The OOTIKOF, an internationally renowned society of flamers since 1998, invites you to join in the fun. Clicking on Casual Banter will get you to all the sections.
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:03 am
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Mon Jan 27, 2020 5:29 pm
The Wise And Powerful"
Quote :
Thanx for admitting that Schiff wouldn't allow Republican's requests for witnesses.
The witnesses need to obey their subpoenas Some came forth.. The others defied the subpoenas.. .. Here’s a look at those subpoenas, indicating whether they are for documents, testimony or both. They are listed here in order of the deadline.
Only a few----
-- John Bolton
1. Sec. of State Mike Pompeo. (Documents) Deadline: October 4. Status: Not in compliance. The State Department sent a letter to Congress on October 4 about the request. That has not been made public.
2. Marie Yovanovitch. Former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. (Testimony) Deadline: October 11. Status: Complied with the deadline. This subpoena is an exception, however, because Democrats openly issued it only after the State Department blocked Yovanovitch from testifying voluntarily. It was issued hours before she testified.
3. Ambassador Gordon Sondland. Ambassador to the European Union. (Documents and testimony) Deadline: October 14 for documents. October 16 for testimony. Status: Sondland’s attorneys sent out a statement saying he will testify, but will not turn over documents, because they are the property of the State Department.
4. Office of Management and Budget. (Documents) Deadline: October 15. Status: Awaiting response.
5. Department of Defense. (Documents) Deadline: October 15. Status: Awaiting response.
6. Igor Fruman. Associate of Rudy Giuliani. (Documents and testimony) Deadline: October 16 for documents. Testimony date to be determined later. Status: Awaiting response.
7. Lev Parnas. Associate of Rudy Giuliani. (Documents and testimony) Deadline: October 16 for documents. Testimony date to be determined later. Status: Awaiting response.
8. Mike Mulvaney. White House chief of staff. (Documents.) Deadline: October 18. Status: Awaiting response.
9. Rick Perry. Energy Secretary. (Documents.) Deadline: October 18.
By Associated Press
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Sen. King: 5-10 GOP Senators Will Vote to Hear Witnesses. Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:40 pm
Sen. King: 5-10 GOP Senators Will Vote to Hear Witnesses.
NPR interviewed Sen. Angus King of Maine (independent, caucuses with the Democrats):
Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, told NPR's Mary Louise Kelly on Monday that up to 10 Republican senators could vote for witnesses following the Times' report about the Bolton manuscript.
"I'm already hearing a number of Republicans who are moving toward voting to at least hear from John Bolton, if not other witnesses," he said. When asked if four Republicans would vote for witnesses, he said: "I think there'll be more. My bold prediction will be five or 10."
Grackle
Posts : 2495 Join date : 2017-09-09
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:49 pm
Temple copy and pastes 2 more articles in attempt to build his Strawman to deflect from the issue at hand, which is the FACT that republicans were denied the opportunity to call witnesses during the inquiry, which he has denied, claiming republicans DID call witnesses, which is blatantly false ..His 2 articles are irrelevant
Temple wrote:
The witnesses need to obey their subpoenas
Not under executive order ..and Bolton was never subpoenaed ..
Quote :
Some came forth.. The others defied the subpoenas..
Maybe they were ordered not to comply or maybe they chose not entertain the democrats' partisan impeachment agenda they've had since the 2016 election of Trump .. It doesn't matter .. Dems coulda used the courts ...They didn't, and proceeded with their inquiry without them .
.Apparently they weren't that important to their inquiry as they made their case without them, voted to impeach, and after needlessly bumbling for a month, submitted the articles to the senate ..Now they're squawkin' that they need more evidence, which was supposedly gathered during the inquiry that their impeachment is based on
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: BREAKING; Senators To Get Their Turn For Questions Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:54 pm
The eighth day of President Trump's Senate impeachment trial on Wednesday will see senators begin to ask questions following the completion of both sides' opening arguments.
It'll be our first look during official proceedings at how the senators have digested the arguments from House impeachment managers and Trump's legal team — and it'll preview whether former national security adviser John Bolton's book draft could impact the push for witnesses later in the week.
This post will be updated with new developments when the trial resumes at 1 p.m. on Wednesday.
