Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 164

Thread: So who wants witnesses

  1. #91 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,534
    Thanks
    65,163
    Thanked 38,094 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Democrats should be ready to yield on Hunter Biden and Eric Ciaramella with those kind of poll numbers.
    This trial is about constitutional issues, not HB's job at Burisma.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  2. #92 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    49,883
    Thanks
    14,463
    Thanked 32,101 Times in 21,165 Posts
    Groans
    6
    Groaned 1,307 Times in 1,235 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,



    You should have listened to more of what Trump said today.

    Trump said he would block their testimony. He said he would like to hear from them but it would be a national security issue, so he would have to block it.

    "But Trump then argued that he could assert executive privilege to try to block the witnesses if called saying it could be a national security risk if they shared private conversation they had with the president."

    Trump, today: "I would rather go the long way. I would rather interview Bolton. I would rather interview a lot of people. The problem with John is, that it’s a national security problem"
    How is he wrong?

    There are at least potential national security issues with Bolton testifying and Trump has the authority to block it/him with that annoying executive privilege thing. It’s ‘the problem’ with Bolton.

    Trump’s opinion doesn’t matter and neither does ours: it’s up to senate democrats and how bad they want to hear from Bolton.

    The poll numbers suggest they should put Hunter Biden on the stand. In addition to some others.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  3. #93 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,534
    Thanks
    65,163
    Thanked 38,094 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Phantasmal,

    Did the WH invoke executive privilege? When exactly?
    Never. And Schiff noted this several times in his arguments.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    PoliTalker (01-22-2020)

  5. #94 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,979
    Thanks
    12,111
    Thanked 14,175 Times in 10,393 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Why did the House block witnesses? Why did the House not get Bolton if the Dems wanted him so bad?
    The House blocking witnesses? Are you fucking drunk?

  6. #95 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    49,883
    Thanks
    14,463
    Thanked 32,101 Times in 21,165 Posts
    Groans
    6
    Groaned 1,307 Times in 1,235 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    This trial is about constitutional issues, not HB's job at Burisma.
    The trial will be whatever the majority of the Senate says it will be about.

    It’s not the Schiff Show now.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  7. #96 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,979
    Thanks
    12,111
    Thanked 14,175 Times in 10,393 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    The House called all the witnesses they wanted, then they concluded their investigation and voted. Then Pelosi sat on the articles of impeachment for 2 weeks. So why did the House move so fast if they had other witnesses they wanted to hear from?
    Liar

  8. #97 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,534
    Thanks
    65,163
    Thanked 38,094 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    But it’s relevant to the defense’s case.

    The trial is supposed to be fair, right?
    Impeachment is about trump's abuse of the Constitution, not HB's job at Burisma.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    PoliTalker (01-22-2020)

  10. #98 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,979
    Thanks
    12,111
    Thanked 14,175 Times in 10,393 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Perhaps the Dems should try collusion again.
    FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION

    A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
    B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
    C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
    D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
    E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
    F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
    H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
    I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
    J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
    K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

    “Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance. For example, the President's direction to McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed was followed almost immediately by his direction to Lewandowski to tell the Attorney General to limit the scope of the Russia investigation to prospective election-interference only-a temporal connection that suggests that both acts were taken with a related purpose with respect to the investigation.”
    ____________

    Obstruction of justice - 18 USC 1501-1521
    Witness intimidation 18 USC 1512
    Emoluments - US Constitution
    Abuse of power - no statute. Merely reason to be removed from office
    Extortion – 18 USC 112
    Solicitation of something of value from a foreign entity - 11CFR 110.2 and 11 CFR 300.2

    ______________

    Extortion – 4 elements
    Threat – withholding $400 million
    Intent – Forcing public announcement of investigations
    Fear – of loss of funding for defensive weapons against the Russians
    Property – the thing of value is the investigations of 2016 tampering and the Bidens

  11. #99 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    9,164
    Thanks
    3,635
    Thanked 6,593 Times in 4,192 Posts
    Groans
    130
    Groaned 1,203 Times in 1,060 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by floridafan View Post
    What it comes down to my dear, all you excuses aside, it that you and you kind fear any witnesses who will tell the truth.
    We already have enough truth from enough witnesses. Trump is a treacherous criminal and these GOP cowards are giving the middle finger to the America people and The Constitution in fear of losing their cushy seats. The majority of the people want this POS removed and hopefully most of these dirt-bags will be voted out.
    BLUEXIT
    A Modest Proposal For Separating Blue States From Red

    Dear Red-State Trump Voter,
    Let’s face it, guys: We’re done.


    It is a tragedy that so much of the work that so many men and women toiled at for so long to make this a better country, and a better world, has been thrown away, leaving us all in such needless peril.

    This is why our separation in all but name is necessary.


    https://newrepublic.com/article/1409...mp-red-america

  12. #100 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,534
    Thanks
    65,163
    Thanked 38,094 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    But it’s relevant to the defense’s case.

    The trial is supposed to be fair, right?
    Btw, we already know the trial is not fair. Repubs voted down every motion the House raised yesterday.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  13. #101 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Southern Chicken,



    Oh, how convenient. Throw it all into the courts to be dragged out for years and years? And the reason this is unacceptable is somehow not understood?
    That's the process,right? The courts interpret a separation of powers. You have problems with the constitution.

  14. #102 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Btw, we already know the trial is not fair. Repubs voted down every motion the House raised yesterday.
    Well they do have Sole authority to try impeachment. Just like The house had sole authority to impeach.

  15. #103 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,979
    Thanks
    12,111
    Thanked 14,175 Times in 10,393 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    But it’s relevant to the defense’s case.

    The trial is supposed to be fair, right?
    HB = irrelevant

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to domer76 For This Post:

    christiefan915 (01-22-2020)

  17. #104 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,979
    Thanks
    12,111
    Thanked 14,175 Times in 10,393 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    How is he wrong?

    There are at least potential national security issues with Bolton testifying and Trump has the authority to block it/him with that annoying executive privilege thing. It’s ‘the problem’ with Bolton.

    Trump’s opinion doesn’t matter and neither does ours: it’s up to senate democrats and how bad they want to hear from Bolton.

    The poll numbers suggest they should put Hunter Biden on the stand. In addition to some others.
    Then Bolton or Trump's lawyers can invoke executive privilege to the question, not the entire testimony.

  18. #105 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    Here's the way it works in real trials. When a person is indicted based on existing evidence, any additional evidence discovered AFTER the indictment can still be offered at trial. That's the case here, dumbfuck. More information is becoming available almost every day. IN ADDITION to the evidence sufficient to impeach.

    Comprende, moron?
    Senate rules not judicial rules, idiot

Similar Threads

  1. 71% of Americans Think Key Witnesses Should Testify
    By PoliTalker in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-22-2019, 11:54 AM
  2. Why won’t the retRumplicans call witnesses?
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 12-17-2019, 09:56 AM
  3. GOP lied about GPS witnesses being uncooperative
    By evince in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 02-03-2018, 01:02 PM
  4. Coach faces witnesses
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2012, 08:02 PM
  5. I'm joining the Jehovah's Witnesses
    By Augustine in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-04-2007, 09:23 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

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