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

[Luckyone]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?

None of the above. Evidence is this case is thought to be damaging to Trump and therefore on a partisan basis they voted against it.

Where are we now? Have we decided to throw out our justice system that has been the backbone of our country for 240 years? Have we now decided that truth is no longer important? Are we now more interested in our perceived benefits that in defending our Constitution and our laws?

What happens in the future when some other president that the Republicans are against is then impeached for actions against the Constitution and he gets away with whatever he has done because he refused subpoenas and hid evidence simply because he was able to do so and the party in charge supported him? Is that what you want? Is that what you would support even if it against your political views?

I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided. All Trump supporters have used the law when it has been in their favor, such as the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" being used every single day against the accusations being leveled against Trump. Now you are in favor of no evidence that proves innocence or guilt being introduced?

If that is the case, you are then proving the point that our nation (not just our political representatives) has become corrupt. Corruption from the bottom to the top and not just at the top.

If you believe in our Constitution and believe in our laws that state that guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt", you need to support the introduction of all evidence that is available! It is the only way that guilt or innocence can be proven! Simple as that!

 

[Drawdown]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?

None of the above. Evidence is this case is thought to be damaging to Trump and therefore on a partisan basis they voted against it.

Where are we now? Have we decided to throw out our justice system that has been the backbone of our country for 240 years? Have we now decided that truth is no longer important? Are we now more interested in our perceived benefits that in defending our Constitution and our laws?

What happens in the future when some other president that the Republicans are against is then impeached for actions against the Constitution and he gets away with whatever he has done because he refused subpoenas and hid evidence simply because he was able to do so and the party in charge supported him? Is that what you want? Is that what you would support even if it against your political views?

I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided. All Trump supporters have used the law when it has been in their favor, such as the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" being used every single day against the accusations being leveled against Trump. Now you are in favor of no evidence that proves innocence or guilt being introduced?

If that is the case, you are then proving the point that our nation (not just our political representatives) has become corrupt. Corruption from the bottom to the top and not just at the top.

If you believe in our Constitution and believe in our laws that state that guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt", you need to support the introduction of all evidence that is available! It is the only way that guilt or innocence can be proven! Simple as that!

Our legal system presumes innocence. Our democrats do not. Our sense of fairness relates to the accused, not the prosecutors.

 

[Lutherf]

Well let's see...everything that went down in the House was purely partisan so what's good for the goose and all.

 

[haymarket]

This whole sham trial is more fixed that WrestleMania.

 

[Luckyone]

Our legal system presumes innocence. Our democrats do not. Our sense of fairness relates to the accused, not the prosecutors.

The OP is not about parties but about laws and the Constitution.


Are you are against evidence that proves guilt or innocence being provided? Are you for the defendant deciding what evidence can be provided and which not? Are you against our established laws?

This is the question in the OP. There is nothing in the OP that talks about Party.

 

[Luckyone]

Well let's see...everything that went down in the House was purely partisan so what's good for the goose and all.

This OP is not about the Party's but about the law!

Keep the parties out of your posts on this thread and tell me how you feel about evidence being presented (or not) in a trial.

 

[Captain Adverse]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?
...

...I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided.

Simple.

The charges are not "bribery, coercion, conspiracy," or any other actual "crimes." The Articles are "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Congress."

The Democrats did this on purpose because they had no actual evidence of any "crimes" and they seek to "investigate" in the Senate to fish for evidence.

However, the Senate does not have to allow this, nor should they. No actual Court would either. Trials are not fishing expeditions, they are dispute resolution mechanisms.

The only defense needed for each Article IMHO is Presidential Authority for Article I and Executive Privilege for Article II.

Thus there is no need to address any other evidence, only that regarding Executive Authority and Executive Privilege. NOT attempt to show bribery, conspiracy, etc..

 

[Lutherf]

This OP is not about the Party's but about the law!

Keep the parties out of your posts on this thread and tell me how you feel about evidence being presented (or not) in a trial.

There is no law in what's happening with this impeachment. It's 100% Democrat politics and 100% Democrats making up law as they go along.

 

[poweRob]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?

None of the above. Evidence is this case is thought to be damaging to Trump and therefore on a partisan basis they voted against it.

Where are we now? Have we decided to throw out our justice system that has been the backbone of our country for 240 years? Have we now decided that truth is no longer important? Are we now more interested in our perceived benefits that in defending our Constitution and our laws?

What happens in the future when some other president that the Republicans are against is then impeached for actions against the Constitution and he gets away with whatever he has done because he refused subpoenas and hid evidence simply because he was able to do so and the party in charge supported him? Is that what you want? Is that what you would support even if it against your political views?

I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided. All Trump supporters have used the law when it has been in their favor, such as the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" being used every single day against the accusations being leveled against Trump. Now you are in favor of no evidence that proves innocence or guilt being introduced?

If that is the case, you are then proving the point that our nation (not just our political representatives) has become corrupt. Corruption from the bottom to the top and not just at the top.

If you believe in our Constitution and believe in our laws that state that guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt", you need to support the introduction of all evidence that is available! It is the only way that guilt or innocence can be proven! Simple as that!

#MoscowMitch is going to tank it all. All while lying about doing it.

 

[HumblePi]

Our legal system presumes innocence. Our democrats do not. Our sense of fairness relates to the accused, not the prosecutors.

Every witness who testified, every email document and whatsapp conversation -- a literal mountain of evidence -- has been inculpatory to Trump's guilt. Trump has not offered one shred of exculpatory evidence, no witnesses, no documents, absolutely nothing.

 

[Bullseye]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?

None of the above. Evidence is this case is thought to be damaging to Trump and therefore on a partisan basis they voted against it.

Where are we now? Have we decided to throw out our justice system that has been the backbone of our country for 240 years? Have we now decided that truth is no longer important? Are we now more interested in our perceived benefits that in defending our Constitution and our laws?

What happens in the future when some other president that the Republicans are against is then impeached for actions against the Constitution and he gets away with whatever he has done because he refused subpoenas and hid evidence simply because he was able to do so and the party in charge supported him? Is that what you want? Is that what you would support even if it against your political views?

I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided. All Trump supporters have used the law when it has been in their favor, such as the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" being used every single day against the accusations being leveled against Trump. Now you are in favor of no evidence that proves innocence or guilt being introduced?

If that is the case, you are then proving the point that our nation (not just our political representatives) has become corrupt. Corruption from the bottom to the top and not just at the top.

If you believe in our Constitution and believe in our laws that state that guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt", you need to support the introduction of all evidence that is available! It is the only way that guilt or innocence can be proven! Simple as that!

IF the vote was 53-47 aren't the Dems being just as partisan? Look, the bottom line is the House should not have delivered the Article if they didn't feel they had sufficient evidence. The House had the option to contest Trump's claims of executive privilege in court but they were so overheated with TDS they couldn't wait. Grasp that fact - the dems screwed the pooch. Now that have to live with what happens in the Senate.

Why was allow more evidence voted down. Because the friggin' Dems have been playing "just one more thing" bull**** for years. Look at the Kavenaugh hearing. The process was almost done when Fienstein tossed her little grenade even though she'd had it for quite a while.

Nadler published a 500+ page document outlining the evidence and testimony heard in the House.

Then Pelosi takes the Articles which were so important to get to save the world and goes away for a month. Give me a break

No "reasonable doubt" doesn't require even more testimony and documents. IF it did the House should have continued to gather it.

 

[Logician Man]

Well let's see...everything that went down in the House was purely partisan so what's good for the goose and all.

Not really. Whether it be the House, the Senate, The Dems, the Repubs, Independents, any politician who takes ANY action(s) that keep Americans from discerning actual 'truth', is not good for anyone in the long run.

 

[Logician Man]

IF the vote was 53-47 aren't the Dems being just as partisan? Look, the bottom line is the House should not have delivered the Article if they didn't feel they had sufficient evidence. The House had the option to contest Trump's claims of executive privilege in court but

Trump is clearly a dangerous, rouge, self-serving POTUS. The House did nothing but fulfill it's Constitutional duty in impeaching this President.

 

[poweRob]

Elizabeth Warren on Twitter: "After 3 amendments, every GOP senator has voted:
No on subpoenas for White House documents
No on subpoenas for State Dept documents
No on subpoenas for OMB documents
This is a sham trial."​

It sure is.

 

[poweRob]

deleted dupe.

 

[NeverTrump]

This whole sham trial is more fixed that WrestleMania.

So do you believe trump will get off Scot-free?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bullseye]

Trump is clearly a dangerous, rouge, self-serving POTUS. The House did nothing but fulfill it's Constitutional duty in impeaching this President.

None of those traits qualify as "high crimes and misdemeanors".

 

[redrover]

Well let's see...everything that went down in the House was purely partisan so what's good for the goose and all.

The Republicans have made it clear they don't want any evidence to cloud the issue. We are going to vote not guilty and we don't want America to know about the crimes they agreed to ignore. Trump has no real defense so this is their only way out.

 

[Luckyone]

Simple.

The charges are not "bribery, coercion, conspiracy," or any other actual "crimes." The Articles are "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Congress."

The Democrats did this on purpose because they had no actual evidence of any "crimes" and they seek to "investigate" in the Senate to fish for evidence.

However, the Senate does not have to allow this, nor should they. No actual Court would either. Trials are not fishing expeditions, they are dispute resolution mechanisms.

The only defense needed for each Article IMHO is Presidential Authority for Article I and Executive Privilege for Article II.

