row_33 Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Good thing for the concept of habeas corpus, the wisest minds of the past developed it to guard against the Schiff’s of the present day and it may save his behind as well in a few years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, Koko78 said: Don't forget that he is also backed by news articles citing selectively-leaked information in order to bolster his later testimony, because there was already news articles about the same information that was selectively-leaked beforehand! Not that I want to do anything other than mock gator, but he may, inadvertently, not be wrong. In many jurisdictions, New York included, you are convicted the moment you plead guilty. When you are subsequently sentenced (and the judgment of conviction entered) is not relevant. However, I will note one caveat: I don't really care enough to do the research to see if that is how federal law defines the actual conviction. Oh no, leaks in Washington! Face it, Trumps guilty Edited October 31, 2019 by Tiberius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Formation Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Get this guy out of office. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share Posted October 31, 2019 3 minutes ago, Sunshower said: Get this guy out of office. Pence warming up in the bullpen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 30 minutes ago, Foxx said: Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference For Tiberius and his cohorts facts are inconvenient things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share Posted October 31, 2019 45 minutes ago, Foxx said: Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference Nothing to support Trumps innocence in trying to get foreign interference in 2020. This is all tossed pots! 16 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: For Tiberius and his cohorts facts are inconvenient things. Fine, this clown seems to be able to report this none sense, why did Trump have to extort a foreign power over this? If it's all so true, get those right wing hack reporters over there to investigate, don't break the law to create the false narrative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 41 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Fine, this clown seems to be able to report this none sense, why did Trump have to extort a foreign power over this? If it's all so true, get those right wing hack reporters over there to investigate, don't break the law to create the false narrative You can’t seriously be this disinterested in whether the former VP was using his position to line his family’s pockets....or can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Democrat Alcee Hastings, Who Was Impeached and Removed, Makes Impeachment Rules by Joel B. Pollak Original Article Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) is the second-ranking Democrat on the House Rules Committee, which is setting the rules for the “impeachment inquiry” into President Donald Trump. Hastings himself was impeached and removed from office in 1989 — one of only eight federal officials, all of whom have been judges, so be so relieved of their duties. [Tweet] Hastings was removed for bribery, one of the causes enumerated in the Constitution’s Impeachment Clause (Article II, Section 4): A difference of opinion is not a crime, folks. Dem Star Impeachment Witness Vindman Confirms Trump Did Nothing Wrong by John Nolte Original Article The only news that matters coming out of Alexander Vindman’s Tuesday impeachment testimony is that he once again proved President Trump has done absolutely nothing impeachable, or even close to it. Vindman, who is obviously all wound up to overturn the 2016 election and have Trump removed from office, could only testify that the transcript of Trump’s now-famous July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was missing a couple of details. Boy, that sounds ominous! Did Trump conceal the true nature of his phone call??? Did Zelensky also aid in the cover-up by repeatedly claiming he never felt pressured by Trump???? Bombshell time, amirite? Except, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share Posted October 31, 2019 14 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: You can’t seriously be this disinterested in whether the former VP was using his position to line his family’s pockets....or can you? I'm disinterested in it enough to say it doesn't give Trump the right to break the law or hurt our national secuity or our election integrity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: I'm disinterested in it enough to say it doesn't give Trump the right to break the law or hurt our national secuity or our election integrity How in the world did his inquiry ‘hurt our election integrity’? Gag me! What if the President is actually looking into corruption in the Ukraine....not corruption by Biden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) the resolution has passed 231 - 196. with 2 dems voting, 'nay'. it is so ordered. Edited October 31, 2019 by Foxx 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 The NYT reports.This is not the vote the Republicans have been demanding — that is not "a formal vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry," which is what happened in the cases of Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon. So the Democrats are doing some theater of voting out in the open today, but it's not the vote that accords with historical practice. It's not the vote the Republicans have been talking about. It's a vote about what the rules will be.Of course, the House gets to make its own rules — that's in the Constitution — and the majority will win and get what rules they want and can get away with claiming for themselves. Apparently, the idea is to