|
|
Post by westcoastoffensive on Jan 28, 2020 20:58:44 GMT -5
I thought Pat Cipollone made his case well. Just watched it. "The notion of a fair trial exists for the sake of the accused, not the state." tell me more The 6th Amendment. Jury of peers. Presumption of innocence. Speedy and fair trial. Our framers were protecting the rights of the individual against the state. The argument I would be making if I was rabid TDS Dem is that this is not a criminal trial but a political one so we can be as unfair as we want against the evil Orange man. The fact that the prosecutors are trying to play victim is weak as hell. Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 28, 2020 21:37:44 GMT -5
The 6th Amendment. Jury of peers. Presumption of innocence. Speedy and fair trial. Our framers were protecting the rights of the individual against the state. The argument I would be making if I was rabid TDS Dem is that this is not a criminal trial but a political one so we can be as unfair as we want against the evil Orange man. The fact that the prosecutors are trying to play victim is weak as hell. Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. The Dems controlled the impeachment in the house. They had the football and were able to do anything they wanted. They didnt call certain witnesses. They controlled the evidence that would be sent to the Senate. The Republicans hold the football in the Senate and have decided (until this point) to not add witnesses. They are going with what the Dems provided them. Simple as that. If they were interested in defending the constitution they would do their job and pass laws. The power of the executive has grown over the decades because the legislative has abdicated its responsibilities and at times encouraged the executive to act on their behalf. Our entire foreign policy is based on quid pro quo. We help countries in exchange for things all the time. And we punish ones who dont do what we want. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. |
|
|
|
Post by 32Green on Jan 28, 2020 21:56:00 GMT -5
Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. The Dems controlled the impeachment in the house. They had the football and were able to do anything they wanted. They didnt call certain witnesses. They controlled the evidence that would be sent to the Senate. The Republicans hold the football in the Senate and have decided (until this point) to not add witnesses. They are going with what the Dems provided them. Simple as that. If they were interested in defending the constitution they would do their job and pass laws. The power of the executive has grown over the decades because the legislative has abdicated its responsibilities and at times encouraged the executive to act on their behalf. Our entire foreign policy is based on quid pro quo. We help countries in exchange for things all the time. And we punish ones who dont do what we want. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. Agreed, well stated. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Jan 28, 2020 22:29:52 GMT -5
Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. The Dems controlled the impeachment in the house. They had the football and were able to do anything they wanted. They didnt call certain witnesses. They controlled the evidence that would be sent to the Senate. The Republicans hold the football in the Senate and have decided (until this point) to not add witnesses. They are going with what the Dems provided them. Simple as that. If they were interested in defending the constitution they would do their job and pass laws. The power of the executive has grown over the decades because the legislative has abdicated its responsibilities and at times encouraged the executive to act on their behalf. Our entire foreign policy is based on quid pro quo. We help countries in exchange for things all the time. And we punish ones who dont do what we want. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. Exactly |
|
|
|
Post by shakin on Jan 29, 2020 0:13:01 GMT -5
The 6th Amendment. Jury of peers. Presumption of innocence. Speedy and fair trial. Our framers were protecting the rights of the individual against the state. The argument I would be making if I was rabid TDS Dem is that this is not a criminal trial but a political one so we can be as unfair as we want against the evil Orange man. The fact that the prosecutors are trying to play victim is weak as hell. Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. who are you and what have you done with wco i'm scared |
|
|
|
Post by westcoastoffensive on Jan 29, 2020 2:30:37 GMT -5
Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. who are you and what have you done with wco i'm scared You wanna see something REALLY SCARY?!?!?! newyorkjetshampur.com/board/19/hampurgatory-holding-penAnthony Robbins would struggle in there. |
|
|
|
Post by westcoastoffensive on Jan 29, 2020 2:37:13 GMT -5
Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. Very succinct; much appreciated. Esp this part. |
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Jan 29, 2020 10:15:49 GMT -5
lol 'vadimir ploootin' this wretched twat makes biden look cogent She looks like she’s turning into Michael Jackson. or a Mexican Day of the Dead pinata |
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Jan 29, 2020 10:20:24 GMT -5
Those rights are important. I believe you're conflating the Dems messages in bringing Articles of Impeachment, with the Dems' gripes re: setting of rule for the Impeachment trial. To say that defending Constitution is "the State persecuting the individual"... sounds off. The "quid pro quo" is a different matter and needs to be vetted, and vetted thoroughly. That's the deal. The Dems controlled the impeachment in the house. They had the football and were able to do anything they wanted. They didnt call certain witnesses. They controlled the evidence that would be sent to the Senate. The Republicans hold the football in the Senate and have decided (until this point) to not add witnesses. They are going with what the Dems provided them. Simple as that. If they were interested in defending the constitution they would do their job and pass laws. The power of the executive has grown over the decades because the legislative has abdicated its responsibilities and at times encouraged the executive to act on their behalf. Our entire foreign policy is based on quid pro quo. We help countries in exchange for things all the time. And we punish ones who dont do what we want. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. I would add that as POTUS, he has the right to investigate possible criminal acts perpetrated by American citizens, even if those involved happen to be running for President. |
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 29, 2020 13:03:20 GMT -5
The Dems controlled the impeachment in the house. They had the football and were able to do anything they wanted. They didnt call certain witnesses. They controlled the evidence that would be sent to the Senate. The Republicans hold the football in the Senate and have decided (until this point) to not add witnesses. They are going with what the Dems provided them. Simple as that. If they were interested in defending the constitution they would do their job and pass laws. The power of the executive has grown over the decades because the legislative has abdicated its responsibilities and at times encouraged the executive to act on their behalf. Our entire foreign policy is based on quid pro quo. We help countries in exchange for things all the time. And we punish ones who dont do what we want. But if you want to drill down on this specific case with Ukraine then I dont see how you can get past their PM stating he didnt feel pressured and the fact that they didnt even know the aid was being held up. Also, Trump provided them with lethal military aid that the previous administration didnt. And they were invaded by Russia under Obama. I would add that as POTUS, he has the right to investigate possible criminal acts perpetrated by American citizens, even if those involved happen to be running for President. Of course. He is the chief executive and the DOJ is under the executive branch. BTW its not his right. It is his obligation. |
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 29, 2020 15:06:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 29, 2020 15:06:58 GMT -5
#wewantallthetranscripts
|
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Jan 29, 2020 21:10:34 GMT -5
lol - Tim Scott asks who "debunked the Biden Burisma" claim. Answer NO ONE! ooooh dis gettin good!
|
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Jan 29, 2020 21:11:44 GMT -5
(R) Senators asking about Schitt and whistleblower and SchittySchiffhead refuses to answer |
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Jan 29, 2020 21:16:58 GMT -5
Sekulow (and really the entire team) is fucking brilliant. Took Schitt apart with his "hypotheticals". Said Dims used foreigners to investigate Trump and dig up dirt.
So Trump 2020 landslide bigger than Reagan vs Mondale? possibly
|
|