Grackle
Posts : 2495 Join date : 2017-09-09
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Tue Jan 28, 2020 4:44 pm
I guess you lost your bearings on the board and pounded this out about the impeachment -on the *Democratic Debates Highlights* thread
Quote :
It all makes no difference.. Mitch will not allow witnesses/documents or to oust trump. I don't waste time watching. I do read the highlights. I find junk to post to see Grack mess himself over it ..
Beyond me why you wast time on this shit..
aww .. You feel better now after ^that pouting and ready to try again? ..S'ok, Adam and Jerry will be there to boost your confidence again.. Wipe the snot from your lip and relax
The Wise And Powerful Admin
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:43 pm
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Wed Jan 29, 2020 5:38 pm
I don't tune into that bore-fest. It's nowhere like that tv show Paul Masson. his trials were exciting. G'ma watched him. He's on old time TV MeTV look at a real tv trial.
Well, if witnesses are allowed it will somewhat exciting then I'd tune in..
Now, I read the highlights, and watch the highlights-- that's enough..
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: The Senate Chamber Burst Into Laughter. Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:07 pm
“Today, while we’ve been debating whether a president can be impeached for essentially bogus claims of privilege, for attempting to use the courts to cover up misconduct, the Justice Department in resisting subpoenas is in court today … (snip-- “So the judge says: ‘If the Congress can’t enforce its subpoenas in court, then what remedy is there?’ And the Justice Department lawyer’s response is ‘Impeachment! Impeachment!’”
Subject: Republicans Can’t Win , They Steal Elections- Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:19 pm
Republicans Can’t Win Presidential Elections Anymore, but They Sure Can Steal Them
‘LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE’
They can go on about Federalist this or Hamilton’s letter that, but the fact is that impeachment is in the Constitution, with no “unless we’re coming up on an election” exception.
“Let the people decide for themselves!” cried White House Counsel Pat Cipollone Wednesday, warning senators not to even think about pushing Trump out less than 10 months before an election.
Hmmm: Where have we heard that one before?
Flash back four years, to when Justice Antonin Scalia died and, while his corpse was still warm, Mitch McConnell said:
“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Exclusive Impeachment Trial Footage of Pam Bondi Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:24 pm
Exclusive Impeachment Trial Footage of Pam Bondi
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Senator John Warner; ''Follow “Judicial Norms” by “Welcoming Relevant Witnesses And Documents” Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:51 pm
NEW: Former Senator John Warner, a Republican and elder statesman of Virginia politics, has issued a statement calling on fellow Republicans to follow “judicial norms” by “welcoming relevant witnesses and documents” in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
The Wise And Powerful Admin
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:00 am
The Wise And Powerful Admin
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:38 am
Published 28 mins ago, Last Update 26 mins ago Pelosi argues Trump 'cannot be acquitted,' suggests defense team should be disbarred By Dom Calicchio | Fox News
In scathing comments Thursday as her party appeared on the verge of defeat in the Senate impeachment trial, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi argued that President Trump "cannot be acquitted" if the trial lacks the witness testimony and documentation that Democrats have been seeking.
The San Francisco Democrat also fired on Trump's impeachment defense team, saying they've "disgraced themselves" during this week's trial and suggesting they deserve disbarment over their trial remarks.
The comments came hours before Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said he would not back efforts by Democrats to have witnesses testify at the Senate trial – all but sealing an acquittal for Trump.
But Pelosi challenged whether that acquittal would be valid, in remarks that seemed a bid to undermine any Trump claim of victory.
"He will not be acquitted," Pelosi insisted during her weekly news conference, according to Politico. “You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that. Does the president know right from wrong? I don't think so.” "He will not be acquitted. You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that. Does the president know right from wrong? I don't think so.”
— House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Democrats have been seeking to have former national security adviser John Bolton, and possibly others, testify at the trial. Bolton, who was fired in September, is reportedly willing to provide testimony that could bolster the Democrats’ arguments that Trump abused his power by seeking a quid-pro-quo deal with Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Pelosi’s comments about Trump’s legal team were equally combative.
“You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that,” Pelosi says.
politico.com
POLITICO @politico "He will not be acquitted," Pelosi declared today. “You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that."