give the President's supporters nothing until the Intelligence Committee has finished its work. The Democrats apparently want the Intelligence Committee to produce a one-sided report, with any balance on the side of the President to come only after the matter is referred to the Judiciary Committee.So the Democrats will be out in the open today, explaining to us Americans why that is fair and why that is about getting to the truth? How will that work out? Here's how the NYT puts it: But Thursday’s vote indicates that Democrats, once wary of holding a vote on the issue, have now united solidly behind the idea. Or they've heard enough criticism about their partisan, secretive ways and they're yielding to pressure to legitimatize themselves. The NYT's use of the phrase "a vote on the issue" hides the just-admitted reality that it's not a vote on the issue the Republicans demanded — the issue of whether to authorize the impeachment inquiry. It's a vote on procedural rules for continuing the inquiry. The difference in issues is obvious if you think of the consequences of a "no" vote. What would happen if there's a "no" vote on these rules? Things would continue as they've been going, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, Foxx said: the resolution has passed 231 - 196. with 2 dems voting, 'nay'. it is so ordered. According to TOC lahjik, that is bi-partisan support against the impeachment inquiry. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Is it the 12th yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 here is the problem as i see it. what the Dems are doing in the basement of the Capital is an issue because the Dems are the ones conducting the investigation. Schiffty's gang wants to be perceived as an independent council doing an investigation into possible high crimes and/or misdemeanors. previously, Clinton's impeachment inquiry was done by an outside special council led by Ken Starr. this, at the very least, gave the appearance of impartiality. that inquiry also gave no special accommodations to President Clinton during the discovery phase. no real prosecution investigation gives consideration to defense concerns at this point. what this investigation is trying to accomplish, is much the same. an investigation into what the facts of the accusations are. however, there is a real problem with what is going on. Schiffty is leading this, 'special council', which, based upon his previous statements towards Trump alone, should omit him from any role in an investigatory relation to any type impeachment inquiry, not to mention simply being, in this day and climate, on the other side of the aisle. i believe the reason they have chosen to keep the investigation "in House", is so that they can control the outcome. they didn't get what they wanted from Mueller so they are not going to chance it happening again. add to it all that there never was a floor vote on whether or not the majority of the House wanted to begin an impeachment inquiry, lending questionable validity to the entire process we are seeing, just adds to the dubiousness that the American populace sees. that Nancy has called a vote to establish procedure going forward does nothing to change any of the above. she only hopes that they can claim they held a vote of the House so they are adhering to precedent. history is not going to be kind to the One Hundred and Sixteenth United States House of Representatives. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albwan Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) It's pretty clear the democrats are disgusted with the presidential candidates, so they are running impeachment as the the 2020 democratic nominee. Total hail mary. Edited October 31, 2019 by Albwan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) Typical Congressional *****-show. --The Majority drafts the rules and doesn't permit any amendment or change to their draft which has been proposed by the Minority. --Deliberations begin and the Majority speaks almost exclusively in conclusory terms about anything but procedure, but rather the guilt of the subject of the impeachment. --The Minority gets up and complains about the proposed rules in almost every instance. The Majority says "why are you complaining about procedure"? Huh, WTF? Nobody in the Minority said (that I heard) that since impeachment is so important party divisions should go out the window when setting the rules. Every Congressmember is equal in this proceeding and each should have the right to all the evidence and should be able to make whatever inquiries they need to make an informed decision. This is true at the Committee Stage and later, I would suppose, when the entire body deliberates later on. The rules don't seem to favor a level field for all investigators in the process. Nobody in the Minority (that I heard) asked why -- after a month of hearings -- is the Majority now setting rules for the inquiry? Nobody asked whether the prior activities of the Intelligence Committee are invalidated, or argued that they should be invalidated. Essentially, the inquiry should start now, since it is only now that rules have been put into place, no matter how objectionable these rules might be to the Minority. On with the show, I suppose. Edited October 31, 2019 by snafu 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 51 minutes ago, Foxx said: the resolution has passed 231 - 196. with 2 dems voting, 'nay'. it is so ordered. So, it wasn’t bipartisan. Not a single R vote. Who woulda thunk it? (Thread title needs a change) 3 hours ago, Sunshower said: Get this guy out of office. It’ll happen, one day in 2025. Unless you mean Mr. Schiff. He’ll be gone much sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted October 31, 2019 Share Posted October 31, 2019 Bring it on.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts