Reply With QuoteIf Trump is guilty then I hope he will be prosecuted, but I don't have much time for political games which have been going on since the Russian Collusion hoax, which started before he became president.Originally Posted by PontBlue
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
.
I suspect your right .
If Trump is guilty then I hope he will be prosecuted, but I don't have much time for political games which have been going on since the Russian Collusion hoax, which started before he became president.
The impeachment managers don't seem very convincing judging by their demeaner. It's almost as though their hearts aren't in it, and they are just going through the motions. I'm not seeing any conviction in their delivery either, and it looks like they are reading from a script.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share
'President Trump's lawyer Alan Dershowitz decried his client's impeachment over the weekend because, he said, there was no crime committed.
Impeachment calls for a standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors" - a much debated phrase that dates back to the Constitution and doesn't necessarily mean the law has been broken.
A central plank in Trump's defence is that impeachment should only be applied to allegations of criminal conduct.
But, in 1998, Mr Dershowitz seemed to make the opposite argument in a CNN interview.'
It's not impeachable when it's Trump, but it was when it was Clinton. Seems legit.
Summary of the first day proceedings: The Democrats have turned up to a gunfight without any guns.
They are not attempting to remove POTUS from office.
[2/3rd Senate will not vote to convict [no law(s) broken]]
They are attempting to protect themselves from prosecution and prevent the public from discovering the truth.
Q++
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Russia didn't [hack] the DNC (insider breach)…..
& US INTEL supported Russia [breach] claim……
What does that tell you?
THE US GOV [UNDER POTUS] WENT THROUGH [STILL ONGOING] A MAJOR REMOVE/REPLACE OPERATION.
TRAITORS EVERYWHERE.
'DRAIN THE SWAMP' HAS 'REAL' MEANING.
[Mueller][impeachment] all meant to 'slowdelay prevent' the exposure [& prosecution] of their crimes.
Will new articles of impeachment be 'continually' drafted in effort to hold as ammunition to prevent Senate hearings re: [D] party corruption?
Moves & countermoves.
The 'silent' war continues.
Q
delta.jpg
q.jpg
Easiest bet you'll win all season.
So the sham 'trial' has begun. Trump's team aren't contesting any of the facts as they're too damning. It's difficult to make a decent argument in Trump's defence - if it wasn't, it would have been made by now. Funny how we don't hear "no quid pro quo" any more.
It looks like this is how they're doing it. The Ukraine extortion to get an investigation into Biden's son was foreign policy, and the obstruction of the impeachment inquiry was executive privilege. If the president does it, it's not illegal.
The ultimate aim is to keep all the republican senators happy enough to give their votes (not going to be difficult) then go to the Winchester for a nice cold pint until this blows over.
An interesting take from the blogger who outsmarted the worlds media regarding the Russia Collusion hoax, not to mention a few posters on here including you and lardy.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...achment-flaws/
Says the bloke who swallowed the Steele Dossier nonsense hook, line and sinker!
You could argue that the Impeachment investigation is as corrupt or biased process as is the actual trial by the Senate.
Both processes are weighted to either political party that holds a majority , which makes any impeachment a mockery and allows it to become just a political driven agenda , with no independent judge and jury , but grabbing useful, desperate media headlines .
Thankfully for the Democrats their dreams can come true , as they will have the chance to put this case to a real judge and jury ( the many millions, of American voters .)
I feel another wait and see moment appearing .
Your agreement that Schiff humiliated the Trump's legal team has been duly noted.
You're right there. You have to be suspicious of a 'trial' where more than half the jurors have said they have made their minds up already and refuse to listen to witnesses and refuse to see new evidence.
Have they found the whistleblower yet? They should be witness No.1, followed by Chairman Schiff.
This argument has played elsewhere along with the stonewalling from Trump administration and lawyers for not answering subpoenas because of Executive Privilege, Presidential immunity and the absence of a White House lawyer at any hearing.
Now if you had any degree of scepticism of this you would be asking why all the effort to stop All The President's Men lining up under oath to declare how innocent he is and what a crock of shit the charges are. Then rather than seeing it as the trial being a stitch up behind closed doors you could go in triumph to the American people saying it's plain to everyone that those Dems did their worst and still the facts and evidence bore out that there was nothing to see.
But you haven't...so you don't.
Don't get me involved in your little spat with the Treehouse, this is between you and them, last man standing, etc.. However, his premise is that the entire thing has been scripted, with traps set all over the place, hence the the non-compliance to avoid being ensnared.
