As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Impeachment] Acquitted without trial | Article I 52-48 ⁂ Article II 53-47

monikermoniker Registered User regular
edited February 2020 in Debate and/or Discourse
3g7bjycxe6a6.jpg



The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

—Article I, Section II, Clause V
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

—Article I, Section III, Clauses VI and VII



And so it begins

https://youtu.be/k_Q5sFbZhNc

Transcript:
Good afternoon. Last Tuesday, we observed the anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution on September 17.

Sadly, on that day, the Intelligence Community Inspector General formally notified the Congress that the Administration was forbidding him from turning over a whistleblower complaint. On Constitution Day. This is a violation of law.

Shortly thereafter, press reports began to break of a phone call by the President of the United States calling upon a foreign power to intervene in his election. This is a breach of his constitutional responsibilities.

The facts are these: the Intelligence Community Inspector General, who was appointed by President Trump, determined that the complaint is both of ‘urgent concern and credible,’ and its disclosure, he went on to say, that it ‘relates to one of the most significant and important of the Director of National Intelligence’s responsibilities to the American people.’

On Thursday, the Inspector General testified before the House Intelligence Committee, stating that the Acting Director of National Intelligence blocked him from disclosing the whistleblower complaint. This is a violation of the law.

The law is unequivocal. The DNI, it says, the Director of National Intelligence ‘shall’ provide Congress the full whistleblower complaint.

For more than 25 years, I have served on the Intelligence Committee – as a Member, as the Ranking Member, as part of the Gang of 4 even before I was in the Leadership.

I was there when we created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That did not exist before 2004.

I was there ever earlier in 90’s when we wrote the whistleblower laws and continue to write them, to improve them to ensure the security of our intelligence and the safety of our whistleblowers.

I know what their purpose was, and we proceeded with balance and caution as we wrote the laws. I can say with authority, that the Trump Administration’s actions undermine both: our national security and our intelligence and our protections of whistleblowers – more than both.

This Thursday, the Acting DNI will appear before the House Intelligence Committee.

At that time, he must turn over the whistleblower’s full complaint to the Committee. He will have to choose whether to break the law or honor his responsibility to the Constitution.

On the final day of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, when our Constitution was adopted, Americans gathered on the steps of Independence Hall to await the news of the government our Founders had crafted.

They asked Benjamin Franklin, ‘What do we have: a republic or a monarchy?’ Franklin replied: ‘A republic, if you can keep it.’

Our responsibility is to keep it.

Our republic endures because of the wisdom of our Constitution, enshrined in three co-equal branches of government, serving as checks and balances on each other.

The actions taken to date by the President have seriously violated the Constitution – especially when the President says, ‘Article II says, I can do whatever I want.’

For the past several months, we have been investigating in our Committees and litigating in the courts, so the House can gather ‘all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full Article I powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity — approval of articles of impeachment.’

And this week, the President has admitted to asking the President of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. The action of – the actions of the Trump Presidency revealed the dishonorable fact of the President’s betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.

Therefore, today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. I am directing our six Committees to proceed with their investigations under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry.

The President must be held accountable. No one is above the law.

Getting back to our Founders – in the darkest days of the American Revolution, Thomas Paine wrote: ‘The times have found us.’ The times found them to fight for and establish our democracy. The times have found us today, not to place ourselves in the same category of greatness as our Founders, but to place us in the urgency of protecting and defending our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. In the words of Ben Franklin, to keep our Republic.

I thank our Chairmen – Chairman Nadler, Chairman Schiff. Chairman Nadler of Judiciary. Chairman Schiff of Intelligence. Chairman Engel of Foreign Affairs. Chairman Cummings of Oversight and Chairman Cummings I have been in touch with constantly. He is a master of so much but including, Inspectors General and whistleblowers. Congressman Richie Neal of the Ways and Means Committee. Congresswomen Maxine Waters of the Financial Services Committee.

