Doubt it. Nobody blocks exculpatory information when they're innocent. Especially when this is as much a public sentiment game as a legal one.

70% of Americans know he did something wrong, the other 30% wouldn't be convinced by a confession. The more revealed through FOIA and new witnesses, the more damning it is, not a good trend.

aginlakeway said:

---

Ok. So when will the articles of impeachment be sent to the senate? We were told by the media and democrats this was a crisis ...

---

Soon I'd bet but who knows. It's been 0 session days, the Clinton trial was 5 weeks after impeachment. Why does the Senate not want possibly exculpatory evidence and witnesses?

Chance Chase McMasters said:

---

Doubt it. Nobody blocks exculpatory information when they're innocent. Especially when this is as much a public sentiment game as a legal one.

70% of Americans know he did something wrong, the other 30% wouldn't be convinced by a confession. The more revealed through FOIA and new witnesses, the more damning it is, not a good trend.

---

No reason to present any witnesses if you believe the case against you hasn't been made. Nancy is sitting on this for a reason. Maybe she moves it along but then it gets dismissed and she doesn't have it to hang over Trump.

Nancy got suckered in by the new guard. She didn't want to go this route. She knows Schiff is an idiot.

Chance Chase McMasters said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

Ok. So when will the articles of impeachment be sent to the senate? We were told by the media and democrats this was a crisis ...

---

Soon I'd bet but who knows. It's been 0 session days, the Clinton trial was 5 weeks after impeachment. Why does the Senate not want possibly exculpatory evidence and witnesses?

---

I thought this was urgent and that Trump was a threat to our national security and needed to be removed immediately.

I'll wait and judge what the Senate does after they actually get the articles of impeachment.

So do you still think Trump won't win this November?

backintexas2013 said:

---

Chance Chase McMasters said:

---

Doubt it. Nobody blocks exculpatory information when they're innocent. Especially when this is as much a public sentiment game as a legal one.

70% of Americans know he did something wrong, the other 30% wouldn't be convinced by a confession. The more revealed through FOIA and new witnesses, the more damning it is, not a good trend.

---

No reason to present any witnesses if you believe the case against you hasn't been made. Nancy is sitting on this for a reason. Maybe she moves it along but then it gets dismissed and she doesn't have it to hang over Trump.

Nancy got suckered in by the new guard. She didn't want to go this route. She knows Schiff is an idiot.

---

It takes one to know one, they're like peas in a pod.

Trump hasn't been impeached. Isn't that the Dem claim now? He has been impeached until NP sends over the articles?

When does Hillary get sworn in?

70% of American democrats Gary?

Rockdoc said:

---

70% of American democrats Gary?

---

Yeah. I wonder how he will reconcile that with ~70 million votes that will be cast for Trump in November. So many people "know he did something wrong" and yet he ends up winning in a landslide because the Orange Man can just mesmerize voters and make them act against their own will.

Ulysses90 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

70% of American democrats Gary?

---

Yeah. I wonder how he will reconcile that with ~70 million votes that will be cast for Trump in November. So many people "know he did something wrong" and yet he ends up winning in a landslide because the Orange Man can just mesmerize voters and make them act against their own will.

---

He turned me into a newt.

Chance Chase McMasters said:

---

Doubt it. Nobody blocks exculpatory information when they're innocent. Especially when this is as much a public sentiment game as a legal one.

70% of Americans know he did something wrong, the other 30% wouldn't be convinced by a confession. The more revealed through FOIA and new witnesses, the more damning it is, not a good trend.

---

Keep perpetuating the DNC lies.
War Turtle has not blocked any witnesses. He merely has stated that he wants to hear the case from the House before they vote on whether or not they need to call witnesses. It apparently is the same process used for Clinton.

Since the House has such a strong, impartial case, the Senate would of course vote to hear additional witnesses or vote to convict with the need for witnesses. Why jump the gun, McMetcetera?

Chance Chase McMasters said:

---

Doubt it. Nobody blocks exculpatory information when they're innocent. Especially when this is as much a public sentiment game as a legal one.

