How it is possible to acquit someone at a trial with NO witnesses when witnesses were present at the time of the CRIME?? DIRTY MONEY and DIRTY SELF-SERVING LAWYERS
POSTED BY: WISHIMAY
UPDATED: Sunday, June 21, 2026 15:21
VIEWED: 7905
PAGE 5 of 12
Quote:That's easy: They're all idiots. (I've thought Rubio was an idiot ever since he ran for Prez)
SignyM:
SECOND, in every other thread you repeat ad nauseum how stupid Republican politicians are. Now all of the sudden we're supposed to set that aside and agree with them?
I think Lamar Alexander is an idiot, and I think your really need a new hobby.
SECOND: You need to call at least 3 GOP Senators idiots because they were convinced Trump is guilty. Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Marco Rubio (R- Fla.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said Trump is guilty but they will acquit him.
Now, they're all entitled to their opinion. But the House proceedings .... there was NOT ONE WITNESS WHO COULD TESTIFY TO ACTUAL EVENTS. The transcipt showed nothing impeachable, and Zelenskiy himself said there was no pressure. I'm not saying nothing happpened, but why would I convict? "Gut feeling"? That's ridiculous. I hope they never get jury duty again,
Quote:Says you. And since you're wrong most of the time and you hate democracy, why should I believe you? I've already posted my thoughts on why I think Republicans are avoiding this like the plague.
Why? Since fewer than 67% of voters want Trump removed, fewer than 67 Senators will vote to remove. Even some Democrats will vote to acquit. Again, the reason is that back in their home state fewer than 67% of voters want Trump gone.
But yanno, if you're right ... that's democracy in action. Too bad for you, since you hate Americans and you hate democracy.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) was convinced Trump is guilty, but she will not remove him:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Now, they're all entitled to their opinion. But the House proceedings .... there was NOT ONE WITNESS WHO COULD TESTIFY TO ACTUAL EVENTS. The transcipt showed nothing impeachable, and Zelenskiy himself said there was no pressure. I'm not saying nothing happpened, but why would I convict? "Gut feeling"? That's ridiculous. I hope they never get jury duty again,
"I do not believe the House has met its burden that the President's conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office," Collins said in a speech on the Senate floor. "This decision is not about whether you like or dislike this President or agree with or oppose his policies or approve or disapprove of his conduct in other circumstances. Rather it is about whether the charges meet the very high constitutional standard of treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors."
Had Collins left it there, she would have been fine. But she didn't leave it there. In an interview with CBS' Norah O'Donnell, Collins said "I believe that the President has learned from this case" and that Trump "will be much more cautious in the future."
Trump, when asked about Collins' comments said, "It was a perfect call." Trump will NOT be cautious in the future.
www.mediaite.com/news/lesson-not-learned-trump-apparently-rejects-susa
n-collins-claim-hell-be-more-cautious-after-impeachment/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I read the transcript. There was no "quid pro quo". There was nothing impeachable in it. If you insist that this is a Big Deal you will simply be even more of a laughingstock than you already are.
There would have to be something MORE. Somebody would have to come forward with evidence that somebody did something at TRUMP's behest above and beyond that phone call which, btw, I do not find impeachable. And if the House Dems had waited perhaps another month or two, they might have gotten that testimony. But they didn't. Schiff just madeup stuff whole cloth, parodying the President's phone call as some sort of Don Corleone-style threat, claiming that we're paying Ukraine to fight Russians there so we don't have to fight them here (really???) and spewing about the death of democracy and the toppling of the United States ... seriously, when you have to reach for that kind of shit you clearly have no argument on your side, just hyperventilation.
SECONDRATE, you've been fooled over and over again over "allegations" which - so far - have evaporated like frost in the light of day. When is your skepticism going to kick in?
You believe what you WANT to believe because it matches your hatred. Stop letting your hatred drive your brain, because it's also driving you crazy. Get a new hobby. Something fruitful and productive. Go watch The Biggest Little Farm or something.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE, you've been fooled over and over again over "allegations" which - so far - have evaporated like frost in the light of day. When is your skepticism going to kick in?
