The trial of Donald J. Trump

And so it begins.

Just listened to opening remarks by Adam Schiff. The things I do to have a more complete understanding of the issues!



Schiff is ranting about "we must have witnesses" when no decision has been made on witnesses and no attempt in his House inquiry was ever made to get the witnesses he wanted because involving the courts would just take to long. Imagine that, going through the courts would take to long. Considering privilege would take to long.


Schiff said "the President can not defy impeachment by entering into endless litigation". But impeachment happened without witnesses and litigation did it not? So it would seem that the Presidents efforts to defy impeachment didn't really matter did it? How many times did we hear the Democrats say "we have more than enough evidence to to find guilt" and where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, from Adam Schiff saying he had more than enough evidence to prove Trump conspired with Russia to interfere in the election only he never had or or sure as hell didn't share it with Mueller because it was never presented.


Rule 7 and 16 talks about "the presiding officer, in this case Chief Justice Roberts, "may" rule on the question of "relevance of witnesses" or he may not" and leave that up to the Senators to decide by vote. If 51 Senators decide to call Hunter Biden and Joe Biden and Adam Schiff, they can regardless of the opinion of the presiding judge as I understand it. Can't imagine 4 Republicans saying no, I don't want to hear from Hunter Biden. And why should Hunter Biden be called? When the question is asked and it should be asked, why did the President do what he did, it deserves an answer and that answer is correctly, the Biden's and what they may or may not have done.



Schiff's biggest complaint is the probability that the documents and witnesses he wants may not happen to which he says "you may infer the Presidents guilt from his ongoing refusal to defy subpoenas". Yes, you may or you may understand that privilege may not be discarded at the whim of the prosecutor. Can the prosecutor decide the the 5th amendment privilege doesn't apply? The marriage privilege? Privilege must be decided by the courts and if you feel you don't have time for legal arguments, you may infer guilt, that is you prerogative and I'm sure many will.

Agree with your summation, HF.

Whiny fascist DPST forwarded a nothing burger of Articles of Impeachment.

They know it - and are desperate to set precedent to call the Senate trial precisely what the house Impeachment process was - a fixed, rigged, pre-ordained sham of a process.
lying Fascist DPST's .


If witnesses are called, it will be very interesting to see what the fascist DPST's have to say about calling the bidens - to which they are diametrically opposed.

Hypocrites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
I'll be the first to post the fact that Cipollone lied to the Cheif Justice. Republicans were allowed in the SCIF.


Pat Cipollone is White house counsel.
Please post the specifics and references for your accusations. 9500.

Or, this is just another House Article of Impeachment statement.



“It’s time to start with this trial,” said White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, the president's lead lawyer in brief remarks as the proceedings opened in public.

I'm amused.
This is where Schitt was to present the summary of incriminating evidence.
Opps, didn't have any.
We can already see the script of how this is going to play out.
What a waste of time.
And sadly, the Dims are just damaging themselves.

Fascist DPST Schiff -We Impeached trump - so it must be True!!

Andy McCarthy often seen on Fox news made a couple of interesting points in how both sides spoke in some what contradictory terms.


The contradictions from Schiff is on the one hand arguing that they have more than enough evidence from the House inquiry to convict but are now arguing that they need, must have more witnesses and documents to make their case. If they need more documents and witnesses, aren't you saying you don't have enough evidence to make your case? And if these witnesses you now want are so important, why didn't you wait for a legal decision? The decision on whether McGhan must testify would have been made by now and could have opened the door to both he and Bolton and everybody else the Democrats want to testify but the Democrats pulled the subpoena and promised not to ask for it again in the House. Now they insist they must have these witnesses to make their case



On the Republican side, they must decide if they do what Trump seems to want to do which is argue the facts of the case to wit "I didn't do what they are accusing me of" which might lend credence to the argument that more witnesses then would be needed to find any evidence to contradict that opinion. The lawyers would probably like to concede that the facts are correct but that no law was broken and the facts don't amount to an impeachable offense since no impeachment has ever proceeded without an alleged crime and while the GAO may say that Trump violated the Impound Act of 1974, that is not alleged in the Articles of impeachment and may not be convincing as being part of an abuse of power and especially since there is no ruling from a court of law saying Trump violated that law, it's merely a matter of opinion from a non legal body up for different interpretation.


Interesting stuff if one is into all the legal arguments which are many.


They just took the first vote on Shumer's amendment calling for documents and witnesses to be named before opening remarks from prosecutors and the amendment was tabled on a party line vote of 53 to 47. Since none of the Republicans jumped ship on this, maybe the most important amendment to McConnell's resolution, it is probable that all 50 amendments offered by the Democrats will fail and McConnell will indeed set the rules moving forward.


Some Republicans did depart on the 24 hour rule. McConnell wanted the opening 24 hours of both sides done in 2 days from 1 in the afternoon till 1 in the evening but at least 4 Republicans insisted on 3 days as Democrats proposed.

I'm amused.
This is where Schitt was to present the summary of incriminating evidence.
Opps, didn't have any.
We can already see the script of how this is going to play out.
What a waste of time.
And sadly, the Dims are just damaging themselves. Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

Yep, so they are begging for more opportunity.

#wrapitup

Trump's White House Counsel Just Told the Most Blatant Lie on the Floor of the Senate in Trump's Defense, and People Are Calling Him Out


https://secondnexus.com/trump-white-house-counsel-lied

On Tuesday, Cipollone addressed the Senate as part of the impeachment trial of the President. His remarks led many to note the White House Counsel's apple did not fall far from the Trump tree.

What also amuses me is that both the Dims and the Repubs both appear to forget that their tv audience is well equipped to Google search every statement made to determine factual basis, or lies, regardless of speaker. Not only is this stuff going straight into news reports, opposing folks will be calling the other side out on this stuff, during the proceedings. Anyway. Back to highly entertaining. And, one has to think that at least a few folks will torch their careers.

So at what point does lying befores the Senate become more obstructions? These attorneys are merely extensions of the defendant, eh? He’ll soon be claiming he doesn’t knows them.

So at what point does lying befores the Senate become more obstructions? These attorneys are merely extensions of the defendant, eh? He’ll soon be claiming he doesn’t knows them. Originally Posted by HoeHummer

From the sound of the callers on C-SPAN . . .

POWER TRIP? The POTUS is on his own massive ego and power trip.

. . . the talking points are to bitch about the taxpayers getting their money wasted. It's getting more and more ridiculous the later it gets. The tone is changing.

Admonishment from the chief. Pettifogging?

placing undue emphasis on petty details.

What also amuses me is that both the Dims and the Repubs both appear to forget that their tv audience is well equipped to Google search every statement made to determine factual basis, or lies, regardless of speaker. Not only is this stuff going straight into news reports, opposing folks will be calling the other side out on this stuff, during the proceedings. Anyway. Back to highly entertaining. And, one has to think that at least a few folks will torch their careers. Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

Americans don’t care about lies. Over 14,500 lies later, half the country still support the moron.