Thus there is no need to address any other evidence, only that regarding Executive Authority and Executive Privilege. NOT attempt to show bribery, conspiracy, etc..

Nonetheless, the main excuse/reason that the Republicans gave when the Impeachment inquiry was occurring was that it was "second hand testimony" and now because that did not work for their benefit, they changed their excuse/reason and it is now because this is not an impeachable offense. Whether this is impeachable or not is not something you or I can intelligently discuss (it is up to the Constitutional Scholars to decide).

Nonetheless, what is wrong is the "plea being changed". If a person is being accused of spousal abuse and he changes his plea from "innocent" to the "law does not apply in that particular situation and with the charges now stated", the first thing that needs to be done is to find out exactly to what degree the "spousal abuse" was before it can be decided whether the new plea applies or not. Simply stated, if it was the neighbors that reported the incident because they heard all the fight but there was a person in the house when the spousal abuse occurred, bringing in that witness no matter what. That witness will help the judge decide whether the laws do not apply to that spousal abuse or whether it does.

In addition, if spousal abuse did occur but the law to that amount of spousal abuse does not apply, it is still relevant because this person is responsible for all the households in the United States (not just his own) and we need to know just to what degree this person is willing to go as it applies to all of us.

And by the way, since when evidence not necessary when any wrong doing occurs? It is as much of a moral/ethical issue as a legal issue when the entire nation is personally involved. Being specific to this case, if Trump did try to withhold already authorized funds from an ally of our to protect his country in order to obtain a personal favor, it is wrong any way you look at it, whether legally it is or not.

 

[Moderate Right]

A vote on whether to allow new evidence into the impeachment trial was voted on today and did not pass on a 53-47 vote. It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this? Is evidence a political thing? Is the Constitution against evidence being produced? Is providing evidence against our established laws?

None of the above. Evidence is this case is thought to be damaging to Trump and therefore on a partisan basis they voted against it.

Where are we now? Have we decided to throw out our justice system that has been the backbone of our country for 240 years? Have we now decided that truth is no longer important? Are we now more interested in our perceived benefits that in defending our Constitution and our laws?

What happens in the future when some other president that the Republicans are against is then impeached for actions against the Constitution and he gets away with whatever he has done because he refused subpoenas and hid evidence simply because he was able to do so and the party in charge supported him? Is that what you want? Is that what you would support even if it against your political views?

I cannot understand anyone voting against evidence being provided. All Trump supporters have used the law when it has been in their favor, such as the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" being used every single day against the accusations being leveled against Trump. Now you are in favor of no evidence that proves innocence or guilt being introduced?

If that is the case, you are then proving the point that our nation (not just our political representatives) has become corrupt. Corruption from the bottom to the top and not just at the top.

If you believe in our Constitution and believe in our laws that state that guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt", you need to support the introduction of all evidence that is available! It is the only way that guilt or innocence can be proven! Simple as that!

Ummmmmmmmm, the Democrats have 47 and voted 47. That's about as partisan as you can get. Why do the Democrats have to be so partisan?

 

[Drawdown]

The OP is not about parties but about laws and the Constitution.


Are you are against evidence that proves guilt or innocence being provided? Are you for the defendant deciding what evidence can be provided and which not? Are you against our established laws?

This is the question in the OP. There is nothing in the OP that talks about Party.

LOL you better reread your OP where your second and third sentences are, "It was 100% a partisan vote because that is exactly the difference between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

Why are the Republicans being partisan on this?"

 

[jdog21]

This OP is not about the Party's but about the law!

Keep the parties out of your posts on this thread and tell me how you feel about evidence being presented (or not) in a trial.

This is not a trial like in a criminal case, this is a trial by politics.
The house is the prosecutor, prosecutors are supposed to gather the evidence before the trial not during.

 

[HumblePi]

Ummmmmmmmm, the Democrats have 47 and voted 47. That's about as partisan as you can get. Why do the Democrats have to be so partisan?

Seriously? With all the persuasive evidence presented by all democrats today for legitimate reasons to allow witnesses and documents and not ONE republican voted against their party line. It's both a sham and a national disgrace.

 

[Luckyone]

There is no law in what's happening with this impeachment. It's 100% Democrat politics and 100% Democrats making up law as they go along.

On that you are 100% wrong.

If Trump used the power of his office and withheld already authorized funds to obtain a personal political favor, it is wrong.

That needs to be decided in a trial. The Democrats may be proven wrong but a trial must be held and evidence of guilt or innocence has to be provided. It is the law!

Even innocent people have to go to trial when accused even if accused unfairly. It is up to the judge to decide that after "all the evidence is provided". This has been the case now for 240 years.

 

[Luckyone]

#MoscowMitch is going to tank it all. All while lying about doing it.

Just goes to show how deep and strong the corruption in the Republican party is.