Senate Republicans are on trial

[reason10]

The Senate Impeachment trial will tell us more about the Republican party and its future than about President Trump. We already know how he operates, but Senate Republicans will be put to the test. Will they defend our Constitution, our Republic or will they accede to an imperial presidency envisioned by many in their once Grand Old Party?

They're not on trial. LYING SCHIFF is on trial. And if ANY witnesses need to be called, they should be Biden, Hunter and LYING SCHIFF. Put that sack of shitt on the stand under oath and make him ADMIT he lied about that phone call. Put the whistleblower on the stand and have him admit he never heard the goddam phone call.

All the Senate Republicans have to do is bring out the TRUTH, which is on their side, and this thing is over. And Democrats WILL lose the House.

 

[JackDallas]

She's not on trial though.

She ought to be.

 

[Addy]

She ought to be.

Why?

 

[JuliefromOhio]

they will defend our constitution, as will Roberts


and theyre not on trial. trump is

Today's word:

tri·al
/ˈtrī(ə)l/
noun
1. a formal examination of evidence before a judge, and typically before a jury, in order to decide guilt in a case of criminal or civil proceedings.
2. a test of the performance, qualities, or suitability of someone or something.
3. person, thing, or situation that tests a person's endurance or forbearance.

Examples:​

1. The senate is conducting a trial.
2. The Republicans are being tested (on trial) on their performance of defending the Constitution.
3. Your posts often test my endurance. They're a trial.

 

[reason10]

1. The senate is conducting a trial.

Based on the House's attempts to overturn the 2016 Election.

2. The Republicans are being tested (on trial) on their performance of defending the Constitution.

Which they will do splendidly when they vote to acquit this president. And they will send a message to future LIARS and liberals that your hating a man is not an impeachable offense.

3. Your posts often test my endurance. They're a trial.

All logic, facts and truth tests your endurance. You're not used to losing so many arguments.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

Trump defense team on trial, too.

“The managers were prepared, they were thoughtful, they were factual, they were logical, they were dignified,” Conway said. “Trump’s lawyers, on the other hand, were dissembling, distorting and even lying.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/george-conway-rips-utterly-shameless-trump-lawyers-in-rare-tv-appearance-treating-the-senate-like-theyre-morons/

 

[reason10]

Trump defense team on trial, too.

“The managers were prepared, they were thoughtful, they were factual, they were logical, they were dignified,” Conway said. “Trump’s lawyers, on the other hand, were dissembling, distorting and even lying.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/george-conway-rips-utterly-shameless-trump-lawyers-in-rare-tv-appearance-treating-the-senate-like-theyre-morons/

Total bullshit and lies.
Adam Schiffstain LIED AND LIED AND LIED.

He DID admit that he doesn't trust the voters NOT to elect Trump in 2020 so he has to stop him with this impeachment.

In other words, he is trying to steal the election.

 

[Spamature]

The House Democrats are on trial because they stuck their necks out on impeachment prior to having enough evidence to secure any sort of conviction. We already know how they operate, and their rush to impeach puts their character to the test. Why didn’t they respect the courts and the constitution? Will they be able to negate the result of an election and strike a sitting president from the next one?

No, of course not.
Coup failed.

Do you ever feel dirty after incredibly disingenuous post like these ?

 

[Dino]

Do you ever feel dirty after incredibly disingenuous post like these ?

Name one thing disingenuous about it.
The truth hurts don't it? Or do you think things are actually going well? LOL

 

[Spamature]

Name one thing disingenuous about it.
The truth hurts don't it? Or do you think things are actually going well? LOL

That you know it might have taken until after the elections to get rulings from the court on subpoenas. While at the same time Trump was still trying to cheat in that election. Rudy was still having meeting in Ukraine.

You know that you would have been outraged had Obama classified the admin actions in regards to Benghazi and forbade any member of the admin involved from testifying before congress on the matter.

You know that this was about the 2020 elections and that Trump has admitted to what he is accused of, and has publicly even gone so far as to ask China to get involved on his side in our upcoming election.

Most importantly you know why they don't want to have witnesses. Because then Republicans senate (who you know is already in the bag for Trump) would have to justify their votes after hearing the Democratic case confirmed under oath by the people directly involved in the Constitutional crimes Trump was impeached for.

You know it, and I know it.

 

[Winston]

The Senate Impeachment trial will tell us more about the Republican party and its future than about President Trump. We already know how he operates, but Senate Republicans will be put to the test. Will they defend our Constitution, our Republic or will they accede to an imperial presidency envisioned by many in their once Grand Old Party?

Yes Julie tell us more about your dreams

 

[Winston]

She's not on trial though.

Trump is not on trial either. Trials have impartial jurors so this is not a trial

 

[Dino]

That you know it might have taken until after the elections to get rulings from the court on subpoenas. While at the same time Trump was still trying to cheat in that election. Rudy was still having meeting in Ukraine.

You know that you would have been outraged had Obama classified the admin actions in regards to Benghazi and forbade any member of the admin involved from testifying before congress on the matter.

You know that this was about the 2020 elections and that Trump has admitted to what he is accused of, and has publicly even gone so far as to ask China to get involved on his side in our upcoming election.

Most importantly you know why they don't want to have witnesses. Because then Republicans senate (who you know is already in the bag for Trump) would have to justify their votes after hearing the Democratic case confirmed under oath by the people directly involved in the Constitutional crimes Trump was impeached for.

You know it, and I know it.

Why didn't the House have witnesses? They made the rules, they could have called or subpoenaed anyone they wanted to. The Republicans can easily justify their votes after hearing the Democrats' case that's now ongoing. The case Schiff and Nadler said was enough to have Trump removed,
The DEMS are the ones who know what calling witnesses will lead to. They want no part of calling either Biden, Ciaramella and Schiff to the stand as witnesses. Biden's presidential chances would be sunk, and the ties between Schiff and Ciaramella would end up with both of them facing perjury charges.

I can go vote for Trump in perfect conscience due to the Democrats' constant chicanery and dirty tricks. It wasn't enough they lied their way through the fake Russian collusion case, paid for the fake Steele Dossier, and had their dirty tricks come up empty in the Mueller investigation. Now it's this knee-jerk pre-emptive and simply spurious impeachment hoax.
Your party will pay for this coup attempt, I guarantee!

 

[Winston]

Today's word:

tri·al
/ˈtrī(ə)l/
noun
1. a formal examination of evidence before a judge, and typically before a jury, in order to decide guilt in a case of criminal or civil proceedings.
2. a test of the performance, qualities, or suitability of someone or something.
3. person, thing, or situation that tests a person's endurance or forbearance.

Examples:​

1. The senate is conducting a trial.
2. The Republicans are being tested (on trial) on their performance of defending the Constitution.
3. Your posts often test my endurance. They're a trial.

There is no trial in the senate, as there are zero impartial jurors

 

[voyager]

The republican Congress has become accessories to obstruction of justice. They are impeaching themselves.

 

[NinaS]

Why didn't the House have witnesses? They made the rules, they could have called or subpoenaed anyone they wanted to. The Republicans can easily justify their votes after hearing the Democrats' case that's now ongoing. The case Schiff and Nadler said was enough to have Trump removed,
The DEMS are the ones who know what calling witnesses will lead to. They want no part of calling either Biden, Ciaramella and Schiff to the stand as witnesses. Biden's presidential chances would be sunk, and the ties between Schiff and Ciaramella would end up with both of them facing perjury charges.

I can go vote for Trump in perfect conscience due to the Democrats' constant chicanery and dirty tricks. It wasn't enough they lied their way through the fake Russian collusion case, paid for the fake Steele Dossier, and had their dirty tricks come up empty in the Mueller investigation. Now it's this knee-jerk pre-emptive and simply spurious impeachment hoax.
Your party will pay for this coup attempt, I guarantee!