And I commend all of our Members, our colleagues for their thoughtful, thoughtful approach to all of this – for their careful statements.

God bless them and God Bless America. Thank you all

Source: https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/92419-0

Full Video:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?464684-1/speaker-pelosi-announces-formal-impeachment-inquiry-president-trump


Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III

Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election
[PDF]


Washington Post

Full Timeline of the President's interactions with Ukraine


House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Whistleblower Report

Fact Sheet released by Speaker Pelosi (D CA-12)

https://www.speaker.gov/sites/speaker.house.gov/files/Trump Shakedown and Coverup.pdf



Surfpossum wrote: »
I just spent far too much time writing up a facebook post to try and provide a sort of high-level, citation-filled rundown of The Ukraine Call since I haven't seen anything laying it out in a simple manner so I figured I'd post it here, too.
The Misuse of Presidential Power to Solicit Foreign Interference in Our Election

“In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President's main domestic political rivals.” 1


The money: the US was planning to send several hundred million dollars to Ukraine to help them purchase military hardware.

This aid package (announced in June of 2019) was contingent on Ukraine’s efforts to combat corruption, and the Pentagon sent a letter to Congress in which they "certified that the Government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability." 2


The setup: in June, the White House suddenly blocked the aid package without explanation.

In July, “Administration officials were instructed to tell lawmakers that the delays were part of an “interagency process” but to give them no additional information — a pattern that continued for nearly two months, until the White House released the funds on the night of Sept. 11.” 3


The shakedown: this was followed by a phone call in July between Trump and the Ukrainian President in which the Ukrainian President brought up wanting to purchase military hardware and Trump’s response was to ask for some “favors.”

From the official “reconstructed transcript” created from notes on the phone call, we can see that Trump’s response to the Ukrainian President’s comment about the financial aid they are expecting to receive is to request some investigations:

“President Zelenskyy: We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.
The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it.
[here the Ukrainian President, Zelenskyy, assures Trump that they are “great friends” and that “all the investigations will be done openly and candidly”]
The President: The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.” 4


The crime: the use of the US government’s money to pressure a foreign government into manufacturing an investigation to hurt a political rival in the upcoming election is an abuse of power.

Even setting aside the use of the US government’s resources to extort assistance, “It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election.” 5


The cover-up: realizing the seriousness of what just happened, the White House attempted to hide the transcript of the phone call on a server used for classified national security info.

“White House lawyers directed White House officials to remove the electronic transcript of the Zelensky call from the computer system where such transcripts normally are stored. That transcript then was loaded into a “separate electronic system” that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature. “One White House official described this act as an abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.”” 6

The whistleblower elaborates on what that server is usually for: “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with, the transcript of the President's call with President Zelenskyy was placed into a computer system managed directly by the National Security Council (NSC) Directorate for Intelligence Programs. This is a standalone computer system reserved for codeword-level intelligence information, such as covert action.” 1


The conclusion:

“I am deeply concerned that the actions described below constitute “a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, or violation of law or Executive Order” [...] I am also concerned that these actions pose risks to U.S. national security and undermine the U.S. Government's efforts to deter and counter foreign interference in U.S. elections.” 1

Sources:
  1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-whistleblower-complaint-regarding-president-trump-s-communications-with-ukrainian-president-volodymyr-zelensky/4b9e0ca5-3824-467f-b1a3-77f2d4ee16aa/?fbclid=IwAR0oj1nxRlu_PNQmeakdyEb-WwWgrLKXWPtyBUCTPDGcYab1f7WYdjRwocc
  2. https://www.npr.org/2019/09/25/764453663/pentagon-letter-undercuts-trump-assertion-on-delaying-aid-to-ukraine-over-corrup?fbclid=IwAR2MxuFi7LICAqM9rj7G6RaE2l_JFZ_dF3HiWoTT1W4l1j05CF3ZILIKWA4
  3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1QyVOTWyGYcMqN_ojzqUsGXPZeVUJ-dYefgbE8GS2hjdzyLK-iAy78ToY
  4. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2tLXsD_2tSOnqMvNpXvIoFevBjuqCCGnQjO4r224923u54fwO9V_RyeCA
  5. https://mobile.twitter.com/EllenLWeintraub/status/1139309394968096768?fbclid=IwAR3Q1xwX-qk6TbgJan_dj4d15B_RmHlzh2YEPxEpKQLfXHfPjWvU5hLvwpk
  6. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/biggest-bombshells-in-trump-whistleblower-complaint-cover-up.html?fbclid=IwAR1Axs0UcMTe9Ul9yeEcPddGY1DoOW-gSb5afE_sns9L8--QxWs1qq8oRxM

