Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[JimL]

Let's assume all of that is true. So what?

How about you just admit, that you're afraid all of that is true. The truth will set you free, MM.

Again, the president sets foreign policy even if his advisers disagree. That's not a crime.

Why assume anything, MM? Why not hear it for yourself whether it's what you want to hear or not? How do you know what Bolton et al. are going to say, perhaps their testimony will exonerate the President. And btw, the fact that the president sets foreign policy has nothing to do with whether or not what he did was a crime. Contrary to Trumps assertion, Article 2 doesn't give him the power to do anything he wants, though he be the president, he's not the King, and he's still obliged to follow the law whether he likes it or not.

[JimL]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/impeach...in-the-senate/

And let's not forget about all the documentory evidence, and I do mean all being that the president has blocked all documentary evidence from Congress. A lot of that has been released to Congress now through court order and the freedom of information act etc. and apparently much of that is very incriminating.

[NorrinRadd]

OK Here is what I meant about the democrats not letting the Republicans question witnesses properly:

https://nypost.com/2019/11/19/adam-s...ent-witnesses/

I also recall that everytime a Republican was trying to question a witness (like the law professors) the democrats like Schiff kept interrupting them and playing such games.

I also remember that Nunes provided a list of witnesses such as Hunter Biden to Schiff and they were denied.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1XJ0FK

I don't recall ANY republican witnesses being allowed other than the one law professor. Do you? If so, let me know who they were.

And that one law professor was a Hillary-voting Democrat.

[NorrinRadd]

The smoking gun in that case would be Bolton's testimony. Not a surprise or surprise witness.

It will be interesting to see what, if any, of his potential testimony the Court will rule not protected by Executive Privilege.

[DivineOb]

Sorry I missed this. In the future if I miss one of your posts you want me to reply to feel free to send me a PM.

OK Here is what I meant about the democrats not letting the Republicans question witnesses properly:

Schiff blocks WB questions

You probably already know how I feel about attempts at outing the WB. I watched the clip in that article and if that's the example you lead with...

I also recall that everytime a Republican was trying to question a witness (like the law professors) the democrats like Schiff kept interrupting them and playing such games.

I admit I didn't catch as much of the Judiciary hearing as the others. Is Schiff even on the Judiciary Committee? In any case, there was lots of efforts of Republicans to disrupt that hearing. So I image that, and the faux outrage when their bad faith disruptions were shut down, is what you're remembering. I'm open to being proven wrong, but the fact that half of the day was spent on the Barron / baron joke leads to believe there was little legitimate outrage.

If you find a video clip of Republican questioning from that hearing being shut down I'll take a look though.

I also remember that Nunes provided a list of witnesses such as Hunter Biden to Schiff and they were denied.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1XJ0FK

I don't recall ANY republican witnesses being allowed other than the one law professor. Do you? If so, let me know who they were.

Ok, what *relevant* witnesses were denied? Hunter Biden? I said someone *other* than him to being with! Even if HB was dirty he *still* would have been an irrelevant witness.

There were valid reasons not to bring the WB into that hearing, not the least of which everything he reported has since been confirmed by witnesses with more direct knowledge of his claims.

Sorry :/.

[DivineOb]

It will be interesting to see what, if any, of his potential testimony the Court will rule not protected by Executive Privilege.

In the trial CJ Roberts will make that call. I'm not worried about it. He's left enough breadcrumbs that he's not prepared to incinerate his place in history for Trump.

[firstfloor]

If there are going to be documents and witnesses at the trial, Republicans are going to look very stupid when they acquit.
Trump getting nervous:

WaPo

[Mountain Man]

Is the only person you're willing to listen to about what is right and wrong Trump? Not Bolton, not Republican senators who would probably have a much easier working relationship by silently nodding at everything McConnell says? Other than Trump who could actually convince you that what Trump did was wrong?

"Trust, but verify" is as far as I'm willing to take it with politicians. I just don't get it. I can't imagine living my life that way.

I have no idea what you're talking about. The fact is there is zero evidence that the President broke the law.

[firstfloor]

I have no idea what you're talking about. The fact is there is zero evidence that the President broke the law.

... except for bribery, for which the evidence is abundant. [Fox is propaganda.]

I see the Russkies have been hacking Burisma to help their favorite POTUS.

[rogue06]

... except for bribery, for which the evidence is abundant. [Fox is propaganda.]

I see the Russkies have been hacking Burisma to help their favorite POTUS.

The collusion delusion just never let's go does it?

[Mountain Man]

... except for bribery, for which the evidence is abundant.

Except "bribery" wasn't included in the articles of impeachment, and the Democrats certainly didn't present any evidence for it.

So...

[Mountain Man]

The collusion delusion just never let's go does it?

He still hasn't accepted the fact that Rachael lied to him.

[One Bad Pig]

You keep saying that, MM, but I don't have to read your mind, you make the fear that you have with respect to a fair trial with relevant witnesses and other evidence clear with every post you submit. It's really funny that you don't realize how obvious you are.

Er, no. You may WANT MM to be fearful, but in reality he's no more 'fearful' than I am - and I would far prefer President Pence to President Trump. If Trump is legitimately impeached, GREAT!

[rogue06]

He still hasn't accepted the fact that Rachael lied to him.

IMHBAO she lied to herself as well.

Moreover, let's not forget:

rachelmadcow.jpg

"statements she makes on her show should not be considered facts"
Probably true of all of MSNBC

[rogue06]

Er, no. You may WANT MM to be fearful, but in reality he's no more 'fearful' than I am - and I would far prefer President Pence to President Trump. If Trump is legitimately impeached, GREAT!

Little jimmy is probably one of those prannocks that thinks if Trump were to be booted out of office that means Hillary would be president smiley dolt.gif