You believe what you WANT to believe because it matches your hatred. Stop letting your hatred drive your brain, because it's also driving you crazy. Get a new hobby. Something fruitful and productive. Go watch The Biggest Little Farm or something.
Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) all came to the same conclusion:
The president is guilty but shouldn’t be ousted for it.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE, you've been fooled over and over again over "allegations" which - so far - have evaporated like frost in the light of day. When is your skepticism going to kick in?
You believe what you WANT to believe because it matches your hatred. Stop letting your hatred drive your brain, because it's also driving you crazy. Get a new hobby. Something fruitful and productive. Go watch The Biggest Little Farm or something.
Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) all came to the same conclusion:
The president is guilty but shouldn’t be ousted for it.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
GUILTY OF WHAT???
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
SIX: GUILTY OF WHAT???
Guilty of being on SECOND's shit-list?
Well, apparently the House is going for a do-over: They're going to interview Bolt-on.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Let Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) explain to you in three paragraphs: “This process has been the apotheosis of the problem of congressional abdication. Through the refusal to exercise war powers, or relinquishing the power of the purse, selective oversight and unwillingness to check emergency declarations designed to skirt Congress — we have failed.” She is talking about Trump.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
GUILTY OF WHAT???
Do Right, Be Right. :)
"The President’s behavior was shameful and wrong. His personal interests do not take precedence over those of this great nation. The president has the responsibility to uphold the integrity and honor of the office. Not just for himself but for all future presidents. Degrading the office, by actions or even name calling, weakens it for future presidents, and weakens our country."
Sadly — for to be clear she is very sad — she “cannot vote to convict.” Because, she argued, “the Constitution provides for impeachment but does not demand it in all instances.” So, Murkowski wants you to understand that since the Constitution does not force her to impeach, she cannot.
www.murkowski.senate.gov/press/speech/speech-senator-murkowski-on-impe
achment-trial
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
All I read there is a deficiency of the Congress itself for decades now.
Congress can, and should, take back the power over making war decisions. We can agree on that.
Trump isn't guilty of anything he was impeached for. If Congress wants that power back after it has abdicated it since the early years of GWB, then it better get to work on that after Trump is acquitted.
Meanwhile, Democrats just using this as another thing to bitch about. Nothing more, nothing less.
It's the whole Electoral Process debate all over again. They never bring it up for one single second when they win, but when they lose it's all you hear about for a year straight.
I'm sure we're going to be hearing a lot about that too, during the months leading up to and the eventual slaughtering of the Democratic Party in November.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I rewrote it so you can understand. This is the key paragraph from Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska):
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
All I read there is a deficiency of the Congress itself for decades now.
Congress can, and should, take back the power over making war decisions. We can agree on that.
Trump isn't guilty of anything he was impeached for. If Congress wants that power back after it has abdicated it since the early years of GWB, then it better get to work on that after Trump is acquitted.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
"The President’s behavior was shameful and wrong. His personal interests do not take precedence over those of this great nation. The president has the responsibility to uphold the integrity and honor of the office. Not just for himself but for all future presidents. Degrading the office, by actions or even name calling, weakens it for future presidents, and weakens our country."
www.murkowski.senate.gov/press/speech/speech-senator-murkowski-on-impe
achment-trial
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND, there's a big gap between a small offense and an offense big enough to remove a president. Yanno, like the gap between littering and murder.
Get a grip already. Those senators are saying what Trump did was too little to remove him over it.
And, from (somewhat) following the proceedings, I think the democrats knew it. The testimony was a bust. NO ONE could testify they heard Trump firsthand say anything about anything, except *I WANT NOTHING*. So the democrats had to fall back to the transcript itself which was a big, fat nothing burger. Which they also knew. So they had to make up (with the help of the NYTimes) a Bolt-on moment, kind of like what they did with Kavanaugh. Which worked about as well as it did with Kavanaugh.
I know Trump is your personal bête noire. Yanno he's richer than you, more famous than you, he's a republican, and he's even president. And he's NONE of those things you think about yourself when you recite to yourself why being rich means you're better than everyone.
But dooood, get over yourself.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME