• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No Evidence.............

ataraxia said:
He can't force them to vote one way or the other. They can be shown the sun at middday, and they can vote that it's nighttime. Who's gonna stop them?

McConnell has told us he knows which way he is going to vote- before the trial gets and underway and the evidence is even presented. He also wants to shut down any further evidence or witnesses. That is the definition of corruption.

There is nothing the chief justice can do about that. What's he going to do, force McConnell to actually consider and hear evidence he doesn't want to hear?
Click to expand...

I didn't ask that
 
AlphaOmega said:
I didn't ask that
Click to expand...

You seem to be under the impression that the chief justice can force corrupt senators to be objective or vote based on the evidence, and not just on their political interests. That is incorrect.
 
On Nov. 9, 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke during a panel discussion at the Artificial Intelligence Journey (AIJ) forum in Moscow, Russia.

"Thank God, no one is accusing us of interfering in the US elections anymore; now they're accusing Ukraine"

Why is it so difficult to understand that Putin wanted this, probably more than anything? Putin's efforts to get sanctions removed from Russia started in 2012. The Magnitsky Act was a bipartisan bill passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in December 2012. The intention of the sanctions was to punish Russian officials that were responsible for the death of Russian tax accountant Sergei Magnitsky in a Moscow prison in 2009.

This is where all of this began... in 2012. This was the start of all the mess we're in today. This is why Trump had been groomed as Putin's puppet, to get those sanctions pulled back. This was Putin's one burning goal, to get the Magnitsky Act sanctions repealed. The sanctions have done immense damage to Russia's economy, more than most people realize. Despite Russia being one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world, Russia is a dying federation.

If Russia could be exonerated for interfering in our 2016 election by blaming Ukraine, sanctions would be relieved. Russia is not considered by experts to be a democracy, citing purges and jailing of political opponents, curtailed press freedom, and the lack of free and fair elections. This all sounds like where the US is heading, taking the Russian-leaning path is where Trump has been leading the US.

Human rights organizations and activists have accused Putin of persecuting political critics and activists, as well as ordering them tortured or assassinated; he has rejected accusations of human rights abuses.

Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia
 
vegas giants said:
He absolutely does not. The senate can over ride him with a simple vote
Click to expand...

They can over-ride on some things. I never said they couldnt. The justice is there to enforce the trial be carried out fairly.
XVI. All motions, objections, requests, or applications whether relating to the procedure of the Senate or relating immediately to the trial (including questions with respect to admission of evidence or other questions arising during the trial) made by the parties or their counsel shall be addressed to the Presiding Officer only, and if he, or any Senator, shall require it, they shall be committed to writing, and read at the Secretary’s table.
 
AlphaOmega said:
They can over-ride on some things. I never said they couldnt. The justice is there to enforce the trial be carried out fairly.
XVI. All motions, objections, requests, or applications whether relating to the procedure of the Senate or relating immediately to the trial (including questions with respect to admission of evidence or other questions arising during the trial) made by the parties or their counsel shall be addressed to the Presiding Officer only, and if he, or any Senator, shall require it, they shall be committed to writing, and read at the Secretary’s table.
Click to expand...

Yep. And then the senate over rides it by simple vote



Why is trump so afraid to hear what Bolton has to say?
 
ataraxia said:
You seem to be under the impression that the chief justice can force corrupt senators to be objective or vote based on the evidence, and not just on their political interests. That is incorrect.
Click to expand...
That's true. The Democrats are allowed to vote as they wish. In the House, three refused and one resigned the party in protest. Even in Washington, there were three Democrats--two now--with ethics. Are there any in the Senate?

vegas giants said:
Yep. And then the senate over rides it by simple vote
Why is trump so afraid to hear what Bolton has to say?
Click to expand...
He already knows.
 
vegas giants said:
Yep. And then the senate over rides it by simple vote



Why is trump so afraid to hear what Bolton has to say?
Click to expand...
Because bolton has knowledge of sensitive information that the President knows about other leaders and could release it under questioning creating an international crisis.