“Does the president know right from wrong? I don't think so" https://politi.co/2Oe2UB5 4:28 PM - Jan 30, 2020
"I don't know how they can retain their lawyer status, in the comments that they're making," Pelosi told reporters, according to The Hill. "I don't think they made the case. I think they disgraced themselves terribly in terms of their violation of what our Constitution is about and what a president's behavior should be."
"I don't know how they can retain their lawyer status, in the comments that they're making. I don't think they made the case. I think they disgraced themselves terribly in terms of their violation of what our Constitution is about and what a president's behavior should be."
— House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Pelosi also accused other Trump allies of attempting “to dismantle the Constitution” in order to shield the president from conviction and removal from office over two articles of impeachment that the Democrat-controlled House approved in December.
“Some of them are even lawyers,” Pelosi said. “Imagine that you would say — ever, of any president, no matter who he or she is or whatever party -- if the president thinks that his or her presidency ... is good for the country, then any action is justified — including encouraging a foreign government to have an impact on our elections."
“[That] is exactly what our Founders were opposed to — and they feared,” she added, according to The Hill. “I don't think they made the case. I think they disgraced themselves terribly in terms of their violation of what our Constitution is about and what a president's behavior should be.”
Pelosi’s comments about the legal team were largely a reaction to Wednesday’s assertion by Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz, that, “If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”
Much of the media was quick to attack Dershowitz’s argument, comparing it to former President Richard Nixon’s 1977 comment to British interviewer David Frost that all presidential actions, particularly on national security, were legally justified.
"Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal,” Nixon said.
Dershowitz pushed back on the criticism Thursday.
“I did not say or imply that a candidate could do anything to reassure his reelection,” Dershowitz wrote on Twitter, “only that seeking help in an election is not necessarily corrupt, citing the Lincoln and Obama examples. Critics have an obligation to respond to what I said, not to create straw men to attack.”
Alan Dershowitz @AlanDersh · 18h Replying to @AlanDersh I gave another hypothetical. President Obama promised to bomb Syrian military targets if Assad used chemical weapons. He broke his promise. (MTC)
Alan Dershowitz @AlanDersh I did not say or imply that a candidate could do anything to reassure his reelection, only that seeking help in an election is not necessarily corrupt, citing the Lincoln and Obama examples. Critics have an obligation to respond to what I said, not to create straw men to attack. 8:40 AM - Jan 30, 2020
Dershowitz elaborated further during an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity.”
"The point I was making was about the senators," Dershowitz said on "Hannity." "What I said [was] if you have mixed motives if you are in the public interest and you're trying to help the public, but you're also trying to get re-elected, according to [Rep. Adam] Schiff and [Rep. Jerry] Nadler, that's a crime.
Alan Dershowitz responds to comparison to HitlerVideo Pelosi has faced her own share of criticism for stalling the impeachment process for about a month – by withholding the approved articles of impeachment from the Senate, seeking leverage in setting the parameters of the Senate trial -- after initially calling for “urgency” while House panels were holding their impeachment inquiries.
President Trump and other Republicans argued that Pelosi slowed down the process at least in part because she viewed the Democrats’ chances of winning a conviction of Trump in the Senate to be weak.
“We know their case is not strong and now they want to change the rules,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said during an appearance on “Fox & Friends” in early January, referring to Senate Democrats’ call for witnesses at the trial.
Late Thursday, the Democrats’ hopes of seeing Trump convicted took a severe blow when Alexander – one of a small group of Republicans thought to be sympathetic to approving witness testimony at the Senate trial – announced he opposed the effort.
Alexander’s decision made it unlikely that Democrats would attract enough Republican votes to win the argument for witnesses at the trial, making Trump’s acquittal all but certain.
Subject: The Motion To Call Witnesses Failed Fri Jan 31, 2020 6:47 pm
The Senate voted against calling witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial, which is a first in US history
The Senate on Friday voted against calling witnesses in President Donald Trump's historic impeachment trial.
The motion to call witnesses failed, with 51 senators voting against it and 49 voting in favor.
Democrats repeatedly made the case that former national security adviser John Bolton should be called to testify.
Witnesses were called in all 15 impeachment trials in the Senate in US history.
