Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[Mountain Man]

MM, we all know you want a sham trial, you can't handle the possibility that Trump might be found guilty. You're stance makes it clear that you're all afraid to see all the evidence. You can blather on, but you can't hide.

Your mind reading act is not getting any better.

[Mountain Man]

Nope, i don't believe it's a forgone conclusion, there are one or two principled republicans in the Senate and a few with tough upcoming elections who can't just look the other way when it comes time to vote on allowing witnesses and documentary evidence at trial since that is what some 70% of the people want.

Then what are you worried about?

[oxmixmudd]

What are you talking about? The Democrats held open hearings for weeks. They could have argued in court to prove legal sufficiency to compel those gagged by executive privilege to testify, but they quickly lost heart for the fight and rushed the impeachment articles to a vote because they simply didn't have time to wait. They had to get them to the Senate as quickly as possible!



Or not...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]42102[/ATTACH]

If the Democrats don't have a strong case to present to the Senate then they only have themselves to blame.

You are complaining about unfairness in how the Democrats proceeded, how they conducted the investigation. You have been complaining about that the entire time, and a constant taunt around here is that the democrats were unfair so why can't the senate be unfair.

And what I'm saying is that the things you are calling unfair in the House impeachment investigations were necessary to limit the capacity of the republicans to conspire to keep the President's deeds from being exposed. They still were able to in complicity act on the presidents behalf to keep the people with full and first hand knowledge, those that likely hold the smoking gun as it were, from testifying. And they are still at it - refusing to allow Bolton to tell what he knows.

We know what the president did, and we know that it is worthy of impeachment. But the senate will not allow an actual trial to take place, and they believe they can talk their way out of the evidence so far, but they will not allow the evidence they can't talk their way out of (like the president telling someone he was trying to get dirt on Biden from Ukraine) to be heard. Those words would only have been spoken, if they were ever spoken, to people like Bolton or Giuliani.

[rogue06]

I think it's more a case that Democrats see their party imploding and are desperately looking for someone to blame. Pelosi is proving to be a convenient target because she seems to have lost control of the House, though I'm not certain the blame is entirely on her.

Rarely are such collapses "entirely" the blame of one person.

[One Bad Pig]

Rarely are such collapses "entirely" the blame of one person.

Pelosi is doing a decent job of riding the avalanche, IMO; I'm not sure anyone else could be doing any better.

[DivineOb]

Pelosi is doing a decent job of riding the avalanche, IMO; I'm not sure anyone else could be doing any better.

One Day More (from the good Les Mis) comes to mind. It'll be more than a day but we're pretty close to discovering who has reality in their brains and who doesn't :).

BTW I'm hearing talk that Schiff is going to the impeachment manager for the Dems. Thrilled. Will the Republicans be able to appoint someone of similar caliber?

[Mountain Man]

We know what the president did, and we know that it is worthy of impeachment. But the senate will not allow an actual trial to take plac...

False. They will allow a trial to take place if the prosecution can convince a simple majority of Senators that one is warranted.

Do you think they can do it?

[Mountain Man]

BTW I'm hearing talk that Schiff is going to the impeachment manager for the Dems. Thrilled. Will the Republicans be able to appoint someone of similar caliber?

Are you being sarcastic?

[Sparko]

If you can show me documentation that the Democrats wouldn't let Republicans call relevant witnesses (e.g. not Hunter Biden) I'll join you in condemning them. Same for preventing them from interviewing relevant witnesses.

I want to follow the truth wherever it leads.

LOL - I love how you ask for evidence but then disqualify any that you don't like. I am not going to bother with proving anything to you at this point. Go google it yourself.

[Sparko]

Perhaps it's me, but I can't make sense out of what your saying here. Any examples?

Sure:

Pelosi is creating time for thinking Americans to recognise that Moscow Mitch and the republican Senate are working with the President in order to cover-up his crimes with a sham trial. In the mean time more and more evidence is emerging which the Senate will have to deal with one way or the other.

[rogue06]

BTW I'm hearing talk that Schiff is going to the impeachment manager for the Dems. Thrilled. Will the Republicans be able to appoint someone of similar caliber?

Is Bozo the Clown still around?

[DivineOb]

LOL - I love how you ask for evidence but then disqualify any that you don't like. I am not going to bother with proving anything to you at this point. Go google it yourself.

When have I disqualified evidence just because I didn't like it?

Don't write checks you can't cash, Jesus is watching.

[Sparko]

When have I disqualified evidence just because I didn't like it?

Don't write checks you can't cash, Jesus is watching.

Right in your post

"If you can show me documentation that the Democrats wouldn't let Republicans call relevant witnesses (e.g. not Hunter Biden)"

And you are doing that insufferable smug thing again. Stop it.

[Sparko]

Right in your post

"If you can show me documentation that the Democrats wouldn't let Republicans call relevant witnesses (e.g. not Hunter Biden)"

And you are doing that insufferable smug thing again. Stop it.

Wait I might have misread your post upon re-reading it, I intitiallyt read it as "provide evidence except such thing as Hunter Biden"

If so I will go look it up.

[Sparko]

Wait I might have misread your post upon re-reading it, I intitiallyt read it as "provide evidence except such thing as Hunter Biden"

If so I will go look it up.

OK Here is what I meant about the democrats not letting the Republicans question witnesses properly:

https://nypost.com/2019/11/19/adam-s...ent-witnesses/

I also recall that everytime a Republican was trying to question a witness (like the law professors) the democrats like Schiff kept interrupting them and playing such games.

I also remember that Nunes provided a list of witnesses such as Hunter Biden to Schiff and they were denied.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1XJ0FK

I don't recall ANY republican witnesses being allowed other than the one law professor. Do you? If so, let me know who they were.