70% of Americans know he did something wrong, the other 30% wouldn't be convinced by a confession. The more revealed through FOIA and new witnesses, the more damning it is, not a good trend.

---

Bogus stats don't bolster your claims. Also, in terms of impeaching and ultimately removing the President of The United States, the term "wrong" has to represent actions which are illegal/unethical not just antithetical to whatever the democrat stance of the day is.

"Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society."

- John Adams

Hmmm, good question for Eric Holder and Obama too don't you think. Do you assume their guilt too?

Chuck Schumer just gave a speech on the senate floor. He's a real piece of work. Basically begging for his witnesses to be called.

FriscoKid said:

---

Chuck Schumer just gave a speech on the senate floor. He's a real piece of work. Basically begging for his witnesses to be called.

---

"Hey guys! Iran is really no big deal...Don't forget that we're trying to finish impeaching Trump over here!"
/Dems

tsuag10 said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Chuck Schumer just gave a speech on the senate floor. He's a real piece of work. Basically begging for his witnesses to be called.

---

"Hey guys! Iran is really no big deal...Don't forget that we're trying to finish impeaching Trump over here!"
/Dems

---

No, he talked about that too. "Trump had no right to do that without consulting with me". (Since he was part of the gang of 8)

FriscoKid said:

---

tsuag10 said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Chuck Schumer just gave a speech on the senate floor. He's a real piece of work. Basically begging for his witnesses to be called.

---

"Hey guys! Iran is really no big deal...Don't forget that we're trying to finish impeaching Trump over here!"
/Dems

---

No, he talked about that too. "Trump had no right to do that without consulting with me". (Since he was part of the gang of 8)

---

Poor guy. Little Chuckie is just getting disrespected from all angles.

Charles Schumer has been "serving" since 1998. He has accomplished absolutely nothing in his unlimited term. He is the swamp. He is the disease.

He's only got 90+ (edited was thinking of confirmations, not vacancies) to fill. Go Mitch go!

While the Dems are distracted the Senate could get some **** done.

House is do nothing bunch of nitwits with Pelosi at the helm.

Zemira said:

---

He's only got 180+ to fill. Go Mitch go!

While the Dems are distracted the Senate could get some **** done.

House is do nothing bunch of nitwits with Pelosi at the helm.

---

Has anyone estimated how many or what percentage of judges could be conservative by the ends of Trump's first and second terms? I'd like to see some stats on that.

From Wiki:
" There are currently 870 authorized Article III judgeships: nine on the Supreme Court, 179 on the courts of appeals, 674 for the district courts and nine on the Court of International Trade."

Also from Wiki:
"As of January 1, 2020, the United States Senate has confirmed 187 Article III judges nominated by President Trump, including 2 Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, 50 judges for the United States Courts of Appeals, 133 judges for the United States District Courts, and 2 judges for the United States Court of International Trade.[2] There are currently 33 nominations to Article III courts awaiting Senate action, including 2 for the Courts of Appeals, 30 for the District Courts and 1 for the Court of International Trade.[3] There is currently 1 vacancy on the U.S. Courts of Appeals, 69 vacancies on the U.S. District Courts, 2 vacancies on the U.S. Court of International Trade,[3] and 11 announced federal judicial vacancies that will occur before the end of Trump's first term (1 for the Courts of Appeals and 10 for District Courts).[4] Trump has not made any recess appointments to the federal courts."

21.49% of current Federal Judges are Trump appointees.
187 of 870

RyanAg08 said:

---

Zemira said:

---

He's only got 180+ to fill. Go Mitch go!

While the Dems are distracted the Senate could get some **** done.

House is do nothing bunch of nitwits with Pelosi at the helm.

---

Has anyone estimated how many or what percentage of judges could be conservative by the ends of Trump's first and second terms? I'd like to see some stats on that.

---

Not 100% sure on the overall percentage, but I believe the stat prior to Christmas was 1/3 of all federal judges are now Trump appointees (which means they are Federalist Society approved conservatives).

Oops that's the 180 I was thinking of. More like 90+ vacancies.