Rapier108 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

The rules they voted on say Schiff can block any question the Republicans ask, and no doubt he will.

---

In an open hearing? Really? Schiff is going on national TV to run a star chamber hearing? Have they lost their minds? The American people will be really turned off by that as turns Trump (and the truth) into a victim.

What edited transcript

aggiehawg said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

The rules they voted on say Schiff can block any question the Republicans ask, and no doubt he will.

---

In an open hearing? Really? Schiff is going on national TV to run a star chamber hearing? Have they lost their minds? The American people will be really turned off by that as turns Trump (and the truth) into a victim.

---

I have no doubt that is what Schiff will do. He cannot allow himself to lose control of the narrative and to so called "rules" allow him to do just that.

FireAg said:

---

nmag34 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

But he did not change his assertion that POTUS said what he said...

He modified what his assumptions were later, but those are Sondland's assumptions, not the words of POTUS...

Try to keep up...

---

Saying "no quid pro quo" negates the fact that all of his subordinates assumed the president meant a quid pro quo based on all of his other statements?

That's an absurd defense.

Trump can use contradictory language, but his intent has been substantiated by his subordinates.

---

It absolutely does not negate a damn thing...

Assumptions are not proof of crimes or wrong-doing...

Give me facts...

"You have long hair and wear hemp-fiber clothing...I assume you smoke weed so you are under arrest and going to jail for weed..."

Thank GOD our judicial system doesn't actually work on 'assumption of guilt'...

---

Our Judicial system should work on presumption of innocence, but after the last couple of years I have my doubts.

What we do know is the Democratic held House of Representatives led by Pelosi, Nadler and bag of schiff actually works on the "presumption of guilt".

Not if the media covers for him and the unaligned voters are not paying attention.

FireAg said:

---

They had TAPES on Nixon...

---

Thanks for proving my point, Bo.

Your Congressional R's defended Nixon and denied his crimes despite a mountain of incriminating evidence and sworn testimony. But then after a hard-fought court battle, the tapes were gotten by Congress and were made public. When the tapes were finally acquired by Congress, the tape transcripts that your WH R's had previously provided were proven to be falsified and edited.

The fear your Congressional R's had of public opinion and voter wrath caused your Congressional R's to quickly do a 180 flipflop, lol. It's what their ilk always does. We know that about them, so we'll keep on moving forward with the investigation.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

---

It's a fact. Impeachment is meant to remove a president. That's not a theory. It's fact. Theres 0.0% chance this happens. So what's the point? If any DA in the country knows there's zero chance he's getting a conviction he doesn't bring a case because he knows it's pointless.

---

A majority of the American people don't see this impeachment investigation as pointless, Bo.

---

We are a union of states, not people. And the state's representatives in the senate are where impeachment is decided.

Oh you are going to see the American people flip all right. Flip the hell out if Schiff tries to muzzle the minority from cross examination on national TV.

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

aggiehawg said:

---

Oh you are going to see the American people flip all right. Flip the hell out if Schiff tries to muzzle the minority from cross examination on national TV.

---

Saving this one, too.

MetoliusAg said:

---

FireAg said:

---

They had TAPES on Nixon...

---

Thanks for proving my point, Bo.

Your Congressional R's defended Nixon and denied his crimes despite a mountain of incriminating evidence and sworn testimony. But then after a hard-fought court battle, the tapes were gotten by Congress and were made public. When the tapes were finally acquired by Congress, the tape transcripts that your WH R's had previously provided were proven to be falsified and edited.

The fear your Congressional R's had of public opinion and voter wrath caused your Congressional R's to quickly do a 180 flipflop, lol. It's what their ilk always does. We know that about them, so we'll keep on moving forward with the investigation.

---

Many were on board before the tapes were released though. None are now for trump. And if something like tapes come out and prove every single thing the democrats are asserting he still isn't not getting removed. So what's the point?

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

---

Not exactly as Schiff interrupted with questions of his own extending the Dem time and curtailing the GOP time.

And I can see you still haven't read the depositions.

MetoliusAg said:

---

FireAg said:

---

They had TAPES on Nixon...

---

Thanks for proving my point, Bo.

Your Congressional R's defended Nixon and denied his crimes despite a mountain of incriminating evidence and sworn testimony. But then after a hard-fought court battle, the tapes were gotten by Congress and were made public. When the tapes were finally acquired by Congress, the tape transcripts that your WH R's had previously provided were proven to be falsified and edited.

The fear your Congressional R's had of public opinion and voter wrath caused your Congressional R's to quickly do a 180 flipflop, lol. It's what their ilk always does. We know that about them, so we'll keep on moving forward with the investigation.

---

Yeah, dude, because additional evidence came out that changed the R's and the American public's mind.

That additional evidence , and let me write this clearly so you can comprehend it, does not exist right now.

Does. Not. Exist.

You can keep draw parallels between the situations all you want, but the most important thing of all is there is no evidence as it now stands that has convinced that majority of the American people and the people they elect that an impeachable offense has occurred.

That's a fact. Outside of the 35% who wanted to impeach the guy before he ever stepped foot in the Oval Office, the vast majority of the rest of the country simply isn't swayed by the dog and pony show.

I'm sorry. I know this hurts. It's just 5 more years.

nmag34 said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

That's a foolproof prosecution method. He said X so it was X. He said Y so he really meant X.

Guilty either way, right?

So assuming all your facts are correct, what is the high crime or misdemeanor?

---

OR... he said X, but his actions are contradictory to X. He said X, but all of his actions support Y. Everyone else thinks he wants Y. He's happy when we do things that support Y. He fired that girl that didn't support Y.

I think he meant Y.

Alleged crimes: Title 18 U.S. Code 872: Extortion by officers or employees of the United States., Title 2 U.S. Code 192, Refusal of witness to testify or produce papers, Title 18 U.S. Code 610.Coercion of political activity, Title 18 U.S. Code 600.Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity.

---

Incredibility weak case here:

Extortion - Doesn't apply because Trump was not pushing for "something of value"
Refusal of witness to testify - Even if you accept every "subpoena" was lawfully sent, this is a misdemeanor for the person who doesn't show up. Not the president.
Coercion of political activity - Assisting an investigation by the DOJ is not a political activity.
Benefit for political activity - Assisting in an investigation by the DOJ is not a political activity.

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

---

Not exactly as Schiff interrupted

---

Yep, just like pretty much every Congressional committee chairperson ever. You and your cohorts sure have changed your tune, aggiehawg. It wasn't long ago y'all were claiming R's weren't even allowed to attend the closed sessions. Then when that was proven to be a lie, y'all claimed R's weren't allowed to ask questions. When that lie was exposed, y'all changed your story again. Seems to be a pattern there.

Speaking of lies, do you think once this all gets on TV, Schiff will finally reveal his hard, slam-dunk evidence on Trump-Russian collusion?

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

---

Not exactly as Schiff interrupted

---

Yep, just like pretty much every Congressional committee chairperson ever. You and your cohorts sure have changed your tune, aggiehawg. It wasn't long ago y'all were claiming R's weren't even allowed to attend the closed sessions. Then when that was proven to be a lie, y'all claimed R's weren't allowed to ask questions. When that lie was exposed, y'all changed your story again. Seems to be a pattern there.

---

Russian Collusion

no wait

Paying off a pornstar

no wait

Tax returns

no wait

Obstruction of Justice

no wait

Sharpiegate

no wait

Ukraine Extortion



Seems to be a pattern there.

FYI...

From Steven Engel, Assistant Attorney General

Quote:

---

Congressional committees participating in an impeachment inquiry may not validly compel executive branch witnesses to testify about matters that potentially involve information protected by executive privilege without the assistance of agency counsel. Congressional subpoenas that purport to require executive branch witnesses to appear without agency counsel in these circumstances are legally invalid and are not subject to civil or criminal enforcement.

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

---

Not exactly as Schiff interrupted

---

Yep, just like pretty much every Congressional committee chairperson ever. You and your cohorts sure have changed your tune, aggiehawg. It wasn't long ago y'all were claiming R's weren't even allowed to attend the closed sessions. Then when that was proven to be a lie, y'all claimed R's weren't allowed to ask questions. When that lie was exposed, y'all changed your story again. Seems to be a pattern there.

