Is Mitch playing Opossum?

Darth Omar said:
What’s absurd is sending a half-baked investigation to the Senate with an ‘impeachment’ sticker attached to it.
Click to expand...

The investigation was not half-baked.

You assured us the House evidence was compelling, Frank. Compelling means compelling. If it was ‘compelling’ Democrats would need to call witnesses.
Click to expand...

The evidence is much more than compelling. Hundreds of former federal prosecutors have testified that they each have obtained guilty verdicts with much less evidence.

The Republican senators will vote to acquit no matter what. The Democrats simply want as much evidence of the abomination's guilt as possible in the open. Gotta make the cowards pay as much a price for there near-treason as possible.
 
Frank Apisa said:
The investigation was not half-baked.



The evidence is much more than compelling. Hundreds of former federal prosecutors have testified that they each have obtained guilty verdicts with much less evidence.

The Republican senators will vote to acquit no matter what. The Democrats simply want as much evidence of the abomination's guilt as possible in the open. Gotta make the cowards pay as much a price for there near-treason as possible.
Click to expand...

Republicans could absolutely convict Trump.

Just not with the ‘less than compelling’ evidence Democrats possess. The way impeachment is supposed to work is that the opposing party *is forced* by the weight of the evidence to vote to convict.

Just admit Democrats don’t have it, Frank. You’ll look less silly.
 
Darth Omar said:
Republicans could absolutely convict Trump.
Click to expand...

As I said, they wouldn't convict him if he committed murder in their presence.

He owns them He owns people like you.

Just not with the ‘less than compelling’ evidence Democrats possess. The way impeachment is supposed to work is that the opposing party *is forced* by the weight of the evidence to vote to convict.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...you are now making rules for impeachment. You'd so better making recipes for peach brandy.

Just admit Democrats don’t have it, Frank. You’ll look less silly.
Click to expand...

I do not look silly at all. I am simply discussing an issue on the Internet.

The Democrats have MORE than enough evidence for a conviction. And they could easily have more if the Republicans were not so willing to let Trump get away with crap.
 
Frank Apisa said:
As I said, they wouldn't convict him if he committed murder in their presence.

He owns them He owns people like you.



Ahhh...you are now making rules for impeachment. You'd so better making recipes for peach brandy.



I do not look silly at all. I am simply discussing an issue on the Internet.

The Democrats have MORE than enough evidence for a conviction. And they could easily have more if the Republicans were not so willing to let Trump get away with crap.
Click to expand...

This is pointless, but here is part of the problem for Democrats:

Their articles don’t contain a crime. The Nixon and Clinton articles not only named the specific statutes involved but both Clinton and Nixon’s guilt was established prior to voting on the articles.

What’s that do, Frank? It makes it politically difficult for opposing parties to vote to acquit. That motivation just isn’t there in this weak-ass impeachment. If House Democrats thought a Republican Senate was going to fall all over themselves to vote to convict Trump, for non-crimes, they are simply stupid.

It’s going to be an uphill battle *and it should be* an uphill battle for Democrats. And guess what? They are clamoring for more witnesses.
 
Darth Omar said:
This is pointless, but here is part of the problem for Democrats:

Their articles don’t contain a crime. The Nixon and Clinton articles not only named the specific statutes involved but both Clinton and Nixon’s guilt was established prior to voting on the articles.

What’s that do, Frank? It makes it politically difficult for opposing parties to vote to acquit. That motivation just isn’t there in this weak-ass impeachment. If House Democrats thought a Republican Senate was going to fall all over themselves to vote to convict Trump, for non-crimes, they are simply stupid.

It’s going to be an uphill battle *and it should be* an uphill battle for Democrats. And guess what? They are clamoring for more witnesses.
Click to expand...

My guess: The Democrats were forced into the impeachment. They knew the Senate Republicans were too cowardly to convict and that the end result would be an acquittal. So I suspect they changed their objectives.

Impeach him...and cause the jerks who defend him to pay as large a price as possible.

I think they are succeeding. I think the Republicans will pay a HUGE price for this farcical trial.

I think Trump will pay a much larger price than he thought also.

We'll see in November.

As for the witnesses...it seems to me that Democrats win this one no matter what. If the witnesses are called, THEIR witnesses will damage Trump even more than he already has been damaged. And it the witnesses are not called, you will hear about the "cover up" the entire of the election campaign. None of the Trump sycophants will be won over...but MANY of the Independents will treat him like the sludge he is.

As I said...we'll see in November.
 
Darth Omar said:
Well, witnesses is plural so that means Republicans get to call theirs too lol.

Myself and most other Republicans are very much interested what Hunter, Eric Ciaramella and some others will say. My objection to calling witnesses is that it legitimizes half-assed, partisan impeachments. Which means this certainly won’t be the last one.
Click to expand...

The Republican defense Senators can call who they want and go tell the liberal prosecution Senators to go pound sand.
 
Earl said:
Bolton is in the “selling book” mode.

Put him under oath, if he is even called.

Surely there were others in the meeting.

The Trump lawyers have presented a compelling case that there is no compelling case for impeachment, no matter what Bolton says.

The outcome is not in doubt.

Anyone on the planet thinks there are 20 Republicans who will vote for impeachment?

Failure ...again for the Democrats.
Click to expand...

Subpoena the WB.
 
Jarod said:
I want Hunter and Ivanka and Fredo.
Click to expand...

Who gives a fuck, what you want.

095ea45e2311cd42867eb1923bf858c3.gif
 
Jarod said:
That is not how it works, the standard of evidence required for indictment is lower than the standard of evidence required for conviction, it is expected that the Senate would get more evidence. As a prosecutor I always got more evidence for the trial than they had at the indictment.
Click to expand...

But as JPP liberals keep saying, "This isn't a trial". :D
 
Earl said:
The superb Trump lawyers made a compelling case that:

(1) The impeachment violated the Constitution in its origins. The Constitution says that the full House (not a committee) has sole authority for impeachment.This is supported by a Supreme Court decision.

(2) The House managers have not presented a compelling case (or any case) that the Articles rise to the impeachment level.

(3) The defense lawyers have humiliated the House managers by showing video after video of them saying things in total opposition to what they said in the Clinton impeachment.

(4) “Hope to have a final vote on impeachment on Friday.”

Senator Barrasso.

Put a fork in this abomination.
Click to expand...

Aside from anything else, I haven't seen a single JPP liberal try to refute this.
 
jimmymccready said:
(1) The impeachment is supported by the Constitution in its origins.

(2) The House managers have presented a very compelling case (one could say 'a perfect') for impeachment.

(3) The House managers have humiliated the Defense lawyers by establishing the facts of the Articles and how they rise to impeachment level.

(4) Witnesses will be heard.

(5) The impeachment has brought out the crimes of the entire Trump wing.
Click to expand...

(1) The impeachment violated the Constitution in its origins. The Constitution says that the full House (not a committee) has sole authority for impeachment.This is supported by a Supreme Court decision.
 
Frank Apisa said:
My guess: The Democrats were forced into the impeachment. They knew the Senate Republicans were too cowardly to convict and that the end result would be an acquittal. So I suspect they changed their objectives.

Impeach him...and cause the jerks who defend him to pay as large a price as possible.

I think they are succeeding. I think the Republicans will pay a HUGE price for this farcical trial.

I think Trump will pay a much larger price than he thought also.

We'll see in November.

As for the witnesses...it seems to me that Democrats win this one no matter what. If the witnesses are called, THEIR witnesses will damage Trump even more than he already has been damaged. And it the witnesses are not called, you will hear about the "cover up" the entire of the election campaign. None of the Trump sycophants will be won over...but MANY of the Independents will treat him like the sludge he is.

As I said...we'll see in November.
Click to expand...

Which will be after the Barr report.

Though I doubt that democrats have run out of Trump removal tricks—they only have a small army of criminal leakers in the government.

Frank, there have already been witnesses and every one of them have been democrat witnesses. Nadler denied any republican witnesses in Schiff’s kangaroo court. So that’s what, 17-0 in favor Democrats? And Democrats STILL don’t have a compelling case.

Think about that: not one single witness has testified in Trump’s defense. And yet, Republicans are prepared to vote while democrats demand even more witnesses. And Democrats have *the audacity* to whine about the process being ‘rigged’ if Republicans don’t vote to call even more witnesses.

They are virtually shameless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top