***DONALD J TRUMP HAS OFFICIALLY BEEN IMPEACHED***

1…433434436438439…510

Comments

  • ikiT
    ikiT USA Posts: 11,059
    edited January 2020
    2018
    YO



    I don't feel tardy/hot for teacher/1984
    Post edited by ikiT on
    Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 06132018
  • benjs
    benjs Toronto, ON Posts: 9,381
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    You clearly claimed that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses. I can't find that evidenced anywhere in the article you posted, just opinions.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,365
    benjs said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    You clearly claimed that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses. I can't find that evidenced anywhere in the article you posted, just opinions.
    Time will tell how well of an impeachment trial manager Roberts is. Or judge.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • benjs
    benjs Toronto, ON Posts: 9,381
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    benjs said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    You clearly claimed that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses. I can't find that evidenced anywhere in the article you posted, just opinions.
    Time will tell how well of an impeachment trial manager Roberts is. Or judge.
    So you take back your statement that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses? There's enough hearsay around here to spread myths based on opinion pieces.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,365
    benjs said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    benjs said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    You clearly claimed that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses. I can't find that evidenced anywhere in the article you posted, just opinions.
    Time will tell how well of an impeachment trial manager Roberts is. Or judge.
    So you take back your statement that Roberts has hinted an aversion to calling witnesses? There's enough hearsay around here to spread myths based on opinion pieces.
    They wouldn’t float it if it wasn’t true.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,365
    And no, I’m calling it as I see it, the fix is in. 
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,530
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    except he very well could rule in favor on any issue raised. only to be voted down or overruled by simple majority.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,883
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mickeyrat said:
    The Juggler said:
    mrussel1 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    The Juggler said:
    Mitt confirms again he will vote to hear from Bolton
    one defection. how many more do they need? 3? 4 total?
    4. I bet he knows there are the votes so he's not out on an island by himself.

    And, yeah it is January already isn't it?!
    yeah he wants to be landlocked for sure. 

    yeah i keep writing that it is 2019 still.
    Im not sure that Pence is a tiebreaker for procedural votes.  I think they need 51. Be curious if someone knows for sure. 
    I have read that is correct. Something about him not being able to break the tie for his own boss or something?
    Chief Justice fills that role in presiding over the trial.
    And I’m hearing Roberts is adverse to calling witnesses. The fix continues to be in and Putin on the ritz wins.
    source?
    I'm viewing this as Moscow Mitchy Baby bitch slaps his repub colleagues to deny witnesses, dems appeal to Roberts during trial and Roberts says, "sorry, I don't make the rules," despite seemingly having the ability to say, "yes, I'll allow witnesses as they're germane to the dems' case, the Team Trump Treason Administration stonewalled and the Clinton impeachment investigation had witnesses and dispositions and documents. If Roberts is a rubber stamp and the dems are forced to litigate via the time consuming courts process, then Team trump Treason is above the law and you can't remove a president. If that's the case, putin on the ritz wins. If it was a "perfect" phone call, why wouldn't Team trump Treason allow for witnesses that exonerate him?

    Here's a version of what I saw as a headline:

    https://news.yahoo.com/chief-justice-roberts-wont-compel-witnesses-to-testify-at-trump-impeachment-trial-legal-expert-says-100045457.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMM7egEYF5aPLpdw5we1TxfCRlJemD7N5Q8Bf0EGyvX1noXjIHChdve4ZWsWZBvwO-vAIflnKJsoVZEb7kKGqtIT6_hs0epbvQPrmuoQYeoIA4S6xpQlfkDgrbhda9Tn2kUNBWUAYzES9yAkWChcode8TLymvej2EhXl0BKtGvBq

    If Democrats press the point that Roberts is able to rule on allowing witnesses but is declining to do so, they could follow the lead of Schiff, who in the November CNN interview indicated that such a decision by the chief justice would amount to a partisan act.

    “It will mean that either Justice Roberts or the Supreme Court itself is not really a conservative justice or court, merely a partisan one,” Schiff said.

    However, it’s not even clear that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have enough Republican votes to deny Democratic demands for witnesses. He would need a simple majority to do so, but there may be enough Republican senators who decide to support a motion for some witnesses. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on Monday told CNN he is open to calling witnesses.

    The question then would be, which witnesses? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested four witnesses who were blocked by the White House from testifying to House investigators: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, Office of Management and Budget associate director for national security; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to the acting White House chief of staff.

    except he very well could rule in favor on any issue raised. only to be voted down or overruled by simple majority.
    But that's not his role in the trial.  Anything voted in by a majority is the rule of the trial.  Roberts has no power over those rules.  He should not be ruling on any issue unless there is a question as to whether it runs afoul of the rules of the trial, voted on by the Senate.  In fact, the Parliamentarian probably has more power in this trial than Roberts.  That person will determine whether motions, actions, etc. are in line with Senate history and parliamentary rules.  
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,530
     https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/42131/what-exactly-are-the-chief-justices-powers-and-roles-in-presiding-over-a-pres

    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,196
    this is chilling. she was right to be frightened.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-release-documents-eve-impeachment-233730577.html
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,365
    Thugs gonna thug and Deplorables are gonna deplore.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,196
    i find chris hayes annoying, but this was the first thing that popped up <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING NEWS: House releases incredibly incriminating trove of documents from Rudy Giuliani&#39;s indicted associate Lev Parnas. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/inners?src=hash&amp;amp;ref_src=twsrc^tfw">#inners</a> <a href="https://t.co/rWop6XtJDw">pic.twitter.com/rWop6XtJDw</a></p>&mdash; All In with Chris Hayes (@allinwithchris) <a href="">January 15, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>under ambassador trending.


    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,543
    Those documents are insane. This story is the gift that keeps on giving.


  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,196
    i've got a feeling Lev is going to be pretty damning. 

    good thing trump doesn't know him.

    and this jabroni Hyde. may as well end his campaign right now. sounds like he is going to have some problems.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,883
    pjl44 said:
    Those documents are insane. This story is the gift that keeps on giving.


    Surveillance??? Our ambassador?
  • Smellyman
    Smellyman Asia Posts: 4,528
    2018
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    this is chilling. she was right to be frightened.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-release-documents-eve-impeachment-233730577.html

    One more delporable to the list, Robert F. Hyde, and he is running for a House seat.

    Being a POS is a GOP requirement on all resumes.
  • josevolution
    josevolution Posts: 31,681
    2018
    Happy Engrossment day tomorrow screw the Baffoon I hope he goes on a tweet binge maybe he’ll pop q
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,543
    mrussel1 said:
    pjl44 said:
    Those documents are insane. This story is the gift that keeps on giving.


    Surveillance??? Our ambassador?
    Sort of. Text messages make it sound like that creep Hyde was tracking her movements. Possibly more beyond that but it's not clear.
  • Gern Blansten
    Gern Blansten Mar-A-Lago Posts: 22,250
    pjl44 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    pjl44 said:
    Those documents are insane. This story is the gift that keeps on giving.


    Surveillance??? Our ambassador?
    Sort of. Text messages make it sound like that creep Hyde was tracking her movements. Possibly more beyond that but it's not clear.
    Really strange....
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
    The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,543
    Gern Blansten said:
    pjl44 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    pjl44 said:
    Those documents are insane. This story is the gift that keeps on giving.


    Surveillance??? Our ambassador?
    Sort of. Text messages make it sound like that creep Hyde was tracking her movements. Possibly more beyond that but it's not clear.
    Really strange....
    So strange. The best description of all this stuff I've heard is that Trump and Giuliani thought they could treat the Ukrainian President like he was the Brooklyn Land Commissioner.

Categories