Suggestions and/or corrections are welcome



*************
The OP will be continually updated as information becomes available, and I have time to add to it.

moniker on
«13456738

Posts

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Articles of Impeachment:
    https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/documents/Articles of Impeachment.pdf

    House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Report:
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/03/782759563/read-impeachment-inquiry-report-by-house-intelligence-committee

    House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Summary and Highlights:
    https://intelligence.house.gov/defendourdemocracy/

    Judiciary Committee Report:
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/16/788383947/read-the-house-judiciary-committees-trump-impeachment-report

    GAO Decision B-331564 | Withholding of Ukraine Security Assistance:
    https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/B-331564
    Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.


    Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III - Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election:
    https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

    *************

    Relevant Statutes:

    2 U.S. Code § 192. Refusal of witness to testify or produce papers - This federal Subpoena law says that people summoned by congress must appear. Trump has not been subpoenaed, but has commanded his staff to ignore lawful subpoenas

    2 U.S. Code § 684. Proposed deferrals of budget authority - This federal Impoundment law says that the President can only defer Congressional spending for special contingencies or cost savings, and that he must inform Congress before he does so

    15 U.S. Code § 78dd–2. Prohibited foreign trade practices by domestic concerns - This federal Corruption law makes it unlawful for a US citizen to give anything of value to a foreign official for the purpose of securing improper advantage.

    18 U.S. Code § 201. Bribery of public officials and witnesses - This federal Bribery law makes it unlawful for a public official to seek anything of value personally in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act

    18 U.S. Code § 610. Coercion of political activity - This federal Coercion law makes it unlawful to command a federal government employee to engage in political activity

    18 U.S. Code § 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television - This federal Fraud law makes it unlawful for a person to deprive another of honest services. (corrupt public officials are convicted of defrauding the public under this law)

    52 U.S. Code § 30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals - This federal Campaign Finance law makes it unlawful for a person to solicit anything of value from a foreign national in connection with an election

    https://www.justsecurity.org/67738/federal-criminal-offenses-and-the-impeachment-of-donald-j-trump/

    moniker on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    House Floor Managers:
    Adam Schiff D-CA
    Jerry Nadler D-NY
    Hakeem Jeffries D-NY
    Zoe Lofgren D-CA
    Val Demmings D-FL
    Jason Crow D-CO
    Sylvia Garcia D-TX

    *************

    President's Legal Defense:
    Alan Dershowitz
    Kenneth Starr
    Pat Cipollone
    Jay Sekulow
    Robert Ray
    Pam Bondi
    Jane Raskin
    Patrick Philbin
    Mike Purpura

    moniker on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    On whether to consider new evidence or calling witnesses: 51-49 against
    49 Ayes wrote:
    Tammy Bladwin D-WI
    Michael Bennett D-CO
    Richard Blumenthal D-CT
    Cory Booker D-NJ
    Sherrod Brown D-OH
    Maria Cantwell D-WA
    Benjamin Cardin D-MD
    Thomas Carper D-DE
    Bob Casey D-PA
    Chris Coons D-DE
    Catherine Cortez Masto D-NV
    Tammy Duckworth D-IL
    Dick Durbin D-IL
    Dianne Feinstein D-CA
    Kirsten Gillibrand D-NY
    Kamala Harris D-CA
    Maggie Hassan D-NH
    Martin Heinrich D-NM
    Maxie Hirono D-HI
    Doug Jones D-AL
    Tim Kaine D-VA
    Amy Klobuchar D-MN
    Patrick Leahy D-VT
    Joe Manchin D-WV
    Edward Markey D-MA
    Robert Menendez D-NJ
    Jeff Merkley D-OR
    Christopher Murphy D-CT
    Patty Murray D-WA
    Gary Peters D-MI
    Jack Reed D-RI
    Jacky Rosen D-NV
    Brian Schatz D-HI
    Chuck Schumer D-NY
    Jeanne Shaheen D-NH
    Kyrsten Sinema D-AZ
    Tina Smith D-MN
    Debbie Stabenow D-MI
    Jon Tester D-MT
    Tom Udall D-NM
    Chris Van Hollen D-MD
    Mark Warner D-VA
    Elizabeth Warren D-MA
    Sheldon Whitehouse D-RI
    Ron Wyden D-OR
    Angus King I-ME
    Bernie Sanders I-VT
    Susan Collins R-ME
    Mitt Romney R-UT
    51 Nays wrote:
    Lamar Alexander R-TN
    John Barasso R-WY
    Marsha Blackburn R-TN
    Roy Blunt R-MO
    John Boozman R-AR
    Mike Braun R-IN
    Richard Burr R-NC
    Shelley Moore Capitol R-WV
    Bill Cassidy R-LA
    John Cornyn R-TX
    Tom Cotton R-AR
    Kevin Cramer R-ND
    Michael Crapo R-ID
    Ted Cruz R-TX
    Steve Daines R-MT
    Michael Enzi R-WY
    Joni Ernst R-IA
    Deb Fischer R-NE
    Cory Gardner R-CO
    Lindsey Graham R-SC
    Chuck Grassley R-IA
    Josh Hawley R-MO
    John Hoeven R-ND
    Cindy Hyde-Smith R-MS
    James Inhofe R-OK
    Ron Johnson R-WI
    John Kennedy R-LA
    James Lankford R-OK
    Mike Lee R-UT
    Kelly Loeffler R-GA
    Mitch McConnell R-KY
    Martha McSally R-AZ
    Jerry Moran R-KS
    Lisa Murkowski R-AK
    Rand Paul R-KY
    David Purdue R-GA
    Rob Portman R-OH
    Jim Risch R-ID
    Pat Roberts R-KS
    Michael Rounds R-SD
    Marco Rubio R-FL
    Ben Sasse R-NE
    Rick Scott R-FL
    Tim Scott R-SC
    Richard Shelby R-AL
    Dan Sullivan R-AK
    John Thune R-SD
    Thom Tillis R-NC
    Pat Toomey R-PA
    Roger Wicker R-MS
    Todd Young R-IN


    The world's greatest deliberative body.

    moniker on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    [Reserved]

    moniker on
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    You have a lot more restraint than I do, if I was in charge of the thread title it would have been Impeachment: I Am the Witness, Goo Goo G’Joob

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    You have a lot more restraint than I do, if I was in charge of the thread title it would have been Impeachment: I Am the Witness, Goo Goo G’Joob

    I prefer to treat this with the gravity that it deserves, and that Congressional Republicans aren't interested in. This has only happened twice before in our nation's history.

  • I ZimbraI Zimbra Worst song, played on ugliest guitar Registered User regular
    So, yeah, Trump was of course lying about Bolton in his tweet. Via the Law Dog:



  • Stabbity StyleStabbity Style He/Him | Warning: Mothership Reporting Kennewick, WARegistered User regular
    I Zimbra wrote: »
    So, yeah, Trump was of course lying about Bolton in his tweet. Via the Law Dog:



    Lying liar lies.

    Stabbity_Style.png
  • TetraNitroCubaneTetraNitroCubane The Djinnerator At the bottom of a bottleRegistered User regular
    Lindsey Graham is on the verge of an epiphany.



