The Impeachment Thread

[Vol Main]

They're is documented evidence that an investigation would be opened as far back as March well before Uncle Joe declared he was running for president.

What were Biden's poll numbers against Trump at that time?

 

[volfanjustin]

They're is documented evidence that an investigation would be opened as far back as March well before Uncle Joe declared he was running for president.

In other words, nothing about an opponent or political rival. But about wanting to see how deep the Biden corruption actually was

 

[volfanjustin]

What were Biden's poll numbers against Trump at that time?

Who cares, he wasn’t a candidate

 

[evillawyer]

The part where it states the house shall have sole responsibility over impeachment.

And he's been impeached by the house. The house has no control over how he's tried. If who the House called during impeachment hearings constrained the Senate trial then, contrary to the express words of the Constitution, the Senate would not have sole power over the trial.

 

[Vol Main]

Who cares, he wasn’t a candidate

That question is just plain stupid. Do you really think that Trump did not care about poll numbers showing Biden leading him by double digits? Is that what you really think? Gah and duh. Ding, ding, ding!

 

[TN Ribs]

Because it's not important enough to hear the same made-up BS over & over again from a buffoon.

Holy crap, I must have missed Trump testifying today!

 

[volfanjustin]

That question is just plain stupid. Do you really think that Trump did not care about poll numbers showing Biden leading him by double digits? Is that what you really think? Gah and duh. Ding, ding, ding!

If Biden and his crack head little baby boy wasn’t corrupt there wouldn’t have been anything to worry about

 

[vols40]

What were Biden's poll numbers against Trump at that time?

You could cite the North or South Pole I don't care a political opponent can only be evidenced after said political opponent is officially in. If said opponent is not in then they are merely an ex vice president which is equal to a regular citizen.
The majority of people that were polled after the 1996 Olympic bombing fiasco thought Richard Jewel was guilty until he wasn't. Stop with the bs. And tell Uncle Joe to find Pop Corn cause it's about to get bad.

 

[vols40]

That question is just plain stupid. Do you really think that Trump did not care about poll numbers showing Biden leading him by double digits? Is that what you really think? Gah and duh. Ding, ding, ding!

Well stupid do you think President Trump cared that most polls just before the election had him down to Hillary.

 

[vols40]

And he's been impeached by the house. The house has no control over how he's tried. If who the House called during impeachment hearings constrained the Senate trial then, contrary to the express words of the Constitution, the Senate would not have sole power over the trial.

And you just made my point

 

[Franklin Pierce]

How absolutely boring it must be to sit and listen to the the Democrats scream the same tired Lies they have been screaming for three years, when Everyone knows what the eventual outcome will be.

 

[MontyPython]

They might have different info at other points in time. But if they were going to testify truthfully it's clear what the conclusion would be.

As to Mulvaney vs Bolton, one point. Even if Bolton was willing to come in, Trump could still assert privilege and forbid it. The privilege belongs to Trump, not Bolton.

There would be a court fight, which is why the GOP is resisting even issuance of the subpoena. Trump would have to explain what he's worried about coming out. That's a bad look for Trump, not Bolton.

I believe it's also possible Roberts could make a ruling on privilege in his oversight capacity on behalf of SCOTUS. Moreover, he could command appearance by witnesses and rule on each purported claim during testimony.

Also possible I'm pulling all of this out of my ass... but I think I read it.

 

[vols40]

They might have different info at other points in time. But if they were going to testify truthfully it's clear what the conclusion would be.

As to Mulvaney vs Bolton, one point. Even if Bolton was willing to come in, Trump could still assert privilege and forbid it. The privilege belongs to Trump, not Bolton.

There would be a court fight, which is why the GOP is resisting even issuance of the subpoena. Trump would have to explain what he's worried about coming out. That's a bad look for Trump, not Bolton.

You do realize that all presidents in the past have said something less than flattering about other leaders in a private setting that they would be best served by having said comments remain private.

 

[hog88]

I believe it's also possible Roberts could make a ruling on privilege in his oversight capacity on behalf of SCOTUS. Moreover, he could command appearance by witnesses and rule on each purported claim during testimony.

Also possible I'm pulling all of this out of my ass... but I think I read it.

Ummm, sorry but Roberts can't make a ruling unless given permission by a majority vote.

 

[volfanjustin]

How absolutely boring it must be to sit and listen to the the Bolsheviks scream the same tired Lies they have been screaming for three years, when Everyone knows what the eventual outcome will be.

I heard earlier that Marsha Blackburn was reading a book during today’s rant lol

 

[vols40]

I believe it's also possible Roberts could make a ruling on privilege in his oversight capacity on behalf of SCOTUS. Moreover, he could command appearance by witnesses and rule on each purported claim during testimony.

Also possible I'm pulling all of this out of my ass... but I think I read it.

Yes it's out of your backside. Roberts oversees the trial and rules that were set forth by the Senate

 

[Vol Main]

In other words, nothing about an opponent or political rival. But about wanting to see how deep the Biden corruption actually was

Wrong. Everyone, from the Ukrainian Prosecutor General to U.S. Embassy staff have stated that they had no evidence that young Biden did anything wrong, that there was nothing suggesting a need for an investigation. Ukraine's AG or PG stated that Hunter Biden had done nothing wrong. Joe Biden's conduct was consistent throughout with Administration policy, EU policy, and the bi-partisan Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. Senate.

 

[C-south]

Wrong. Everyone, from the Ukrainian Prosecutor General to U.S. Embassy staff have stated that they had no evidence that young Biden did anything wrong, that there was nothing suggesting a need for an investigation. Ukraine's AG or PG stated that Hunter Biden had done nothing wrong. Joe Biden's conduct was consistent throughout with Administration policy, EU policy, and the bi-partisan Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. Senate.

 

[volfanjustin]

Wrong. Everyone, from the Ukrainian Prosecutor General to U.S. Embassy staff have stated that they had no evidence that young Biden did anything wrong, that there was nothing suggesting a need for an investigation. Ukraine's AG or PG stated that Hunter Biden had done nothing wrong. Joe Biden's conduct was consistent throughout with Administration policy, EU policy, and the bi-partisan Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. Senate.

So everyone was on board with corruption and bribery? That’s your argument

 

[Septic]

You were running your pihole about shenanigans and I asked if the Republicans should vote no on witnesses in the bunker of the Senate?

Where did you ask that question?

Specifically.

 

[Vol Main]

Yes it's out of your backside. Roberts oversees the trail and rules that were set forth by the Senate

It is possible but doubtful. The Constitution clearly assigns the USSC Chief Justice to preside over the trial. But the Majority Leader ginned up Senate rules which reduce his role to parliamentarian. Robert could cite the Constitution to assert authority to hear evidence, clearly the purpose of a trial. But he probably won't.

 

[Orange defense]

When you start connecting dots this close all you can do is try to illegally remove him. If there's anything to Q and what they post, these people absolutely know by now they're screwed.





SMOKING GUN: Adam Schiff Directly Connected to $7.4 Billion Burisma Corruption Scandal… Details Developing | State Department Watch

Holy crap! And this dude is on the floor? They need to step in there with handcuffs and drag his but out of there, and throw him in jail.

 

[hog88]

It is possible but doubtful. The Constitution clearly assigns the USSC Chief Justice to preside over the trial. But the Majority Leader ginned up Senate rules which reduce his role to parliamentarian. Robert could cite the Constitution to assert authority to hear evidence, clearly the purpose of a trial. But he probably won't.

No he couldn't. Where do you people get this ****?

 

[vols40]

They presented a timeline with poll numbers, date Biden entered the race, Trump's behavior toward Ukraine before and after. Why don't you watch the trial instead of commenting on it out of total ignorance?

The only reason you would pull this crap is if you think your bombshell case is not so bombshell. To assert that some obscure poll is evidence of a sinister plot to investigate a political opponent is a sign they are running on empty.

 

[vols40]

Where did you ask that question?

Specifically.

Post # 36201