VII. The Presiding Officer of the Senate shall direct all necessary preparations in the Senate Chamber, and the Presiding Officer on the trial shall direct all the forms of proceedings while the Senate is sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment, and all forms during the trial not otherwise specially provided for. And the Presiding Officer on the trial may rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate, unless some Member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote be taken thereon, in which case it shall be submitted to the Senate for decision without debate; or he may at his option, in the first instance, submit any such question to a vote of the Members of the Senate. Upon all such questions the vote shall be taken in accordance with the Standing Rules of the Senate.
 
AlphaOmega said:
Because bolton has knowledge of sensitive information that the President knows about other leaders and could release it under questioning creating an international crisis.

VII. The Presiding Officer of the Senate shall direct all necessary preparations in the Senate Chamber, and the Presiding Officer on the trial shall direct all the forms of proceedings while the Senate is sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment, and all forms during the trial not otherwise specially provided for. And the Presiding Officer on the trial may rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate, unless some Member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote be taken thereon, in which case it shall be submitted to the Senate for decision without debate; or he may at his option, in the first instance, submit any such question to a vote of the Members of the Senate. Upon all such questions the vote shall be taken in accordance with the Standing Rules of the Senate.
Click to expand...

What the what????? No one that knows sensitive information can ever testify against the president?????



Holy cow. I cant believe you said that
 
haymarket said:
This whole sham trial is more fixed that WrestleMania.
Click to expand...

The sham was the Stalinist type hearings held in the democrat controlled house. No republicans were allowed to subpoena witnesses, their ability to ask questions of the witnesses the democrats called was restricted. The president's lawyers were not allowed to cross examine witnesses. In effect, President Trump was denied due process rights. as for the witnesses that the democrats now want to call, they had the opportunity to subpoena them during the House hearings. They chose not to do so because they knew they were on shaky ground regarding any efforts to get past Trump declaring executive privilege. They had no faith that the courts would force those witnesses to testify. So they rushed to a full vote on impeachment with nothing but hearsay witnesses and a mystery whistleblower. Then they withheld submitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate, hoping to strong arm the republican led senate into doing what they failed to do in the House. Once it became clear that was not going to work, they submitted the articles and are now attempting to win it in through the mass media. The plain truth is that the democrats do not have a legal leg to stand on. You of all people should understand that, haymarket, as you claim to have taught American Government in a university for decades. What the democrats are attempting simply does not pass constitutional muster. They are attempting to bypass Separation of Powers and constitutional safeguards.
 
vegas giants said:
What the what????? No one that knows sensitive information can ever testify against the president?????



Holy cow. I cant believe you said that
Click to expand...

No not if its classified. Here we can prove you agree with it. When Holder was supposed to testify what did democrats do?
 
AlphaOmega said:
No not if its classified. Here we can prove you agree with it. When Holder was supposed to testify what did democrats do?
Click to expand...

Then let him testify in private and anything classified is not released to the public.


To say he can never testify due to top secret information he may have is laughably wrong. Lol
 
vegas giants said:
Then let him testify in private and anything classified is not released to the public.


To say he can never testify due to top secret information he may have is laughably wrong. Lol
Click to expand...

Sure..when will Holder be testifying?
 
Modern Day Republicans don't care about The Constitution... "they care about partisan power" and within that, they devote themselves to the worship of Trump....

Evil has a way of attracting and consuming such types... because they have pander to it and pursued it by every means they can. It is no point in any discussion that pursue them to deal with facts. They've long proven they care nothing about facts. These are the type of people who submit themselves to any bully stomping "authoritarian" that gets on the stump.

One should read info from the Nixon Era, when they promoted the point of "Attack Mentality" for the sake of "divisiveness", because to them they seek power by acts that promote divisiveness.. The make up of the party is the same as those who made up the system backing of segregationist society, because they "love" the point, factor and premise of "divisiveness".

They have been the Party of Attack Something, since the days of Goldwater's Run for President, and within EVERY Republican Administration their agenda has been about "Attack Something"... which included "Attacking Foreign Nations".... We saw that in the lies that led to the Invasion of Iraq, and the ultimate escalations that brought greater instability to the Middle East, they were the same party, that under Bush, threatened our Allies to force their backing of the Invasion of Iraq.

Trump nearly started a whole new War... by not paying attention to Geo-Political Matters and understanding the stand and position of Allied Nations, when he assassinated the Iraqi General and to date has produced no evidence that it was justified and it was done without notice to the House, or the Allied Nations.

He stands on Foreign Stages, denigrating every element of America that he can, including Former Presidents, The Intelligent Agencies, and The Entire Democratic Population of America and its elected Democratic Politicians, Trashing Our Constitution, and Insulting our Justice Department, and acting and promoting himself as if he is the Authoritarian King over America.. And follows it up patronizing himself over and over and over as he makes himself look like a Megalomaniac Buffoon, and Degrades the Ideal, the Integrity, and the Moral Civility and Image of America...

American's won't forget any of this madness and there will be a long like of removals of Republicans from office.. Many have seen the madness and did their early exits from the political seats, and more will pursue their resignations in the coming months.

The Global Systems of Nations Governance, now know conclusively, "Never in the Future to trust Republican Administrations" !!!!!

The Nations are moving on, because they see the mess that Republican continue to make, and the world will move on with Climate Concern promotions, they will continue with the work that is not publicized to change the stature and nature of Reserve Currency, as they will come together to elevate a Current to Parallel the U.S. Dollar...
They have seen the abusive use of Sanctions, that cause problems for many nations, and they will not continue to suffer the loss expense based on these Imperialistic motivations that Republican continue to promote. Because Trump has DAMAGED the principles of Diplomacy to a point, that it will take years to mend and that mending can only be done by a Democratic Administration. The exact same as Obama mended the Diplomacy which Bush Administration damaged so severely.
 
vegas giants said:
Then let him testify in private and anything classified is not released to the public.


To say he can never testify due to top secret information he may have is laughably wrong. Lol
Click to expand...

Sure..when will Holder be testifying?
 
Partisan is what the Dems wanted and that is exactly what they are getting. What goes around comes around.
 
Luckyone said:
Bottom line (and all the talking and all the excuses are meaningless in this respect) is that the President of the United States has the responsibility of putting the country above his own desires and wants. If he used government funds and extorted the president of Ukraine to gain a personal political advantage, it is not in the benefit of the United States and it is impeachable.
Click to expand...

That claim is not in evidence. Trump has a track record of still being rankled as to the Ukrainian 2016 election influence, and also has a treaty and legal obligation to promote Ukraine's investigation into corruption by Americans dealing with an in the Ukraine.

Are you seriously supporting the idea that Trump is concerned about the 2020 election and Biden as a election opponent? Ask yourself, why would an incumbent, and all the advantages that brings, along with a strong economy and all the advantages that brings, as well as a strong record of promises made and promises kept, why would such an incumbent be concerned about a weaker campaign opponent? When was the last time an incumbent lost with these set of conditions?

No, the focus has been on the corruption and the election 2016 influence, and not likely anything to do with the up coming 2020 election, clearly. What I will grant you is that it hasn't been conducted in the best and wisest way possible.

This forces the impeachment trial to occur. The trial is there to find the truth about whether he did or not and the truth is what is important here, not the process, not the bias of the parties, and not the excuses. It is whether the President did what was best for the country or not.
Click to expand...

In examining the truth, being important as you've stated, you have also ask yourself the Democrat's motivation in bringing impeachment, as they've clearly stated their intention to impeach Trump only moments after the election was called, and the motivation as to why has been clearly explained:



The Democrats and their supporters continue to claim 'the evidence is overwhelming', but if the evidence was overwhelming, why are the Democrats demanding the introduction of even more 'evidence'?

The segregation of duties is quite clear: The House investigates and drafts the articles of impeachment, and the Senate hears those articles and that evidence.