    And exactly why is he wearing that ankle bracelet right now, Lindsey? Think really hard about this one...

    Lindsey Graham is a US senator, for some god awful reason.

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    You have a lot more restraint than I do, if I was in charge of the thread title it would have been Impeachment: I Am the Witness, Goo Goo G’Joob

    I prefer to treat this with the gravity that it deserves, and that Congressional Republicans aren't interested in. This has only happened twice before in our nation's history.

    Sometimes you laugh so that you don’t weep.

  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Lindsey Graham is on the verge of an epiphany.



    And exactly why is he wearing that ankle bracelet right now, Lindsey? Think really hard about this one...

    Lindsey Graham is a US senator, for some god awful reason.

    Remember all those times prosecutors wanted someone to testify or be interrogated but that was impossible because the person was arrested and held in another location or under house arrest and couldn’t come to the police station or courthouse? Oh wait that’s not how that works at all?

    Jealous Deva on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Lindsey...jesus

    You can get a waiver from house arrest to testify elsewhere.

    You can videotape or video conference a deposition or testimony.

    You can't be thuis bloody dull

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Lindsey...jesus

    You can get a waiver from house arrest to testify elsewhere.

    You can videotape or video conference a deposition or testimony.

    You can't be thuis bloody dull

    He’s not, he’s hoping we are

    Depending on certain factors, we might just be

    joshofalltrades on
  • ChanusChanus Harbinger of the Spicy Rooster Apocalypse The Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User regular
    i tend to push back against the idea people i disagree with are just idiots but i'm not entirely convinced lindsey graham isn't just an idiot

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
  • PellaeonPellaeon Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    i tend to push back against the idea people i disagree with are just idiots but i'm not entirely convinced lindsey graham isn't just an idiot

    He's not, it's just really hard to try and constantly excuse the inexcusable.

  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    Lindsey Graham is just shameless. He wants to keep his job and that doesn't happen if he loses the primary. So he licks Trump's boots and tells everyone how good they taste.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    i tend to push back against the idea people i disagree with are just idiots but i'm not entirely convinced lindsey graham isn't just an idiot

    He's not, but he's pretending to be obtuse so he can delay and obstruct as much as possible.

  • Duke 2.0Duke 2.0 Time Trash Cat Registered User regular
    Lindsey Graham is to politics as pilot fish to the sea. Before the big shark to him was McCain, and he tried his best to approximate things like morals and conviction. There’s a new shark in town and he’s following that Trump shark until a new one presents themself. Emulates the larger creature to the best of his abilities.

    As such he’s gonna contribute to the same self-sabotage as the president has with their best legal strategy: Trump did something wrong, but it’s not impeachment worthy. Doesn’t work as well when he is insisting he did nothing wrong.

    VRXwDW7.png
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Senator Thune asked a question of Trumps Defense that was literally "Will you please rebut the argument that Adam Schiff just made."

    You could hear people in the chamber laugh at the absurdity of this "question".

  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    So in further stupid detail, apparently the argument that Graham was making was that Parnas couldn’t attend the trial because the ankle bracelet (which has a gps and transmitter to notify authorities of parnas’ location) is technically an electronic recording device and those are not permitted in the Senate during an impeachment proceeding.

    Not making this up.

  • DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    maybe they can replace it with an ankle-mounted ipad for his appearance

  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    I think it's less the travel and more he's claiming that since no electronic devices are allowed inside that the ankle bracelet counts.

    Nevermind the Republicans with fucking iPads on the floor

  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Senator Markey has asked the House Managers if they tried to seek Bolton's testimony, after Cipollone just attacked the House for not asking for Bolton's testimony and trying hard enough to get it.

    Schiff answered of course they did, but he refused and his deputy refused, and threatened to sue, and they knew they would be in court for years.

    Then he went on to show documents from their court case in trying to get McGahn to testify bringing it up that the very same people that are telling Senators that the House should have gone to court are also telling the courts "They don't have the authority to go to court."

  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    I Zimbra wrote: »
    So, yeah, Trump was of course lying about Bolton in his tweet. Via the Law Dog:



    There it is.

    There's no plan, there's no race to be run
    The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I think it's less the travel and more he's claiming that since no electronic devices are allowed inside that the ankle bracelet counts.

    Nevermind the Republicans with fucking iPads on the floor

    Apparently the only real rule of the current trial is catch 22.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The push to not have witnesses is being led by McSally, Gardner, and Tillis apparently. Because they think covering it up without a hearing is going to look better for them than hearing the evidence and then voting to acquit.

    Think about what that means about the evidence they expect to hear from witnesses.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • sanstodosanstodo Registered User regular
    Remember to call your senators. This is the time for public pressure and even though it might not be enough, we have to try everything at this critical moment.

  • bwaniebwanie Posting into the void Registered User regular
    "After carefully ignoring all evidence, we the senate"

    Yh6tI4T.jpg
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Gardener says there's no need to hear from witnesses.

  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Kennedy, Blackburn, Cornyn question for both sides. Which means each side just gets 2.5 minutes.

    "Why did the house not challenge the President's claims of executive privilege or immunity during the house preceding?"

    Oh for god's sake. He didn't make any claims!

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I think it's less the travel and more he's claiming that since no electronic devices are allowed inside that the ankle bracelet counts.

    Nevermind the Republicans with fucking iPads on the floor

    Nevermind the video camera's recording the entire thing for C-Span

    wbBv3fj.png
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Gardener says there's no need to hear from witnesses.

    Welp, hope he likes breakfast food, cause he’s toast.

  • RhahRhah Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Senator Thune asked a question of Trumps Defense that was literally "Will you please rebut the argument that Adam Schiff just made."

    You could hear people in the chamber laugh at the absurdity of this "question".

    Wait I thought these questions all had to be submitted ahead of time, not on the fly?

  • KruiteKruite Registered User regular
    It's staggering how incompetent these senators appear to be. I've heard more intriguing questions from a group of 5th graders.

  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    The questions are bad because they don't actually want to hear answers, just get soundbites and run out the time to the vote everyone already knows the result of.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Kruite wrote: »
    It's staggering how incompetent these senators appear to be. I've heard more intriguing questions from a group of 5th graders.

    5th graders are interested in learning something. Republican Senators aren't gling to ask a question they don't already know the answer to, and consider to be politically correct.

  • GundiGundi Serious Bismuth Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    The push to not have witnesses is being led by McSally, Gardner, and Tillis apparently. Because they think covering it up without a hearing is going to look better for them than hearing the evidence and then voting to acquit.

    Think about what that means about the evidence they expect to hear from witnesses.

    Thom Tillis is a guy who back in his state legislature days held an important vote unannounced at midnight when most of the legislature was out and there were no press, so this tracks. Gardner also sounds infamously familiar but I can't place where.

    Gundi on
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    The push to not have witnesses is being led by McSally, Gardner, and Tillis apparently. Because they think covering it up without a hearing is going to look better for them than hearing the evidence and then voting to acquit.

    Think about what that means about the evidence they expect to hear from witnesses.

    You’re right. Even if the witnesses don’t have new info, it’s going to create more spectacle and take longer, making it more likely to factor into voters’ minds.

    I think this is the least bad play for these senators, but I don’t really know anything

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    The push to not have witnesses is being led by McSally, Gardner, and Tillis apparently. Because they think covering it up without a hearing is going to look better for them than hearing the evidence and then voting to acquit.

    Think about what that means about the evidence they expect to hear from witnesses.

    You’re right. Even if the witnesses don’t have new info, it’s going to create more spectacle and take longer, making it more likely to factor into voters’ minds.

    I think this is the least bad play for these senators, but I don’t really know anything

    It's the least bad play for Republicans, but the absolute worst play for United States Senators.

This discussion has been closed.