Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
and then

Senate trial or peremptory dismissal

Impeachment Trial  

14 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you want a trial or a quick dismissal of the charges?

    • Trial
      11
    • Senate rejects the Articles
      3


49 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Agent0range
1 hour ago, and then said:

Agreed but I also have the solid foundation of fact where Trump's actions are concerned.  His detractors can feel, think and SAY anything they like but the bottom line is that he had the authority to do what he did.  

Why do you keep saying that?  Have you not been shown that it has been illegal for a President to withhold aid approved by Congress?  I mean, you won't even concede that is wrong.  Look at what you are even saying in this thread.  You are talking about how corrupt Ukraine is, but OK with the fact that the President asked the Ukraine to investigate a private citizen, and his father, for CORRUPTION.  Why would he ask the Ukraine?  Why.  Because not even Brown Nosin Billy Barr could sell that pile of poop.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Gromdor
39 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Why do you keep saying that?  Have you not been shown that it has been illegal for a President to withhold aid approved by Congress?  I mean, you won't even concede that is wrong.  Look at what you are even saying in this thread.  You are talking about how corrupt Ukraine is, but OK with the fact that the President asked the Ukraine to investigate a private citizen, and his father, for CORRUPTION.  Why would he ask the Ukraine?  Why.  Because not even Brown Nosin Billy Barr could sell that pile of poop.  

Perhaps he views Ukraine as less corrupt than our current government and legal system?  Apparently our Constitution and checks and balances aren't enough for people to have faith in our system.  So he is turning to a foreign bastion of justice (the Ukraine) to bring our crooked politicians to justice.  It's a pity they weren't doing it on their own though and needed "encouragement" and arm twisting.

  Perhaps our next president will have the UN investigate our politicians for corruption.  The Horowitz report shows that our investigation into the investigation certainly wasn't giving him the results he wants.  Time for an outside source.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
35 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Perhaps our next president will have the UN investigate our politicians for corruption.  The Horowitz report shows that our investigation into the investigation certainly wasn't giving him the results he wants.  Time for an outside source.

You are saying that like he actually cares about corruption.  For 3 years, he didn't give a crap about Hunter Biden.  I mean, has there ever been another administration in which more people ended up as convicted felons?  I ask that seriously, because I don't know the answer.  How many Republican congressman has he shown support for that have ultimately pleaded guilty to charges?  You can't all of the sudden care about corruption when it involves your political rival when you have dismissed the corruption surrounding you, not even for years, but for literally decades.  

Want to look at corruption?  He should ask China to investigate how Ivanka got trademarks in China 10X faster than the average company.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
4 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

You are saying that like he actually cares about corruption.  For 3 years, he didn't give a crap about Hunter Biden.  I mean, has there ever been another administration in which more people ended up as convicted felons?  I ask that seriously, because I don't know the answer.  How many Republican congressman has he shown support for that have ultimately pleaded guilty to charges?  You can't all of the sudden care about corruption when it involves your political rival when you have dismissed the corruption surrounding you, not even for years, but for literally decades.  

Want to look at corruption?  He should ask China to investigate how Ivanka got trademarks in China 10X faster than the average company.  

He doesn't care about corruption.  The Ukraine has plenty of instances of corruption he could have directed his people to investigate.  Biden and discrediting the investigation in his own corruption was the only thing he cared about.

It's pretty simple:  If you want to frame a guy, get yourself a crooked investigator.  That's why he was trying to do it through Ukraine.  Enough money in a country famed for corruption will get anything you want.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead
34 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

You are saying that like he actually cares about corruption.  For 3 years, he didn't give a crap about Hunter Biden.  

A new president and government formed in Ukraine in 2019 from the previous government which the American Congressional earmarked aid was approved to Ukraine.

The new Ukraine president Zelensky won the presidency on April 21, 2019. Trump calls him congratulate him.

The Ukraine parliamentary election was July 21, 2019. Trump calls him congratulates him on his party's success on winning the parliamentary election.

The now infamous Trump/Zelensky phonecall was July 25, 2019

The timing to ask about investigating corruption was perfect.

 

Edited by acidhead
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead
1 hour ago, acidhead said:

A new president and government formed in Ukraine in 2019 from the previous government which the American Congressional earmarked aid was approved to Ukraine.

The new Ukraine president Zelensky won the presidency on April 21, 2019.

-Trump calls him congratulate him on winning presidency same day.

The Ukraine parliamentary election was July 21, 2019

The now infamous Trump/Zelensky phonecall was July 25, 2019.  

-Trump calls him congratulates him on his party's success on winning the parliamentary election.

The timing to ask about investigating corruption was perfect.

 

Edited

Edited by acidhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
13 hours ago, aztek said:

this is not about truth, or the right thing, this circus is ONLY about who is in power. and dems will do  ANYTHING to keep it. they started talking about impeachment less than 24 hours after trump was sworn in.

Hog wash. Bill Clinton went through the ringer because of a head job and Trump and the republicans are getting all self righteous with their criminal enterprise. Make no mistake the senate is protecting Trump. Mitch McConnell wants to dismiss the charges outright, giving Trump and the trumpets no chance to further implicate them with lies. A fair hearing and a secret ballot is the very least the Republicans should consider as due process. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor Witness
On 12/13/2019 at 4:08 AM, and then said:

So... assuming the D's vote to approve the Articles of Impeachment, should the Senate use its power to simply dismiss the work of the House as too political or should Trump have his chance to face his accusers?

I believe that if a trial is not held and witnesses called, sworn and deposed, this situation will be even worse for Trump.  If the R's in the Senate quash this chance to get clear, sworn answers from those who pushed to destroy a president, then I'll be convinced that the R's are as much a problem as the D's.

Trump is a white poison, which lingers for a lifetime. Everything he touches will crumble and be cursed, including the nation he leads.

Down to the pit, ye Angel of the Abyss. Back to your dark lair in the mountains, and take your alien spirit hybrids with you. The Yeti’s have more class, but if it’s snow you need to travel, here’s an unprecedented pile of it.

Like a mummy, Mother, with darkness to remember. Behold, a Destruction is dispatched for a generation. 
 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

Senate trial or peremptory dismissal?

How does neither grab you, @and then?

Quote

Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to commit Wednesday to delivering articles of impeachment to the Senate, citing concerns about an unfair trial on removing President Donald Trump from office.

Senior Democratic aides said the House was “very unlikely” to take the steps necessary to send the articles to the Senate until at least early January, a delay of at least two weeks and perhaps longer.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/18/trump-impeachment-trial-steny-hoyer-087319

An absolute masterstroke. With the likes of McConnell and Graham openly stating that they would not provide a fair trial and refusing to allow vital witnesses, along with coordinating with Trump, I don't blame her. Genius, really. She can leave it hanging over Trump's presidency and even add to the articles as more of Trump's conduct becomes known. And Trump can continue to meltdown on Twitter. I think he sent something like 150 times in one day last week, obviously hard at work.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
2 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Senate trial or peremptory dismissal?

An absolute masterstroke. With the likes of McConnell and Graham openly stating that they would not provide a fair trial and refusing to allow vital witnesses, along with coordinating with Trump, I don't blame her. Genius, really. She can leave it hanging over Trump's presidency and even add to the articles as more of Trump's conduct becomes known. And Trump can continue to meltdown on Twitter. I think he sent something like 150 times in one day last week, obviously hard at work.

Wrong.  Pelosi can be forced to submit articles to the Senate by the Supreme Court...or withdraw them.

I don't know how it works in your neck of the woods, but here there is a right to due process and a speedy trial.  Given the gravity of the situation, this will be over quickly.

So, yet another Dem "absolute masterstroke" will turn out to be an absolute flop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
13 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Wrong.  Pelosi can be forced to submit articles to the Senate by the Supreme Court...or withdraw them.

I don't know how it works in your neck of the woods, but here there is a right to due process and a speedy trial.  Given the gravity of the situation, this will be over quickly.

So, yet another Dem "absolute masterstroke" will turn out to be an absolute flop.

Trump's taxes have been going through the court system for a year or two and those were expedited as well.  We also have all the first hand witnesses going through the courts to see if they have to testify or not and that has been months too.  I'm thinking you gravely overestimate the speed of our court system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
8 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Trump's taxes have been going through the court system for a year or two and those were expedited as well.  We also have all the first hand witnesses going through the courts to see if they have to testify or not and that has been months too.  I'm thinking you gravely overestimate the speed of our court system.

You are mistaken to place presidential impeachment on par with attempts to snoop through Trump's tax returns.

There will be swift action on this...bank on it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Gromdor
6 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

You are mistaken to place presidential impeachment on par with attempts to snoop through Trump's tax returns.

There will be swift action on this...bank on it.

Exactly.  The Trump tax returns have been going on for two years and is finally scheduled for Supreme Court in March of next year: https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/12/13/supreme-court-sets-trump-tax-return-cases-for-march-argument/?slreturn=20191119112206

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
5 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Exactly.  The Trump tax returns have been going on for two years and is finally scheduled for Supreme Court in March of next year: https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/12/13/supreme-court-sets-trump-tax-return-cases-for-march-argument/?slreturn=20191119112206

I guess you don't read so good...so I'm not sure if this will help.  Statement from attorney L. Lin Wood:

EMJgzjpXkAAcGyM.jpg

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
3 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

I guess you don't read so good...so I'm not sure if this will help.  Statement from attorney L. Lin Wood:

EMJgzjpXkAAcGyM.jpg

Nice letter.  Does nothing to disprove the reality of our courts speed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
1 minute ago, Gromdor said:

Nice letter.  Does nothing to disprove the reality of our courts speed.

Again, this has ZERO to do with historical speed of courts.  It is utterly unprecedented, and the duty of the Supreme Court to swiftly step in to resolve any deadlock between the Legislative and Executive branches is a fundamental underpinning of the Constitution...the primary purpose of the Supreme Court, in fact.

So don't conflate apples with oranges here...that would be unwise.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 12/13/2019 at 11:27 PM, Captain Risky said:

Hog wash. Bill Clinton went through the ringer because of a head job and Trump and the republicans are getting all self righteous with their criminal enterprise. Make no mistake the senate is protecting Trump. Mitch McConnell wants to dismiss the charges outright, giving Trump and the trumpets no chance to further implicate them with lies. A fair hearing and a secret ballot is the very least the Republicans should consider as due process. 

That "head job" wasn't one of the ELEVEN Felonies found by Ken Starr.  That's why his Impeachment in the House was a bipartisan effort to a much greater degree than this farce we're seeing today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
6 hours ago, hacktorp said:

Wrong.  Pelosi can be forced to submit articles to the Senate by the Supreme Court...or withdraw them.

I don't know how it works in your neck of the woods, but here there is a right to due process and a speedy trial.  Given the gravity of the situation, this will be over quickly.

So, yet another Dem "absolute masterstroke" will turn out to be an absolute flop.

The right to due process is so ignored by our courts that for minor offenses a criminal gets less time for pleading guilty than he does if found innocent = particularly the case in illegal border crossings.  Until we clean up the mess for the little guy, I see no reason to hurry for the big one.  At any rate, given our litigious society, this will probably be challenged in court.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
13 minutes ago, and then said:

That "head job" wasn't one of the ELEVEN Felonies found by Ken Starr.  That's why his Impeachment in the House was a bipartisan effort to a much greater degree than this farce we're seeing today.

How many of Trump's cronies have drawn prison sentences so far?  About 20, isn't it?  And that doesn't count indictments.  https://americanindependent.com/trump-associates-special-counsel-mueller-russia-probe-charges-paul-manafort-michael-cohen/

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
4 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

I see no reason to hurry for the big one.

I don't doubt that you see it that way.  The issue at stake here is the fabric of our Constitution and the survival of a viable Republic.  The Left don't give a damn about either of those things any longer judging by their actions.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

How many of Trump's cronies have drawn prison sentences so far?  About 20, isn't it?  And that doesn't count indictments.  https://americanindependent.com/trump-associates-special-counsel-mueller-russia-probe-charges-paul-manafort-michael-cohen/

Doug

Do tell.  Please list those indicted, convicted or plead out to a crime associated with Mueller's mandate to find Russian tampering?  That's correct...not ONE.  All that pathetic list shows is the viciousness of Andrew Weismann and his posse of Democrat thugs.  Remember that the rest of us have access to the news as well.  Cheering on a corrupt judicial process is disgusting and I hope it bites you square in the ass someday.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
4 hours ago, and then said:

Do tell.  Please list those indicted, convicted or plead out to a crime associated with Mueller's mandate to find Russian tampering?  That's correct...not ONE.  All that pathetic list shows is the viciousness of Andrew Weismann and his posse of Democrat thugs.  Remember that the rest of us have access to the news as well.  Cheering on a corrupt judicial process is disgusting and I hope it bites you square in the ass someday.

Twelve Russians indicted:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/rod-rosenstein-expected-to-announce-new-indictment-by-mueller/2018/07/13/bc565582-86a9-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html

Michael Cohen,

Paul Manafort,

Rick Gates (He only got 45 days to be served on weekends - why such a light sentence?  He has been flipped.)

Michael Flynn

George Popadopoulos

Charged, but not sentenced:

Alexander Van Der Zwaan

Richard Pinedo

Yevgeny Prigozhen

And "the Two Shreks"

Expect Rudi to join the flipped list within a few months

There are a bunch more, but I'm getting tired of typing.

Doug

Edited by Doug1029

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
4 hours ago, and then said:

I don't doubt that you see it that way.  The issue at stake here is the fabric of our Constitution and the survival of a viable Republic.  The Left don't give a damn about either of those things any longer judging by their actions.

Pelosi is holding up turning the Articles of Confederation over to the Senate.  The Rubs are refusing to call witnesses.  But if this is going to be a trial, we have to hear from witnesses.  There are already 47 Dem votes for witnesses; all they need are four Rubs and they will subpoena Trump's staff.  The Rubs can add a witness or two at this time.  The Senate is about to go home for Christmas break.  While they are gone, they will be talking to constituents.  Polls show the Dems running 86% in favor of a fair and impartial trial and 64% of Republicans.  Those Senators need those votes in November.  Pretty good chance to flip four or more of them.

Plan B:  Trump says he wants a trial.  All he has to do is call McConnell and say to open it up to his staff.

It must be a really evil person whose own staff can't think of anything good to say about him.

At any rate, the Dems may be in a stronger position than it appears.

Doug

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.