• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump impeachment: Senate GOP reportedly unites behind a no-witness trial

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
And here i really wanted to see Trump on the witness stand...
No script
No tele-prompter

I would hedge bets as to how long it took him to hang himself.
Not calling witnesses does not preclude President Trump from presenting his own testimony. But a Senate impeachment trial isn’t like a regular criminal trial. President Trump won’t be sitting in a witness box. It would be more like a deposition session with lawyers swapping written questions and responses back and forth.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
There's no point in keeping this political circus show going; the quicker the Senate vindicates Trump, the faster Congress can get back to working on ratifying U.S.M.C.A. or infrastructure improvement projects.
Don't worry. Moscow Mitch will continue to sit on bipartisan bills passed by the House or promoting more budget busting tax cuts for the rich.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
NYPost is a trolling tabloid newspaper. Do you also take Roger Stone's "National Enquirer" seriously? You do realize the NYPost is owned by Murdoch?
This country is in serious trouble
nypost_0.jpg
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
If Pelosi is smart, she will keep the articles in her pocket and just let it gather dust and have it rot away never to be seen again.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
If Pelosi is smart, she will keep the articles in her pocket and just let it gather dust and have it rot away never to be seen again.
Or she holds them until after the 2020 election, hope the Dems get Senate majority, and if Trump gets a second term, terminate.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
If Pelosi is smart, she will keep the articles in her pocket and just let it gather dust and have it rot away never to be seen again.
I don't know. Do you think that all Republicans are so stupid that they will not recognize a sham trial, which is what their party seems to want? You certainly have a low opinion of Republicans.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I don't know. Do you think that all Republicans are so stupid that they will not recognize a sham trial, which is what their party seems to want? You certainly have a low opinion of Republicans.
These days, it seems like most rank-and-file Republicans don't care what Trump gets convicted of as long as he keeps locking brown kids in cages and appointing anti-choice and pro-theocracy judges.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Not calling witnesses does not preclude President Trump from presenting his own testimony. But a Senate impeachment trial isn’t like a regular criminal trial. President Trump won’t be sitting in a witness box. It would be more like a deposition session with lawyers swapping written questions and responses back and forth.

Don't they have all the testimony they need from the House impeachment hearings? Those who think Trump is guilty already believe they have enough evidence to convict, while those who think Trump is innocent will never be convinced no matter how many witnesses are called.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Don't they have all the testimony they need from the House impeachment hearings? Those who think Trump is guilty already believe they have enough evidence to convict, while those who think Trump is innocent will never be convinced no matter how many witnesses are called.
Trump did not allow those closest to testify. Did you forget the obstruction of justice part of the charges?

Of course there has been more than enough testimony to convict Trump in front of an honest jury. The problem here is that the Republican leader of the Senate himself said that the Republicans would not be honest.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Trump did not allow those closest to testify. Did you forget the obstruction of justice part of the charges?

Of course there has been more than enough testimony to convict Trump in front of an honest jury. The problem here is that the Republican leader of the Senate himself said that the Republicans would not be honest.

I thought they called it "obstruction of congress," not "obstruction of justice."

Still, the Republicans charged that the House inquiry was "unfair," so this may be their way of getting payback.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I thought they called it "obstruction of congress," not "obstruction of justice."

Still, the Republicans charged that the House inquiry was "unfair," so this may be their way of getting payback.
How was the inquiry "unfair"? I think that they may realize that the general public is not as stupid as they wish that they were. Trying to keep them in the dark may be their only hope. Though the public usually recognizes a whitewash job when they see one.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
How was the inquiry "unfair"?

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure, other than the fact that the Democrats have a majority in the House and had the upper hand in the process. The Republicans have been saying how unfair it is throughout the whole thing. Trump wrote that long, scathing letter, and I get the impression that it's part of the general strategy of portraying it as they are.

I think that they may realize that the general public is not as stupid as they wish that they were. Trying to keep them in the dark may be their only hope. Though the public usually recognizes a whitewash job when they see one.

Yes, although I think they knew this would happen going into it. I'm not sure if it's changed anyone's mind. The vote is going strictly along party lines.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure, other than the fact that the Democrats have a majority in the House and had the upper hand in the process. The Republicans have been saying how unfair it is throughout the whole thing. Trump wrote that long, scathing letter, and I get the impression that it's part of the general strategy of portraying it as they are.



Yes, although I think they knew this would happen going into it. I'm not sure if it's changed anyone's mind. The vote is going strictly along party lines.
I would not mind if the vote went along party lines. What irritates me the most is that Mitch McConnell said that he and the Republicans would violate the oath they have to take as part of the trial.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Trump did not allow those closest to testify. Did you forget the obstruction of justice part of the charges?

Of course there has been more than enough testimony to convict Trump in front of an honest jury. The problem here is that the Republican leader of the Senate himself said that the Republicans would not be honest.


This is the problem. Those that have already tried and convicted Trump seem to make up the narrative as needed. There was never an "obstruction of justice" charge. The charge that was ridiculously handed down was "obstruction of Congress", which has many legal experts scratching their erudite heads.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Don't they have all the testimony they need from the House impeachment hearings? Those who think Trump is guilty already believe they have enough evidence to convict, while those who think Trump is innocent will never be convinced no matter how many witnesses are called.
No one thinks he's innocent. Not even the senate republicans. They just don't care about the rule of law when it comes to keeping "their guy" in power.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Don't worry. Moscow Mitch will continue to sit on bipartisan bills passed by the House or promoting more budget busting tax cuts for the rich.

The Trump approved Tax Cut and Jobs Act enacted by Congress in 2017 has not busted the federal budget.

Federal tax revenues have increased each year since the Trump approved Tax cut and jobs act of 2017 was enacted by the Republican controlled Congress.

Reference: Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Obama year deficits from 2010 to 2016 on average were ca. 5.4 percent of G.D.P. compared to Trump year deficits from 2017 to 2019 being on average ca. 4 percent of G.D.P.. A fair comparison of federal deficit spending relative to Gross Domestic Product reveals Obama year deficits being higher than Trump deficits.

Reference: US Federal Deficit as Percent of GDP - plus charts and analysis
 
Top