Nancy Pelosi Will Hold Off Sending The Articles of Impeachment To The Senate

9500 is surely "triggered" into insult/scatology as his point of debate.

Go back and play with eric swalwell and plan to nuke middle America.

9500 is surely "triggered" into insult/scatology as his point of debate.

Go back and play with eric swalwell and plan to nuke middle America. Originally Posted by oeb11

Made you look, you little little girl.

Made you look, ... Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Fools are customarily entertaining to watch (for awhile) ....

.... you're no exception!

I think you're referring to the difference between Independent Counsel and Special Counsel.
Originally Posted by lustylad

No, I was exactly making the point: There is a distinction between "Counsel" and "Prosecutor" .... and let's just say I heard Ken Starr discussing the often confusion over the authority of the two not too long ago. It has to do with their appointed duties and authorities.

The practical (and due process) reasons have to do with one person gathering the evidence surrounding a matter for which they have a duty to obtain "all" the FACTS/EVIDENCE that is "inculpatory" AND "exculpatory" then turn it over to THE PROSECUTOR to review and make prosecutorial decisions as to what offense, if any, arises from the facts mustered by the special counsel who managed the investigation.

By having a bifurcated process it reduces the risks of a "focused investigation" (sound familiar) that ignores exculpatory facts and evidence and seeks to preserve only those facts and evidence that supports the investigators preconceived notions as to what happened and who was responsible for the activity sought to be investigated.

There is an ethical reason to keep the two separated: An investigating prosecutor can actually conflict themselves out of the case by becoming a witness when they discovered FACTS and EVIDENCE the existence and source of which ONLY came to the attention of the PROSECUTOR during the investigation so the PROSECUTOR is the only witness who can testify as to the knowledge and source of the evidence/facts.

You see the latter situation frequently in government cases ... not the creation of an ethical conflict, but the risk of one. So a "special prosecutor" is appointed.

BTW: There is no "independent" counsel or "independent prosecutor" associated with the U.S. Department of Justice based upon the DOJ prosecutorial guidelines that are applicable to U.S. Attorneys, who are prohibited from making "prosecutorial decisions" without the review and approval of the AG. Can you say "Loretta Lynch"?

Thank you 9500- I read, U look!

Fools are customarily entertaining to watch (for awhile) ....

.... you're no exception! Originally Posted by LexusLover

No counter argument to my statement? No answer to my critique?



https://www.nosweatshakespeare.com/b...speares-fools/

The convention in Elizabethan drama is that the fool is the most insightful and intelligent man in the play. He is not to be confused with a clown: in Shakespeare’s time ‘clown’ was a simple rural man – a yokel.

Thank you 9500- I read, U look! Originally Posted by oeb11

Why don't you try to answer my questions? Can you rebuke them with serious substance? Instead of the miniscule amateurisms.

Look in a mirror- 9500!
Pelosi is playing a drama game in not forwarding Articles of Impeachment sure to be deeated in the Senate .

Trying to strong-arm McConnell from her position of weakness is laughable.

She will scream "unfair" at any rules and procedures adopted by the Senate, and then claim the deliberations and verdict of not guilty are tainted by unfairness.

She would only be satisfied with a trial run exactly asn Schiff and nadler ran their biased lack of due process clown show hearings.



So - Let nancy forward her ideas for "fair rules and procedures" to Sen McConnell - and let's see them publsihed for the public to view.

Anyone wanna bet that she refuses to do so, rather than submit her rules and procedures???? I would bet on refusal at 50-1.



How about a cogent and constructive post from 9500- rather than bandwidth wasting memes of old French fashion designers and revolutionaries. Those really do make fine "source experts" for the DPST cause of lies, deception, and racism.

lol

Look in a mirror- 9500!
Pelosi is playing a drama game in not forwarding Articles of Impeachment sure to be deeated in the Senate .

Trying to strong-arm McConnell from her position of weakness is laughable.

She's working with Schumer from a power position. By holding the impeachment, she's doing what she can to get McConnell to be fair by calling witnesses the Executive put a gag order on. The president isn't laughing.

She will scream "unfair" at any rules and procedures adopted by the Senate, and then claim the deliberations and verdict of not guilty are tainted by unfairness.

Any, rules? Four witnesses wanted. Four fair Senators needed. If they get that, no "screaming."

She would only be satisfied with a trial run exactly asn Schiff and nadler ran their biased lack of due process clown show hearings.

Boo hoo.

So - Let nancy forward her ideas for "fair rules and procedures" to Sen McConnell - and let's see them publsihed for the public to view.

Do those rules and procedures need to be made any clearer to you?

Anyone wanna bet that she refuses to do so, rather than submit her rules and procedures???? I would bet on refusal at 50-1.

What exactly is your bet? She won't submit the articles until she gets what she wants? It's about what they BOTH want? I don't get your bet.

How about a cogent and constructive post from 9500- rather than bandwidth wasting memes of old French fashion designers and revolutionaries. Those really do make fine "source experts" for the DPST cause of lies, deception, and racism.

lol Originally Posted by oeb11

Good enough for you? I'm feeling the Spirit of the Holidays.

Pelosi wants a Senate trial as "fair" as the complete lack of due process partisanship that characterized her house persecution Impeachment hearings.

Ain't happening.

She can sit on the Articles until her face falls off

So what.
9500 is arguing from a position of Robespierre's exit from existence.

LOL


Now - go play with Eric Swalwell about nuking middle American deplorables.

Pelosi wants a Senate trial as "fair" as the complete lack of due process partisanship that characterized her house persecution Impeachment hearings.

Ain't happening.

She can sit on the Articles until her face falls off

So what.
9500 is arguing from a position of Robespierre's exit from existence.

LOL


Now - go play with Eric Swalwell about nuking middle American deplorables. Originally Posted by oeb11

There's no crying in politics. She is doing what she can to play the system to it's finest and richest. You decry the process of House power. I won't, and have not in the past, state the Senate shouldn't try the same. It's a tug-of-war. Let McConnell try to dismiss. The House Majority is working with the Senate Minority to have the case heard. From those directly involved with the public display of Constitutional defiance. If the Senate can't agree to terms for a trial, the case can't be put before the jurors.

You come off as a victim. A cry baby. Reign of Terror? Really?

No counter argument to my statement? Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Nothing to say about nothing.

Most of the time you SHOULD remain silent. "Arguing" with fools is useless.

Do you need "a link" to that TRUTH?

LL- well written.

Nothing to say about nothing.

Most of the time you SHOULD remain silent. "Arguing" with fools is useless.

Do you need "a link" to that TRUTH? Originally Posted by LexusLover

You're just too scared. You use lots of words to say very little.

You're just too scared. You use lots of words to say very little. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

It's regrettable that you failed to educate yourself to a level at which you could comprehend all those "big" words I publish. You might learn something of value. Never misinterpret thoughtful, reasoned hesitancy to engage a fool in a discussion they are not qualified to join .... as having anything to do with "fear"!

That would be you: the fool. You really need to stay on the porch.