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Fri Jan 31, 2020 6:57 pm
Recall as you read this story that Trump attorney Patrick Philbin, asked about Giuliani's actions, said on the Senate floor:
"I want to make clear that there was no conduct of foreign policy being carried out here by a private person."
Bolton’s book says there was an earlier call — and Cipollone was in the room for it?
The same Cipollone who’s been in the Senate for a week, insisting that there was no quid pro quo? Saying Bolton wouldn’t add anything new?
Cipollone has argued to the Senate - no there there - but he was in the room when Trump was asking Bolton to help shake down Zelensky. John Bolton released another new bombshell in his forthcoming book — and places President Donald Trump’s lead impeachment attorney as a fact witness in the Ukraine extortion plot.
The revelation — which came hours after Republicans appeared to have sewn up the votes needed to bar new witness testimony — shocked readers.
“Mr. Trump gave the instruction ... during an Oval Office conversation in early May that included ...the WH counsel, Pat A. Cipollone
So as a matter of professional legal ethics you can't really represent a client in a matter in which you are also a witness (or accomplice) and it's a bar-grievable issue --
((can a lawyer be disbarred for representing a client in a matter in which the lawyer is himself implicated?, yup))
Grackle
Posts : 2495 Join date : 2017-09-09
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:44 pm
Quote :
The Senate voted against calling witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial, which is a first in US history
And that comes as a surprise to you? .. Republicans have been sayin' all along that they don't wanna call witnesses .. now democrats act stunned that they voted not to call witnesses ..I guess they weren't paying attention ...I imagine it's also the 1st time in US history that congress has tried to impeach a president throughout an entire term, starting before the inauguration
Quote :
The Senate on Friday voted against calling witnesses in President Donald Trump's historic impeachment trial.
uhh ..so we've heard ....in the sentence immediately preceding this one
Quote :
The motion to call witnesses failed
That sounds familiar ...lol
Quote :
Democrats repeatedly made the case that former national security adviser John Bolton should be called to testify.
Did they? .. I heard somewhere that the senate voted not to call witnesses ..I forget where I heard that .. I suggest the democrats prolly shoulda called him at some point over the 3 months during the inquiry if they thought his testimony was of importance
Grackle
Posts : 2495 Join date : 2017-09-09
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:55 pm
Quote :
Democrats repeatedly made the case that former national security adviser John Bolton should be called to testify.
At the 8:00 minute mark on the video, Schumer says (about Bolton) "~I don't think anything he has to say will stand up anyway~" ...or something close to that
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Senate Chaplain Delivers Blistering Impeachment Benediction in Senate. Fri Jan 31, 2020 11:44 pm
Published 11 hours ago on January 31, 2020
We always reap what we sow’: Senate chaplain delivers blistering impeachment benediction.
Barry Black, the chaplain since 2003, delivered the opening benediction Friday before a Republican majority was expected to vote against hearing additional witness testimony.
“You have summarized ethical behavior in a single sentence,” Black said. “Do for others what you would like them to do for you.”
He then seemed to take aim at GOP senators in his prayer.
“Remind our senators that they alone are accountable to you for their conduct. Lord help them to remember, that they can’t ignore you and get away with it. For we always reap what we sow.”
Many viewers praised Black for what they saw as a implicit condemnation of Republicans.
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Sat Feb 01, 2020 4:21 pm
Grackle
Posts : 2495 Join date : 2017-09-09
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Sat Feb 01, 2020 5:29 pm
"Apples and oranges" .. McDougal was convicted of several felonies and involved in the Whitewater fiasco ..I think she was actually a partner in it ..her going to prison had nothing to do with Clinton's impeachment ... She refused to answer questions before a grand jury and a federal judge
I don't know how many of the people in your meme were actually subpoenaed (Bolton wasn't) but if democrats had brought subpoenas to a federal judge and s/he ordered them to testify and they refused, I suggest they'd end up in jail ..doubtfully as long as McDougal cuz I doubt they have felonies pending ...Democrats didn't use the courts to force anyone to answer subpoenas so they didn't defy orders from a judge so they weren't arrested/jailed
The Wise And Powerful Admin
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Sat Feb 01, 2020 11:30 pm
How much is Trump’s impeachment costing taxpayers? The impeachment inquiry and trial has cost significantly less than President Bill Clinton's in 1994 By Megan Henney | FOXBusiness
The third impeachment trial in U.S. history is rapidly heading toward a close, with President Trump’s acquittal all but guaranteed after the Senate on Friday rejected a call to allow new witness testimony.