I'll be watching from the sidelines, but it helps to know what each side is up to. K.O. is at 6PM
what I dont, get why bring new evidence to the for now ,surely they had it already , it cant just have popped out of nowhere, of course witnesses should be allowed, including the whistle blower ,where is he/she , who is he /she , surely they have to collaborate and anything as important as this , need the hard facts no hearsay ??
Apparently the whistleblower admitted that they were “not a direct witness to most of the events described,” but were rather “informed” of these various facts by “more than half a dozen U.S. officials” in the course of their work , that is a bit weak , any lawyer would shoot that down ???
There's crap on both sides flying around if you ask me .
Why is the whistleblower important to you and the other Trump defenders? He/she reported concerns using the correct protocol and they have been followed up and evidence has been found thanks to that information.
If I said that I heard from a good source that WalesBales likes to **** cabbages and it was investigated and a lot of his friends (ha!) & family confirmed that they were privy to this information and provided first hand accounts of WalesBales demanding them to buy him cabbages to ****... Why would you want to speak to me anymore? All of the people with the information have confirmed that it's true.
It's a diversion tactic to concentrate on the whistleblower.
So why is the IC IG under investigation?
Because I'd like to hear it from the horses mouth ,we have no knowledge of his political allegiance, he serves the country , he should serve himself up as a witness, perhaps he doesn't exist ?
First of all - google 'whistleblowers protection USA and then 'threats against whistleblower Trump'.
Then imagine how worthwhile it would be to hear this:
"Hi everyone, I'm Johnny Whistleblower. I overheard a conversation between members of staff regarding the President abusing his power in office by withholding approved military aid to try to get a foreign nation to investigate a political rival... in order to personally gain an advantage for the President. All of the information that I provided led to investigations and witnesses confirming said information, that the President attempted to convince the Ukrainian head of state to investigate his political opponent by withholding $400m that was approved by congress... but don't worry about those facts, ask me about whether I voted for Al Gore".
Can you see how ridiculous that is? (likely a redundant question).
Also... the Republicans in the senate haven't agreed to allow witnesses in the trial. Why do you think that is? Do innocent people forbid witnesses from proving their innocence?
Nope still think the man should be named .
Quite right. Name him and make his life hell. That way, no one else will dare cross The Great Man.
Yes, all of lifeonmars' concerns have been addressed one way or another weeks ago.
Not a direct witness to the phone call? The WH have released the transcript and Vindman was on the call and gave testimony.
Political allegiance? Sondland is US ambassador to the EU because he was a massive Trump donor, and he gave testimony.
Was informed of what happened, that's a bit weak and any lawyer would shoot him down: Yes Rumpole, that's why there's no point in him giving any further testimony.
Lifeonmars, if you're worried about people not giving testimony, wonder why Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton and many other very involved characters aren't giving theirs. Which ties into...
"what I dont, get why bring new evidence to the for now ,surely they had it already , it cant just have popped out of nowhere, of course witnesses should be allowed," - there are plenty of holes in the narrative, new evidence/witnesses/testimony would fill them. They didn't have it already as the above names haven't spoken and the Lev Parnas business was under a court's lock and key at the time.
Now another question for you to ponder is: if Trump did nothing wrong, why is he so desperate to stop anyone talking?
Are you Rachael Maddow in disguise? Don't forget she's has a history of leading you astray
As if his identity isn't known
How does one provide content to WL?
>comp-to-comp
>person-to-person [1]
Personal comms [secured] prior to release? [1]
The (Source(s)):
>Feeder [1]
>Recipient [1]
Interning for the DNC can be deadly.
Does Crowdstrike possess 'gov_capablity' to trace 'break-in' route(s)?
Does Crowdstrike possess 'gov_capability' re: foreign intercepts?
Possible to layer/insert code [Crowdstrike] to designate intruder [intended target]?
NSA data_bridge DNC-Crowdstrike [bulk data collection]
Matters of National Security [Highest Levels].
FISA is only the beginning.
The hole is DEEP.
It must be done right.
It must be done according to the rule of law.
It must carry weight.
It must be proven in the court of law.
There can be no mistakes.
Good things sometimes take time.
Attempts to slow/block the inevitable [Justice] will fail.
[D]s election interference 2016.
>Clinton/Hussein illegal FISA
[D]s election interference 2018.
>Mueller
[D]s election interference 2020.
>Impeachment
Projection.
These people are sick.
We, the People, are the cure.
Q++
Posting Permissions
