Page 26 of 107 FirstFirst ... 1624252627283676 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 1063

Thread: The Impeachment Trial

  1. #251
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,424
    Amen (Given)
    13032
    Amen (Received)
    27575
    Quote Originally Posted by firstfloor View Post
    Fruman recording: Why did Trump agree to get rid of Yovanovitch as early as April 2018?
    The plot thickens.
    "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  2. #252
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,020
    Amen (Given)
    159
    Amen (Received)
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
    The relevant questions are:

    1) Who was Trump giving the order to, if no State Department officials were present?

    2) Why would Trump expect this order to be carried out without his directing those State Department officials to do so (i.e., why relay orders to an "irregular channel"?)

    3) Why did Trump lie about not knowing Lev Parnas and how does that lie reflect on his assertion of "no quid pro quo"?

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  3. Amen JimL amen'd this post.
  4. #253
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,758
    Amen (Given)
    23
    Amen (Received)
    449
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
    All I know is that he’s not being very presidential:

    “Get rid of her! Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. Okay? Do it,” Trump says.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  5. #254
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,008
    Amen (Given)
    6101
    Amen (Received)
    7467
    Interesting analysis from one of my favorite sources:

    White House Counsel Patrick Philbin explains why House subpoenas were illegitimate: the subpoena power was never authorized; the initiating subpoena power was never voted on.

    Additionally, and specifically by design, absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no constitutional pathway or process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. Make no mistake, this was a pre-planned purposeful trick within the Pelosi, Schiff and Lawfare road-map.

    The House motive here, the forethought within their design, is very important now because it explains why they are vociferously demanding witnesses in the Senate. The House plan was to work around the ability of the executive branch to go to court. The managers are now attempting to execute that plan, along with a manufactured political talking point, in the Senate trial.

    The House intended for this to unfold exactly as it is happening.

    ...

    CTH noted the structural issue last August, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings. None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

    The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production. Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...-case-n2560099
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  6. #255
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,008
    Amen (Given)
    6101
    Amen (Received)
    7467
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    The relevant questions are:

    1) Who was Trump giving the order to, if no State Department officials were present?

    2) Why would Trump expect this order to be carried out without his directing those State Department officials to do so (i.e., why relay orders to an "irregular channel"?)

    3) Why did Trump lie about not knowing Lev Parnas and how does that lie reflect on his assertion of "no quid pro quo"?

    --Sam
    Is it okay if I reject your hidden premise that if none of these questions can be answered your satisfaction that it proves Trump is guilty?
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  7. #256
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,142
    Amen (Given)
    1177
    Amen (Received)
    20624
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Interesting analysis from one of my favorite sources:

    White House Counsel Patrick Philbin explains why House subpoenas were illegitimate: the subpoena power was never authorized; the initiating subpoena power was never voted on.

    Additionally, and specifically by design, absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no constitutional pathway or process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. Make no mistake, this was a pre-planned purposeful trick within the Pelosi, Schiff and Lawfare road-map.

    The House motive here, the forethought within their design, is very important now because it explains why they are vociferously demanding witnesses in the Senate. The House plan was to work around the ability of the executive branch to go to court. The managers are now attempting to execute that plan, along with a manufactured political talking point, in the Senate trial.

    The House intended for this to unfold exactly as it is happening.

    ...

    CTH noted the structural issue last August, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings. None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

    The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production. Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...-case-n2560099
    I'd like to see the bolded part

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  8. #257
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,008
    Amen (Given)
    6101
    Amen (Received)
    7467
    Sorry, here's the correct link what I quoted:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com...hy-it-matters/

    And the legal briefing in question:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/4437...ity-01-19-2020
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  9. #258
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,008
    Amen (Given)
    6101
    Amen (Received)
    7467
    Curiously, Democrat Chris Murphy says it's possible that some Democrats could vote against one or both of the articles.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-acquit-trump/

    Although I wonder if this is a case of "possible but not likely".
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  10. Amen NorrinRadd amen'd this post.
  11. #259
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,921
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    1602
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    The relevant questions are:

    1) Who was Trump giving the order to, if no State Department officials were present?

    2) Why would Trump expect this order to be carried out without his directing those State Department officials to do so (i.e., why relay orders to an "irregular channel"?)

    3) Why did Trump lie about not knowing Lev Parnas and how does that lie reflect on his assertion of "no quid pro quo"?

    --Sam
    First thing that came to my mind. "I don't know the man, it's possible I was in a photo with him, I take pictures with a lot of people, but I don't know the man."

  12. #260
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,424
    Amen (Given)
    13032
    Amen (Received)
    27575
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    The relevant questions are:
    We are so very blessed to have somebody to tell us so clearly which "the relevant questions" are.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  13. Amen Mountain Man amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •