Thoughts on the trial of President Trump.

[bellisarius]

The first, of course, is there going to be a trial? Well yes, eventually. I tried to find a precedent for the house withholding legislation from the senate and couldn't find any. That doesn't mean it hasn't occurred, only that I could find no precedent. Pelosi can hold on to the legislation, but not indefinitely. Trump can petition the SCOTUS under the VI amendment to force her to release the legislation to the senate.

Which brings us to Pelosi's reason for not forwarding the legislation. She wants a guarantee of a "fair and impartial trial" in the senate. The assertion being that McConnel isn't "impartial." The unspoken assertion here is that all of those democrat senators ARE impartial. That is a crock of shit on the face of it. Each and every senator has a vested interest in the outcome of any trial they hold consequently there isn't a single senator, democrat of republican, that can be said to be "impartial." To believe otherwise is an exercise in delusional thought.

Further, Pelosi's demands are outside of her ability to realize. The Constitution is quite clear on that matter. She has no say in how the trial is conducted. What she, and Schumer, are attempting is to force the trial to literally become a second investigation of Trump to uncover more "crimes" outside the scope of the articles of impeachment passed by the house. This is in effect the same as trying to try a man for embezzlement when the charges brought against him was burglary. If you want the trial to be on charges of embezzlement you have to bring charges of embezzlement.

Regardless, it's fun watching the carnival.

 

[sparkylitesthefuze]

https://i.imgur.com/AH04u.gif

 

[jp55665566]

Interesting 'cause it won't actually be President Trump on trial; it will be the prosecutors themselves who are called to task, and exposed as the corrupt liars they are.

 

[bellisarius]

I want

Biden, both

BugEyes

and CrowdStrike at the min

TO BE QUESTIONED

That would just open Pandora's Box. The charges have little to do with any of that. Besides, I do believe that Durham is going to be looking at all of those activities.

 

[Kantarii]

Nancy Pelosi can say she’s withholding the Articles of Impeachment for whatever reason she wants to justify it by in her head. That, nevertheless, doesn’t fix two simple facts. One, if Trump is so corrupt that he has to be removed from office ASAP - Why keep delaying it? And, two, she caved in to the demands of the radicals in her Party. Obviously she isn’t in control of her own Party as she went against the things she said about not going down this path( impeachment) unless there was something so compelling and bipartisan. Newsflash: Hahaha... She knows she fucked up.

 

[Fart_knocker]

Interesting 'cause it won't actually be President Trump on trial; it will be the prosecutors themselves who are called to task, and exposed as the corrupt liars they are.

Lol, what a moron.

 

[heathergives]

Lol, what a moron.

Whatever you say, luk.^^^

https://i.imgflip.com/p3cm9.jpg

 

[phrodeau]

Nancy Pelosi can say she’s withholding the Articles of Impeachment for whatever reason she wants to justify it by in her head. That, nevertheless, doesn’t fix two simple facts. One, if Trump is so corrupt that he has to be removed from office ASAP - Why keep delaying it? And, two, she caved in to the demands of the radicals in her Party. Obviously she isn’t in control of her own Party as she went against the things she said about not going down this path( impeachment) unless there was something so compelling and bipartisan. Newsflash: Hahaha... She knows she fucked up.

The Articles are still in Pelosi’s outbox, so how has she caved, exactly? Make up your mind.

 

[Rightguide]

Which brings us to Pelosi's reason for not forwarding the legislation. She wants a guarantee of a "fair and impartial trial" in the senate. The assertion being that McConnel isn't "impartial."

It isn't as if Pelosi ran any kind of a fair impeachment inquiry or vote in the House. So, I think any trial in the Senate will be balanced to the other side of the scale, to either assure fairness to the President, or express the Senate's contempt for the corrupt House process and charges.

 

[heathergives]

From The Federalist:

Emerson polling showed that support for impeachment flipped since October from 48 percent support with 44 percent opposing to now 45 percent opposed and 43 percent in support. Among key independents, the switch was even more pronounced. In October, 48 percent supported impeaching President Donald Trump, with 39 percent opposed. Now, 49 percent of independents oppose impeachment, while only 34 percent support it.

A new Marquette University Law School poll found that 40 percent of registered voters in the swing state of Wisconsin think that Trump should be impeached and removed from office, while 53 percent do not think so. Another 6 percent weren’t sure.

A new Gallup poll shows that Trump’s approval has ticked up two points since the impeachment drama began, with 50 percent of Americans opposed to it and 48 percent in support. Henry Olsen notes that Gallup polls all adults, not just registered voters, meaning that a poll of registered voters would have Trump’s job approval even higher and impeachment opposed by closer to a 52-46 margin.

 

[bellisarius]

From The Federalist:

This is an instance where nationwide polls are untrustworthy. The state poll you posted, and others like it, are what people should be looking at.

 

[heathergives]

This is an instance where nationwide polls are untrustworthy. The state poll you posted, and others like it, are what people should be looking at.

Gallup? Untrustworthy?

 

[jp55665566]

I'd like to see a poll on American's opinion of Adam Schiff's antics during the Impeachment Inquiry, specifically his absurd "parody" of the phonecall.

 

[Adre]

It isn't as if Pelosi ran any kind of a fair impeachment inquiry or vote in the House. So, I think any trial in the Senate will be balanced to the other side of the scale, to either assure fairness to the President, or express the Senate's contempt for the corrupt House process and charges.

Bullshit, IMPOTUS was invited along with counsel and first hand fact witnesses. He refused to allow them to appear. You need to check your facts, liar. And how was the vote not fair, did she lie about the totals? Was he really not impeached?

 

[bellisarius]

Gallup? Untrustworthy?

All of them actually. The US has 50 individual elections, not 1 national election. So unless Gallup, and the others, do a state by state and then aggregate the numbers the results are going to be skewed.

 

[kilometers]

Gallup? Untrustworthy?

Any poll that produces unfavorable results is untrustworthy.

 

[heathergives]

Any poll that produces unfavorable results is untrustworthy.

Ahh. so that's what it is.

 

[Rightguide]

Bullshit, IMPOTUS was invited along with counsel and first hand fact witnesses. He refused to allow them to appear. You need to check your facts, liar. And how was the vote not fair, did she lie about the totals? Was he really not impeached?

Your construction is a lie. The house should have taken the matter to the courts. They didn't, and I'm tired of schooling you on the issues of separation of powers, congressional subpoena power, the limits thereof, The refusal to this day to release exculpatory testimony that helps the President, the many violations of House rules of procedure, and the demonstrable violation of minority rights. The process and vote violated Pelosi's own stated standard of mandatory bipartisanship. Check your facts, clown.

 

[Conager]

Bullshit, IMPOTUS was invited along with counsel and first hand fact witnesses. He refused to allow them to appear. You need to check your facts, liar. And how was the vote not fair, did she lie about the totals? Was he really not impeached?

So, you are saying the Republicans shoulda impeached Obama and his "wingman" Holder for obstructing congress?

But, but, but that's DIFFERENT!

 

[Rightguide]

All of them actually. The US has 50 individual elections, not 1 national election. So unless Gallup, and the others, do a state by state and then aggregate the numbers the results are going to be skewed.

^^^
A simple fact the uninformed left is ignorant of.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Utterly untrue.

They want Mulvaney, Bolton and Pompeo to testify on the Ukraine scandal, not anything else.

The first, of course, is there going to be a trial? Well yes, eventually. I tried to find a precedent for the house withholding legislation from the senate and couldn't find any. That doesn't mean it hasn't occurred, only that I could find no precedent. Pelosi can hold on to the legislation, but not indefinitely. Trump can petition the SCOTUS under the VI amendment to force her to release the legislation to the senate.

Which brings us to Pelosi's reason for not forwarding the legislation. She wants a guarantee of a "fair and impartial trial" in the senate. The assertion being that McConnel isn't "impartial." The unspoken assertion here is that all of those democrat senators ARE impartial. That is a crock of shit on the face of it. Each and every senator has a vested interest in the outcome of any trial they hold consequently there isn't a single senator, democrat of republican, that can be said to be "impartial." To believe otherwise is an exercise in delusional thought.

Further, Pelosi's demands are outside of her ability to realize. The Constitution is quite clear on that matter. She has no say in how the trial is conducted. What she, and Schumer, are attempting is to force the trial to literally become a second investigation of Trump to uncover more "crimes" outside the scope of the articles of impeachment passed by the house. This is in effect the same as trying to try a man for embezzlement when the charges brought against him was burglary. If you want the trial to be on charges of embezzlement you have to bring charges of embezzlement.

Regardless, it's fun watching the carnival.

 

[Adre]

So, you are saying the Republicans shoulda impeached Obama and his "wingman" Holder for obstructing congress?

But, but, but that's DIFFERENT!

I suppose they could have tried. Not my fucking fault they didn’t.

 

[Adre]

Over half of Americans polled wanted Trump impeached. It wasn’t a rogue operation.

 

[jaF0]

They could do like his heroes the Saudis and just lop his head off on the National Mall.

 

[Fart_knocker]

So, you are saying the Republicans shoulda impeached Obama and his "wingman" Holder for obstructing congress?

But, but, but that's DIFFERENT!

Tranny boi and his obama obsession...lol

Poor little desert faggot.