Discussion in 'Latest Political News and Current Events' started by JuliefromOhio, Jan 12, 2020.
That explains it all.
He’s guilty of what?
You guys all seem to forget the fact that a prosecution is supposed to have a charge someone did something wrong and then has the onus of proving it. That doesn’t exist here.
Just acquiring paperwork and close confidantes and their testimony won’t prove things that aren’t alleged and that didn’t happen.
This should. be a tough one to intelligent discerning minds that remotely understand politics and our system of justice
The testimony proving Trump's guilt exists. Further, Trump admitted his guilt in public. We all watched it. So did Trump.
Plus every time Trump tries to stop his people from testifying in an impeachment proceeding is yet ANOTHER abuse of power. The latest being John Bolton who said he WANTS to testify in senate trial. Trump says no. Why? Because he's guilty.
Guilt of what - specifically? What crime did he commit (cite the relevant statute).? And, if the "testimony proving Trump's guilt exists," why on earth are the Democrats demanding more testimony in the Senate?
There’s still no crime I’ve seen accused and you seem damn sure he’s guilty of it. That’s kinda insane.
What is he guilty of, besides ticking off the eccentric unconstitutional left?
Maybe you should read the Articles of Impeachment. Trump is accused of abuse of power and his favorite crime - obstruction.
Let’s start with the first Article...
Do you think presidents should be permitted to remain in office after shaking down a vulnerable foreign nation into accusing his political opponent of wrongdoing?
More evidence has been revealed. A private organization sent a FOIA request to the Trump admin and got emails of the cover up. That evidence was unavailable for the House hearings, but it should be presented to the senate.
Why won't Trump present proof of his innocence? Because he isn't innocent.
Instead, he's shaking down Republican senators to get them to acquit.
Does this crack of dawn nutso tweet make Trump look innocent? Nope.
Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
George @GStephanopoulos, ask Crazy Nancy why she allowed Adam “Shifty” Schiff to totally make up my conversation with the Ukrainian President & read his false words to Congress and the world, as though I said it? He got caught! Ask why hearing was most unfair & biased in history?
5:58 AM - 12 Jan 2020
Evidence of what? You certainly have made my point for me.
Our system does not require that we "prove our innocence." The prosecutors must prove guilt, which they obviously haven't done in this case. The idea that you people have turned 200 years of jurisprudence on its head in an effort to "get" Trump tells us all we need to know about your motives here.
Read up on the new evidence.
Impeachment is not a criminal prosecution per se.
1. Abuse of power and the evidence is obvious. He decided to ignore the law stating he had to notify congress of a hold on appropriated aid. He decided that every federal employee in the executive branch can be told to ignore congressional subpoenas.
So a technical (and temporary) violation of the Impoundment Control Act is an impeachable offense? That is ridiculous. That is so obviously NOT what the founders had in mind regarding "high crimes and misdemeanors" that it borders on the preposterous.
I have news for you, many of us think sending hundreds of millions of borrowed money to the notoriously corrupt officials in Ukraine is stupid. So we don't care if he technically violated this stupid "law."
Abuse of power isn't a crime, unless a crime was committed in the process. If the offense was that he violated the Impoundment Act, why wasn't that the charge, rather than abuse of office? My guess is because they knew that a) it's a stupid law that most Americans could not care less about and b) the violation was temporary, and had long ago been rectified so the idea that they could get even those who believe it is a legitimate law worked up over it was minimal.
I don't blame him - it was a witch hunt. It screams "partisan attack" that no Republicans could be brought on board, while they were not even able to get a unanimous vote from even the Democrats. And regardless, they had recourse - go to court.
Right wingers pretend they don't get it.
This is not a criminal prosecution. It’s an impeachment proceeding. Numerous statutory crimes are supported by the text of the Articles, but a president should be impeached for abuse of presidential powers regardless. For this proposition I rely upon GOP Senator Lindsey Graham...
It is not up to him to prove his "innocence". That is not the way this works...lol
Trump has no legal obligation to prove his innocence. He does have a legal obligation not to obstruct an impeachment inquiry. But the GOP firmly supports his obstruction.
Separate names with a comma.