Random impeachment trial thought. · Page 2

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

delta1
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#21

I agree...her statement helped the Dem case by "confirming" what McCarthy said during his phone call with Trump where he pleaded with Trump to call off the mob, to no avail...Dems could have called MCCarthy, but they had a video if him on Fox News from that day, pleading with Trump to call off the mob...they showed several other GOP officials, including Chris Christie, imploring Trump to call off his supporters on live Fox News TV

https://jhb.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=402082

but if the GOP was really OK with her as a witness, why negotiate for 100 plus witnesses and threaten to prolong the trial for weeks/months?

Here's what Graham said about witnesses:

"Graham has also previously made a point of the fact the House impeachment procedure did not call in any witnesses. Last month Graham said on Fox News even "one witness" would be grounds for the trial to take "weeks if not months" for the Senate to determine a verdict."

https://www.newsweek.com/lindsey-graham-blames-liberal-media-prior-impeachment-vote-says-bring-witnesses-1569130

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#22

Why did the left give up so easily on calling their hearsay witness?
Guessing Nancy and Chuck did not want to take the stand when called by the right.
Funny how things change when the shoe is on the other foot.

Burner02 wrote:

Decisions to call a witness are made during trial depending how things are going. If you feel you kicked @$$ in the trial (like the D's do), you want the trial over with ASAP, and might not call any witnesses to expedite or not take a risk with that witness. Other times decisions to call or not to call witnesses are made by negotiated agreement of the other parties. That's the beauty of the judge allowing the attorneys to come to the bench so that their arguments and negotiations are worked out then in private...

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#23

Thankfully, I think it all went well with Leahey presiding. A litigation party has to show actual controversy, actual damages or the likelihood of reparable harm, among other standards, to go to court for damages or to compel performance. Both
sides seemed fine without Roberts. The way he did it, Roberts was free to rule from SCOTUS on any procedural impeachment conflicts that may have risen.

rfenst wrote:

With Chief Justice Roberts not presiding it showed it was unconstitutional.

Shame YOU didn't get that. It was an impeachment process not a civil trial.

Next time we meet...we're talking about this.

Edited by user 5 years ago | Reason: Not specified

tonygraz
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#24

Unconstitutional - isn't that the new slogan of the old republican party.

tonygraz
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#25

My relative got stoned in Salem.

ZRX1200 wrote:

Mine got hung.

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#26

With Chief Justice Roberts not presiding it showed it was unconstitutional.

Shame YOU didn't get that. It was an impeachment process not a civil trial.

Next time we meet...we're talking about this.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

no, it showed that he is only required to preside if the POTUS/defendant is in office.

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#27

Mine got hung.

tonygraz wrote:

I got hung.
It's a blessing and a curse.

izonfire
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#28

I got hung.
It's a blessing and a curse.

frankj1 wrote:

Didja choke up on it???

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#29

I am impressed with the shear number of Trump co-conspirators that protected their fuhrer.
Those boys know how to swallow some chain.

I see Moscow Mitch is starting to walk it back to save himself though...

Burner02
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#30

rfenst wrote:

Thanks for the fyi but I already had a pretty good idea how those things work from a previous occupation. What you and Al missed in my comment was that the Dems decided not to call their witness after they determined the Cons were going to call Queen Nancy as their first witness. I would be willing to bet she would/will not testify unless she had no other choose. To great of a likelihood of her committing perjury.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#31

Trump Acquitted (Again), But Trump Hatred Continues

Written by Ron Paul

Last week’s second impeachment trial of former President Trump should serve as a warning that something is very wrong in US politics. Far from a measured, well-investigated, rock-solid case against the former president, America was again abused with day after day of character assassination, innuendo, false claims, and even falsified “evidence.”

The trial wasn’t intended to win a conviction of Trump for “incitement” because the Democrats already knew that the votes were not there. So, just as with the last impeachment trial, the goal was to fling as much dirt at Donald Trump as they could while the cameras were rolling. Their hatred of Donald Trump is so deep and visceral that probably a psychologist would have been more beneficial to them than yet another impeachment trial.

It would be incorrect to say that the House managers’ case fell apart, because they had no case to begin with. They never had a case because they made no effort to develop a case. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court saw from the beginning that this was no legitimate impeachment trial and informed Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer that he would not preside. Without the Chief Justice, there was no Constitutional impeachment trial. So they put on a show trial instead.

As Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley kept asking, why didn’t the House schedule a single hearing to investigate what really happened up to and on the day of the Capitol melee on January 6th? They had weeks to do so. Professor Turley believes they might even have been able to make a decent case if they had tried.

Why did they not call witnesses? Were there no rioters who could be called to explain under oath how Trump’s speech had inspired them to enter the Capitol building to overturn the election?

Were they afraid that under cross-examination we might have found out more about Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows’ claim that Trump offered to deploy 10,000 National Guard troops in Washington before January 6th but that his offer was rebuked? What about reports that Capitol Hill Police were left without back-up and unprepared for what happened? House and Senate leadership is responsible for security at the Capitol and they obviously failed. Why?

The House and Senate Democrats (and a few Republicans) did not succeed in their ultimate goal: preventing Trump from ever running again for political office. But that doesn’t mean they are giving up. They are not about to give citizen Trump a moment of peace. They are intent on continuing their witch hunt but it looks less and less like any desire for justice. It looks like fear. They are afraid if he is allowed to run again he may be elected. So they cannot allow that vote to happen.

And they accuse Trump of undermining democracy.

There were a number of reasons to impeach and convict President Trump while he was in office. Bombing Syria on bogus grounds without authorization was one of them. But Democrats love war as much as Republicans so they weren’t about to uphold their Constitutional obligations.

Impeachment 2.0 may be over, but those blinded by hatred for Trump are not about to give up. They are irrational and obsessed. They are also dangerous.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/february/15/trump-acquitted-again-but-trump-hatred-continues/

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#32

LOL - As though Trump has a character to assassinate.....

😂

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#33

LOL - As though Trump has a character to assassinate.....

😂

Brewha wrote:

Impeachment 2.0 may be over, but those blinded by hatred for Trump are not about to give up. They are irrational and obsessed. They are also dangerous.

=d> =d> =d>

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

5 years ago

#34

Impeachment 2.0 may be over, but those blinded by hatred for Trump are not about to give up. They are irrational and obsessed. They are also dangerous.

=d> =d> =d>

DrMaddVibe wrote:

That’s it Doc - stay proud of your fascist ideals!

Protect us against democracy!

Edited by user 5 years ago | Reason: Not specified