- people who could not have witnessed anything, such as Biden

- the whistleblower, who had the right to remain anonymous

- a few true witnesses, but they had already been called before by the Dems, so there was no risk that they could bring any new information.

Etc...

I'll address just one of the above falsehoods.  The whistle blower has no legal right to remain anonymous.

[metisdead]

A post using a trolling representation of Mr. Trump's name and a reply has been removed.

[mogandave]

31 minutes ago, Paul Henry said:

Unfortunately some people cannot see the trees for the forest. If Tramp is so clean and misunderstood why are the white house and the GOP working  so hard to stop witness with first hand knowledge and documents that are hard fact from being called.Blocking every subpoena is in itself an admission of guilt.

Roll on November the people  will decide. Then comes the orange jump suit and no more fast food burgers and golf three days a week.

Why did the House not complete the investigation? 
 

You guys crack me up. 
 

Everyone on the left claimed the evidence was overwhelming to impeach him, yet they get to the Senate and they have no case. 
 

Why not use all the iron clad evidence used to impeach?

 

Because it is a big nothing burger, and all the left can do is stretch it out as long as they can. 
 

They are using the Senate and the propaganda wing of the Democrat party to interfere with the 2020 election, and the clapping seals on the left are all for it because to them the only thing that matters is to remove Trump and continue moving the country to the left. 
 

[Grumpy John]

I get a big laugh out of the comments from the butt hurt dems.  The county is doing great but you cannot see it because your overwhelmed with hate.  555

[candide]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I'll address just one of the above falsehoods.  The whistle blower has no legal right to remain anonymous.

No falsehoods, plain truth.

However you are somehow right on this particular point. It is true that the law does not explicitly prohibits others than the IG and their staff to disclose his identity. However, the intent of the WH status is that no potential WB should be prevented to disclose information by fear of retaliation. So the decision protect his identity is in accordance with the intent of the law. 

[Tippaporn]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

No falsehoods, plain truth.

However you are somehow right on this particular point. It is true that the law does not explicitly prohibits others than the IG and their staff to disclose his identity. However, the intent of the WH status is that no potential WB should be prevented to disclose information by fear of retaliation. So the decision protect his identity is in accordance with the intent of the law. 

All falsehoods.

 

The decision to prevent the whistle blower from testifying was not done to protect the whistle blower.  It was done to protect Schiff and to prevent the House sham investigation from imploding.  The above rationale is promoted solely to attempt a plausible explanation for preventing his testimony to be heard or identity to be known.

[candide]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

All falsehoods.

 

The decision to prevent the whistle blower from testifying was not done to protect the whistle blower.  It was done to protect Schiff and to prevent the House sham investigation from imploding.  The above rationale is promoted solely to attempt a plausible explanation for preventing his testimony to be heard or identity to be known.

Another nice conspiracy theory directly from Trump's tweets.

 

Why are my other points falsehoods?

[Tippaporn]

14 minutes ago, candide said:

Another nice conspiracy theory directly from Trump's tweets.

 

Why are my other points falsehoods?

It's a complete falsehood that the people the Republicans wanted to call had no information bearing on the investigation.  The Dems continue to make the claim that those potential witnesses had nothing to offer but the claim is false.  Dems and libs will never admit it though, so their only option is to double down on the falsehood.

 

Ask yourself the question:  Why did Schiff and the Dems arrange for the complete control over the witness list?  Not difficult to answer for anyone who is objective.

 

[candide]

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's a complete falsehood that the people the Republicans wanted to call had no information bearing on the investigation.  The Dems continue to make the claim that those potential witnesses had nothing to offer but the claim is false.  Dems and libs will never admit it though, so their only option is to double down on the falsehood.

What falsehooď? Were Biden or Chalupa in a position to witness what Trump had done or said between March and September 2019? This is pure hypocrisy!