---

Who are these "y'alls" you speak of?
Most everyone knew Republicans on the committee were present and could ask questions. The "y'alls" you speak of also knew "bag of schiff" could cut off questions he didn't like because the answers would undercut the Democrats' narrative. These "y'alls" also knew this inquisition was moved to intel for secrecy so select information could be leaked by "bag of schiff".

I sure would like to see the statute that claims the whistleblower's identity must not ever be revealed. I could be wrong but seems some very knowledgeable people, Congressman, ex acting United States Attorney General, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera have stated this is false.

TexAgs91 said:

---

FYI...

From Steven Engel, Assistant Attorney General

Quote:

---

Congressional committees participating in an impeachment inquiry may not validly compel executive branch witnesses to testify about matters that potentially involve information protected by executive privilege without the assistance of agency counsel. Congressional subpoenas that purport to require executive branch witnesses to appear without agency counsel in these circumstances are legally invalid and are not subject to civil or criminal enforcement.

---

---

Gee. Who'd have thunk that? Schiff knows he is issuing invalid subpoenas in an effort to create some fiddle-faddle obstruction of Congress article of impeachment.

With this opinion and guideline, the Senate has solid grounds on which to not accept such an article of impeachment for trial in the Senate as it lacks any basis in the law, nor is it an abuse of office.

Quote:

---

Yep, just like pretty much every Congressional committee chairperson ever. You and your cohorts sure have changed your tune, aggiehawg. It wasn't long ago y'all were claiming R's weren't even allowed to attend the closed sessions. Then when that was proven to be a lie, y'all claimed R's weren't allowed to ask questions. When that lie was exposed, y'all changed your story again. Seems to be a pattern there.

---

Matt Gaetz has filed an ethics complaint over being excluded, so the matter is still in question. If you had read the depositions you would know how many of the minority's complaints about the ad hoc process were put into the record. Which will be the record that is transmitted to the Senate.

Schiff pulling some nonsense? I shant believe it. I shannot

will25u said:

---

---

As with other releases, it is going to prove to be far less damning than Schiff has lead everyone to believe...

FireAg said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

As with other releases, it is going to prove to be far less damning than Schiff has lead everyone to believe...

---

He'll leave out anything which doesn't fit his narrative. Other releases have been excerpts only.

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

R's received equal time to question and cross examine in the closed hearings, too, and you know it.

---

Not exactly as Schiff interrupted with questions of his own extending the Dem time and curtailing the GOP time.

And I can see you still haven't read the depositions.

---

My favorite part of Volker's deposition is when Meadows complains he isn't allowed to ask questions, is told he can ask questions, and then doesn't ask any. Page 171-173.

Tbh, this happens on both sides. But inside the RWM and internet media sphere of Trump's GOP Congressional defenders, it isn't an anomoly; it's their daily way of life.
|
v

What an unfortunate tweet from Ciaramella's lawyer. Sounds like he's more than willing to be part of a conspiracy, should the opportunity present itself.

Quote:

---

Matt Gaetz has filed an ethics complaint over being excluded, so the matter is still in question.

---

Gaetz wasn't a member of the 3 committees.

Quote:

---

If you had read the depositions you would know how many of the minority's complaints about the ad hoc process were put into the record. Which will be the record that is transmitted to the Senate.

---

If you had read MSM news sources like Manu Raju, you'd have known it was a baldfaced lie that the 47 GOP members of the 3 committees were excluded from attending, and you'd have known it was another baldfaced lie that they weren't allowed to ask questions and cross examine.

Quote:

---

What an unfortunate tweet from Ciaramella's lawyer. Sounds like he's more than willing to be part of a conspiracy, should the opportunity present itself.

---

A tweet from 2017 means Zaid is part of a conspiracy? The thread you want is here: link

So now Lindsey Graham is going with the "Trump is too go**amn incompetent to pull off a bribery/extortion scheme with Zelensky" narrative. I like it.

-- It's factually accurate.

-- The spectacle of R's claiming that "attempted extortion / bribery doesn't meet the Constitutional standard for removal from office" is pure gold.

Yeah, the minority was just hunky dory with Schiff's rules.