If a prosecutor arrives in court to try a case and his first statement is that 'we need to find more witnesses, more evidence', the judge would promptly reply with 'why did you bring the case in the first place?' and rightly so.

Such is the Democrat's idea of overwhelming evidence? Don't make me laugh.

It is that simple and all the excuses will not erase the fact that evidence of guilt or innocence is what needs to come out in its entirety.
Click to expand...

Demonstrated that the Democrat's case is weak, ill prepared, and of questionable foundation.
Demonstrated the Democrat's motivation is strictly partisan politics, and is clearly not in the benefit of the United States.
Demonstrated that the Democrat's motivation to impeachment started before Trump even took office.

My advice to you is to stop watching CNN and MSNBC, they are manipulating you and you are falling for it, allowing yourself to be manipualted by them.
 
zimmer said:
ROTFLOL... seems you missed the circus in the House.

That’s where they are supposed to “investigate”.

They did. Now they present their case... but it seems we have a bunch of House Managers with their dicks in their hands... signifying they have nothing.

Their doing... nobody forced them to be idiots... they did it all on their own. An unforced error.

Oopsi !!!

View attachment 67272319
Click to expand...

haha1.jpg
 
eohrnberger said:
That claim is not in evidence. Trump has a track record of still being rankled as to the Ukrainian 2016 election influence, and also has a treaty and legal obligation to promote Ukraine's investigation into corruption by Americans dealing with an in the Ukraine.

Are you seriously supporting the idea that Trump is concerned about the 2020 election and Biden as a election opponent? Ask yourself, why would an incumbent, and all the advantages that brings, along with a strong economy and all the advantages that brings, as well as a strong record of promises made and promises kept, why would such an incumbent be concerned about a weaker campaign opponent? When was the last time an incumbent lost with these set of conditions?

No, the focus has been on the corruption and the election 2016 influence, and not likely anything to do with the up coming 2020 election, clearly. What I will grant you is that it hasn't been conducted in the best and wisest way possible.



In examining the truth, being important as you've stated, you have also ask yourself the Democrat's motivation in bringing impeachment, as they've clearly stated their intention to impeach Trump only moments after the election was called, and the motivation as to why has been clearly explained:



The Democrats and their supporters continue to claim 'the evidence is overwhelming', but if the evidence was overwhelming, why are the Democrats demanding the introduction of even more 'evidence'?

The segregation of duties is quite clear: The House investigates and drafts the articles of impeachment, and the Senate hears those articles and that evidence.

If a prosecutor arrives in court to try a case and his first statement is that 'we need to find more witnesses, more evidence', the judge would promptly reply with 'why did you bring the case in the first place?' and rightly so.

Such is the Democrat's idea of overwhelming evidence? Don't make me laugh.



Demonstrated that the Democrat's case is weak, ill prepared, and of questionable foundation.
Demonstrated the Democrat's motivation is strictly partisan politics, and is clearly not in the benefit of the United States.
Demonstrated that the Democrat's motivation to impeachment started before Trump even took office.

My advice to you is to stop watching CNN and MSNBC, they are manipulating you and you are falling for it, allowing yourself to be manipualted by them.
Click to expand...

Shoukd we hear from bolton?
 
ataraxia said:
Relax. If Trump is so squeaky clean, then the testimony from Bolton, Mulvaney, andn McGahn should make that clear, and all those dems will have eggs on their faces again. Why all the obstruction?
Click to expand...

I’m relaxed:2wave:

Now if... Trump was/is as dirty as Nancy thought and has claimed him to be.

She should have acted quickly to make sure they were subpoenaed. And make sure every action was taken as quickly as possible to let the Court know about The Dire Threat Trump posed to Our Democracy and Our Constitution!!!

Since, she did not do that...

I simply, wrote a little negative political story based on assumptions and what I could suppose were her true intentions that benefitted her Personal Ambitions and Her Political Party Affiliation.

Kind of like, what happened to Our 45th POTUS before he took either good or bad actions as POTUS.

“Not My President” Impeach 45
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom