The official Impeachment Trial thread.

PMB

Mar 2018
394
220
US
Trump is a nasty vindictive a hole. I don't disagree with you. I'd also say he's an egotistical narcissist who loves to hear his own voice. That said, I may not like him as a person, but he IS doing a great job as our commander in chief.

I hired lots of people over the years and I don't have to like them all for them to be good at their job. That's the difference I feel exists between the parties...the GOP doesn't really like him but he is doing well and they see it. The DNC hates him and no matter what good he does, they won't give him the benefit of admitting any success because they might have to admit he is doing well.
The GOP is scared of him, his mouth and twitter. We have the AG sucking up to him. The maj. of republicans that suck up to him now, didn't want him to be Potus, you picked the worst of the bad. Democrats are not afraid of him, so they have nothing to fear.

He is doing a good job if you like pollution, private education, private prisons, no healthcare for food stamps for the poorer. He gave his buddies a big tax cut, and screw the working man, the tax loopholes are for the wealthy.

The top 10% hold 84% of stocks in this country.

The 401Ks are doing great right now, but that is not going to last, trump will bankrupt the USA like he did with his 6 bankruptcies, he robbed his buisnessess to make sure he lived high off the hog, and he plans to do it with the US along with his friends.

I wonder what the trump family is worth now, now as compared to when he became Potus. I bet a lot more.
 
Dec 2015
21,392
22,461
Arizona
So it begins:
The fearless president--the one who Senate Republicans unleashed starts to tell the truth:


Emboldened after his impeachment acquittal, President Donald Trump now openly admits to sending his attorney Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to find damaging information about his political opponents, even though he strongly denied it during the impeachment inquiry.
The reversal came Thursday in a podcast interview Trump did with journalist Geraldo Rivera, who asked, "Was it strange to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, your personal lawyer? Are you sorry you did that?" Trump responded, "No, not at all," and praised Giuliani's role as a "crime fighter."
"Here's my choice: I deal with the Comeys of the world, or I deal with Rudy," Trump said, referring to former FBI Director James Comey. Trump explained that he has "a very bad taste" of the US intelligence community, because of the Russia investigation, so he turned to Giuliani.
"So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy, and one of the things about Rudy, number one, he was the best prosecutor, you know, one of the best prosecutors, and the best mayor," Trump said. "But also, other presidents had them. FDR had a lawyer who was practically, you know, was totally involved with government. Eisenhower had a lawyer. They all had lawyers."
Trump had previously denied that he sent Giuliani to Ukraine. Asked in November if he directed Giuliani to "do anything" in Ukraine, Trump said, "No, I didn't direct him," but went on to call Giuliani a "great corruption fighter."
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en and PMB
Jul 2019
12,849
9,393
Georgia
So it begins:
The fearless president--the one who Senate Republicans unleashed starts to tell the truth:


Emboldened after his impeachment acquittal, President Donald Trump now openly admits to sending his attorney Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to find damaging information about his political opponents, even though he strongly denied it during the impeachment inquiry.
The reversal came Thursday in a podcast interview Trump did with journalist Geraldo Rivera, who asked, "Was it strange to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, your personal lawyer? Are you sorry you did that?" Trump responded, "No, not at all," and praised Giuliani's role as a "crime fighter."
"Here's my choice: I deal with the Comeys of the world, or I deal with Rudy," Trump said, referring to former FBI Director James Comey. Trump explained that he has "a very bad taste" of the US intelligence community, because of the Russia investigation, so he turned to Giuliani.
"So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy, and one of the things about Rudy, number one, he was the best prosecutor, you know, one of the best prosecutors, and the best mayor," Trump said. "But also, other presidents had them. FDR had a lawyer who was practically, you know, was totally involved with government. Eisenhower had a lawyer. They all had lawyers."
Trump had previously denied that he sent Giuliani to Ukraine. Asked in November if he directed Giuliani to "do anything" in Ukraine, Trump said, "No, I didn't direct him," but went on to call Giuliani a "great corruption fighter."
we're almost at this phase

 
  • Haha
Reactions: Clara007
Sep 2019
335
102
CA
So why didn't the senate (non trial) call the whistleblower?
I'm not sure what you mean. Not trying to be difficult, just honestly confused. They requested on several occasions to deposition the whistleblower but continued to be denied and forced to get answers from Schiff and others instead. The very small group who actually talked to the whistleblower couldn't even ask the questions they wanted because the whole thing was being stone walled. So I really don't understand what you mean. The whistleblower only was willing to field written questions and never agreed to be questioned directly which begs a lot of really glaring problems like, why? If it's a matter of anonymity, they can conduct a private Q&A session and keep their identity hidden...but they didn't want to do that. The whistleblower should be asked if this is a conflict of interest first and foremost because if it is, his/her entire testimony is inadmissible anyways. They should also ask if the whistleblower had any direct connection to the Ukraine dealings under biden and obama as that would also add to a conflict of interest as that needs to be investigated and was being investigated by several other sources including the British government and several media outlets. Honestly, the whole cloak and dagger feel of the "information" is suspect and warrants some actual evidence otherwise it's all here say and inadmissible.
 
Dec 2012
21,397
8,652
California
Our founding fathers never envisioned the disgusting partisanship that the Repubs have become today.
If this had been a court trial, the Repubs would have been ejected from the jury for the statements they made clearly demonstrating their disdain for the process and for the charges. They were bought and paid for to give Trump a pass before the House called its first witness.



Clinton was likewise impeached but his Senate vote failed.
Ergo, by the same idiotic logic you present, does that mean that the allegation he lied was "unsupportable"?

And there is NO support for allegations against Biden.
I'm not a fan of his, but you demonstrate your mindless abandon of facts with such absurd comments.



The same rules that exist in every courtroom across this nation.

A witness must be able to add information which helps determine the question of the accused's guilt / innocence.
If they can't do that, then they shouldn't be called.
As I recall, none of the supposed witnesses could provide a supportable crime being committed. They even admitted such. Opinion and hearsay are subject to ambiguity. A president is not removed on someone's opinion. Clearly, this attempt was build on a faulty house of cards. Clinton was charged with supportable High Crimes yet, the Senate voted to acquit. The logical question is why.
 
Dec 2012
21,397
8,652
California
only solution to that is to get someone as clean as Obama back in the game

R's were so desperate to find something, anything, to impeach him over but nah
Are you talking about the president who obstructed the investigation into Fast and Furious? That CLOWN!
 
Feb 2018
3,249
2,460
Oregon
So, the Trump legal defense team was lying? Why does that ring untrue on its face?
...because you're so brainwashed by people who cover the thousands of lies of Trump and ignore his crimes. THAT is why it "rings untrue" to you.