Why lie????? They had witnesses...and you know it. Both the Democrats and Republicans got to question them. Remember the 4 witnesses?? Think hard, DINO...or google.
Lying is easier, I guess, huh? AND you Trump lovers are pretending that TRUMP wouldn't let Mulvaney and others testify. Remember that?? How can they have witnesses when that lard ass you love so much stop them from testifying?? That's called OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. At least that's what it was before it became a Monarchy under your orange corrupt POS Trump.

 

[Dino]

Why lie????? They had witnesses...and you know it. Both the Democrats and Republicans got to question them. Remember the 4 witnesses?? Think hard, DINO...or google.
Lying is easier, I guess, huh? AND you Trump lovers are pretending that TRUMP wouldn't let Mulvaney and others testify. Remember that?? How can they have witnesses when that lard ass you love so much stop them from testifying?? That's called OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. At least that's what it was before it became a Monarchy under your orange corrupt POS Trump.

I’ll allow no less than the venerable New York Times to make my point so you can stop screeching...


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/478843-house-democrats-may-call-new-impeachment-witnesses-if-senate-doesnt

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/us/politics/impeachment-witnesses.amp.html

But among those missing from the House Intelligence Committee’s witness list, besides Mr. Giuliani, were Mr. Pence, Mr. Pompeo, Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Bolton. Not that the panel’s Democratic majority was necessarily uninterested in talking with the vice president, secretary of state, acting White House chief of staff or former national security adviser. Democratic leaders have decided not to wage a drawn-out fight to force them to testify over White House objections.

Instead, as the committee wrapped up its public hearings on Thursday, House Democrats have opted for expeditious over comprehensive, electing to complete their investigation even without filling in major gaps in the story. It is a calculated gamble that they have enough evidence to impeach Mr. Trump on a party-line vote in the House and would risk losing momentum if they took the time to wage a court fight to compel reluctant witnesses to come forward.

 

[NinaS]

I’ll allow no less than the venerable New York Times to make my point so you can stop screeching...


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/478843-house-democrats-may-call-new-impeachment-witnesses-if-senate-doesnt

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/us/politics/impeachment-witnesses.amp.html

But among those missing from the House Intelligence Committee’s witness list, besides Mr. Giuliani, were Mr. Pence, Mr. Pompeo, Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Bolton. Not that the panel’s Democratic majority was necessarily uninterested in talking with the vice president, secretary of state, acting White House chief of staff or former national security adviser. Democratic leaders have decided not to wage a drawn-out fight to force them to testify over White House objections.

Instead, as the committee wrapped up its public hearings on Thursday, House Democrats have opted for expeditious over comprehensive, electing to complete their investigation even without filling in major gaps in the story. It is a calculated gamble that they have enough evidence to impeach Mr. Trump on a party-line vote in the House and would risk losing momentum if they took the time to wage a court fight to compel reluctant witnesses to come forward.

Sondland, Yovanovich, Bill Taylor, and others testified. TRUMP BLOCKED OTHER WITNESSES LIKE MULVANEY and the rest of the LIARS who were in on his BS with Ukraine. You cons are saying...They didn't provide anything....well that SOB Trump blocked everything. So there's that.

 

[Dawg]

Sondland, Yovanovich, Bill Taylor, and others testified. TRUMP BLOCKED OTHER WITNESSES LIKE MULVANEY and the rest of the LIARS who were in on his BS with Ukraine. You cons are saying...They didn't provide anything....well that SOB Trump blocked everything. So there's that.

Negative, schiffhead blocked witnesses...………….

now framers 'trias politica' Rules the roost

 

[Dino]

Sondland, Yovanovich, Bill Taylor, and others testified. TRUMP BLOCKED OTHER WITNESSES LIKE MULVANEY and the rest of the LIARS who were in on his BS with Ukraine. You cons are saying...They didn't provide anything....well that SOB Trump blocked everything. So there's that.

The solution to which- and which I’ve noted here a couple dozen times- is NOT impeachment. It’s a judicial review process, and a court decides if information or witnesses can be used for testimony. It’s been done that way for over a century, I guess until now.
Due to these Democrats, we can now see impeachments for all presidents in the immediate future.