According to an estimate from the Heritage Foundation in December, the Democrat-led House of Representatives inquiry, and eventual impeachment of Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress on Dec. 18, cost taxpayers an estimated $3.06 million.
That price tag includes the money spent on the salaries of 106 congressional staffers from the House Intelligence Committee, the Judiciary Committee and the Oversight and Reform Committee, who worked on impeachment from Sept. 24 to Dec. 13, according to the Daily Signal. It also included the estimated hourly fees of six attorneys who appeared during hearings.
At the heart of the impeachment case is the allegation that Trump intentionally withheld military aid from Ukraine in order to pressure the country to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, who served on the board of Burisma, Ukraine’s largest natural gas company, while his father was vice president.
While the figure doesn't include the Senate trial, the tab through December is sharply lower than the one for the impeachment investigation and trial of President Bill Clinton two decades ago. According to CNN, the independent probe into Clinton cost taxpayers $80 million in 1994.
The Republican National Committee is picking up the tab for at least two of Trump’s private attorneys, according to The Washington Post, a far different strategy than that employed by Clinton, who set up a legal fund that failed to cover millions of dollars in bills before he left office.
The law firms of Trump’s lead lawyer, Jay Sekulow, and attorney Jane Raskin have received $225,000 from the RNC through November, the Post reported. The party will pay the duo for their work in January and this month as the trial continues, according to the Post, which cited people familiar with the arrangement.
Last year, the RNC and Trump’s fundraising committees brought in a combined $463.6 million, ending the year with $194.8 million in the bank, highlighting the party's success in capitalizing on the threat of impeachment.
"[Donors] are tuning out the Democrats’ politically motivated impeachment charade and turning out for the president and his record of results," RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement to Fox News.
Because Trump is on trial as a result of his holding office, he’s allowed to use his campaign or party coffers to pay his bills. His legal team also includes Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz (who has said he won't accept payment for his work), former independent counsel Ken Starr, who led the Clinton investigation; and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Closing arguments will begin Monday morning and will not exceed four hours total. Senators plan to vote Wednesday on the two impeachment charges against Trump: abuse of power and obstruction of justice.
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: ‘Move for a mistrial ... Sun Feb 02, 2020 7:19 pm
-‘Move for a mistrial ... ((^^ that would be fun, they should go for it' nothing to lose, and I'd be entertained))
Schiff could make a motion for a mistrial based on, among other things, the revelation of [Pat] Cipollone’s grossly unethical conduct/conflicts of interest. referring to allegations that the president’s attorney witnessed presidential high crimes.
Cipollone perpetrated a unimaginable fraud on the Senate and the American people and the Dems should not go quietly into that dark acquittal. Move for a mistrial and see what the Chief Justice says.
They could argue the rules as adopted never contemplated the president’s lawyers would have hidden from the Senate, the Chief Justice and the American people such egregious, disqualifying information (as recently disclosed by John Bolton).”
Temple Regular Member
Posts : 7317 Join date : 2014-07-29
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:10 pm
Trumps pettyness. He is a child having tantrums. How fukin pathetic-
Mitt Romney barred from conservative conference after impeachment vote;
Mitt Romney has been barred from a major conservative conference (CPAC 2020) after he voted to hear from additional witnesses in President Trump's impeachment trial.
The Wise And Powerful Admin
Posts : 111040 Join date : 2014-07-29 Age : 101 Location : A Mile High
Subject: Re: Public Impeachment Hearings Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:16 pm
Temple wrote:
Trumps pettyness. He is a child having tantrums. How fukin pathetic-
Mitt Romney barred from conservative conference after impeachment vote;
Mitt Romney has been barred from a major conservative conference after he voted to hear from additional witnesses in President Trump's impeachment trial.
Trump has nothing to do with what the Senates' conservative conference does or doesn't do.
Home 
