Should the Senate Allow Witnesses Be Called During the Impeachment Trial?

Should the Senate Call Witnesses to Testify During the Impeachment Trial?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 31 51.7%

  • No.

    Votes: 29 48.3%
  • Total voters
    60
#126
#126
And when and
Mick said:
Sorry sport, the House of Representatives really did impeach Trump. When you wake up from your dream, Trump will still be impeached.
Click to expand...

When and if your IQ ever creeps above 45 you will understand he will still be our president. 9 more years
 
#127
#127
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#128
#128
Mick said:
Sorry sport, the House of Representatives really did impeach Trump. When you wake up from your dream, Trump will still be impeached.
Click to expand...

And your nightmare will continue because Trump will remain President and will be re-elected in November.
 
#129
#129
vols40 said:
Will you libs make up your mind? You are now saying the whistle blower is not relevant to this case?
Click to expand...
I've never wavered as to whom I believe are relevant. You're confusing me with someone else. Not surprising. Brain power and reasoning skills aren't your strong suit
 
#130
#130
USAFgolferVol said:
I've never wavered as to whom I believe are relevant. You're confusing me with someone else. Not surprising. Brain power and reasoning skills aren't your strong suit
Click to expand...

I will take your words under advisement and tell you to p1$$ off. Your drivel is unnecessary. But if it makes you feel wanted keep talking USAFSnoflaker
 
#131
#131
USAFgolferVol said:
I've never wavered as to whom I believe are relevant. You're confusing me with someone else. Not surprising. Brain power and reasoning skills aren't your strong suit
Click to expand...

Ohh and Mitch McConnell doesn't care who you think should be called either. You lost the election and don't get to make the rules. Buh bye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#135
#135
hog88 said:
I say yes but OP you have your facts wrong. No witnesses testified at the Clinton impeachment trial, 3 provided depositions that were introduced to the Senate.
Click to expand...

Much of the evidence against Clinton had already been presented in court proceedings, so it was already legally established in the public record. The House chose to proceed against Trump without waiting years for such evidence to be gotten through the kind of long court proceedings President Clinton went through for evidence against his denial of sex. The Trump impeachment involves far more important issues, many of which have not been litigated.
 
#137
#137
Vol Main said:
Much of the evidence against Clinton had already been presented in court proceedings, so it was already legally established in the public record. The House chose to proceed against Trump without waiting years for such evidence to be gotten through the kind of long court proceedings President Clinton went through for evidence against his denial of sex. The Trump impeachment involves far more important issues, many of which have not been litigated.
Click to expand...
Do they?
 
#139
#139
Vol Main said:
Much of the evidence against Clinton had already been presented in court proceedings, so it was already legally established in the public record. The House chose to proceed against Trump without waiting years for such evidence to be gotten through the kind of long court proceedings President Clinton went through for evidence against his denial of sex. The Trump impeachment involves far more important issues, many of which have not been litigated.
Click to expand...
Lying under oath is more legitimate than this current hoax
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
#142
#142
volfanjustin said:
First and easiest is this is the first impeachment where there isn’t a crime
Click to expand...

I said basis in fact, not false fabrication. Withholding Congressionally mandated military aid is illegal. Withholding that aid to induce a foreign government to announce legal investigations against his expected political opponent in the next general election violates the laws of both countries. It is bribery and extortion, which also violates campaign finance laws against accepting help from foreign governments or agents. It is a blatant abuse of power which harmed our national security by weakening an ally at war and attempting to corrupt that nation's legal system, for the purpose of helping Trump's re-election campaign. There are long lists of felonies and boatloads of evidence to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
#143
#143
Vol Main said:
I said basis in fact, not false fabrication. Withholding Congressionally mandated military aid is illegal. Withholding that aid to induce a foreign government to announce legal investigations against his expected political opponent in the next general election violates the laws of both countries. It is bribery and extortion, which also violates campaign finance laws against accepting help from foreign governments or agents. It is a blatant abuse of power which harmed our national security by weakening an ally at war and attempting to corrupt that nation's legal system, for the purpose of helping Trump's re-election campaign. There are long lists of felonies and boatloads of evidence to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
Well then why in the hell isnt all that in the articles of impeachment? Nothing they impeached him over is a crime
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
#144
#144
volfanjustin said:
Well then why in the hell isnt all that in the articles of impeachment? Nothing they impeached him over is a crime
Click to expand...

It is in the First Article of Impeachment. Why don't you Google that(house articles of impeachment Trump) and select a link to the Congressional Record, do you know that you are reading the authentic document, and take a few minutes to read it over? The Second Article is for Obstruction of Justice, which is also a serious crime.
 
Last edited:
#149
#149
volfanjustin said:
No crimes were cited

When will your side start the next round of hoax hearings?
Click to expand...

The violations are presented by the House representatives in the Senate trial, which you will not be able to observe because Republicans barred camera coverage. But you post as if you do not care and do not want to know the answers to your own questions. Enough evidence was presented in the House to disprove your silly talk about a hoax. Numerous former federal prosecutors have stated that anyone but the President would have been prosecuted and convicted in criminal court from evidence already in the public record.

My side is the law, the facts of the case, and the U.S. Constitution, which I've sworn an oath to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. What is your side, Russia?
 
Last edited:
#150
#150
Vol Main said:
The violations are presented by the House representatives in the Senate trial, which you will not be able to observe because Republicans barred camera coverage. But you post as if you do not care and do not want to know the answers to your own questions. Enough evidence was presented in the House to disprove your silly talk about a hoax. Numerous former federal prosecutors have stated that anyone but the President would have been prosecuted and convicted in criminal court from evidence already in the public record.

My side is the law, the facts of the case, and the U.S. Constitution, which I've sworn an oath to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. What is your side, Russia?
Click to expand...
There was far more tangible evidence against Hillary. What happened with that? "No one is above the law" my left foot.

Biden was open for scrutiny by his own actions but let's not talk about that, shall we?

While we are talking, let's talk about Russia, who the hell did the DNC get "dirt" about Trump from? Where's your outrage about that Russian interference in an election?

We all have our own selective view regarding these things. You see it your way because . . .? I see it my way mostly because of the very fact that the Democrats having yelled "Impeach" from day one of the election and have tried, on numerous occasions with the weakest of reasons, to impeach the President. This is the only time it went anywhere and it got there through a very political, manipulated, rushed process, with not one vote garnered from the opposing party for the first time in history. That, right there, should tell you all you need to know about the strength of the case against Trump.

The Democrats performance during this administration, highlighted by this impeachment and the Senate hearing regarding Kavanaugh, tells me all I need to know about their motives and honesty. More of this same crap is going to be very evident in the coming days.

I will never ever, ever consider voting for a Democrat again and I was a registered Democrat for years. Their conduct has been far more shameful than Trump's and several of them should be impeached, if this is the present standard for impeachment.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top