RedDenver Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 1 minute ago, Archy1221 said: Sure they COULD have convicted Trump similar to juries COULD convict an innocent man, but they chose to follow the evidence and vote not to convict. Exactly, the Senate could have convicted Trump. The rest is simply your opinion. I'd even disagree that the Senate followed the evidence since they refused to hear much of the evidence. 1 minute ago, Archy1221 said: They followed the law which I’m surprised you are against that. The bold is false. There's no law that says which way the Senate should vote. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 27 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: Impeachment managers and read what was put into the record Put in the record from where? Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 40 minutes ago, RedDenver said: Exactly, the Senate could have convicted Trump. The rest is simply your opinion. I'd even disagree that the Senate followed the evidence since they refused to hear much of the evidence. The bold is false. There's no law that says which way the Senate should vote. Because the House didn’t put whatever it is you wanted into evidence. 1 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 21 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: Put in the record from where? You are the one asking, do your own work. I think that was the rule I was told before. 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 8 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: Because the House didn’t put whatever it is you wanted into evidence. The Senate sets up it own rules for the trial, in which Repubs hold the majority. So the Repubs blocked evidence by inventing rules to prevent that evidence from being presented. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/new-details-emerge-about-trump-s-senate-trial-democrats-protest-n1118801 It's hard for evidence to be presented when Repubs are blocking it. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-impeachment-trial-senators-vote-on-witnesses-11580508468 https://time.com/5775544/senators-just-voted-not-to-allow-new-evidence-in-trumps-impeachment-trial-these-are-the-questions-that-will-go-unanswered/ Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 1 minute ago, RedDenver said: The Senate sets up it own rules for the trial, in which Repubs hold the majority. So the Repubs blocked evidence by inventing rules to prevent that evidence from being presented. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/new-details-emerge-about-trump-s-senate-trial-democrats-protest-n1118801 It's hard for evidence to be presented when Repubs are blocking it. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-impeachment-trial-senators-vote-on-witnesses-11580508468 https://time.com/5775544/senators-just-voted-not-to-allow-new-evidence-in-trumps-impeachment-trial-these-are-the-questions-that-will-go-unanswered/ Why didn’t the House procure said evidence. 2 Link to comment
commando Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 6 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: Why didn’t the House procure said evidence. the republicans blocked them from entering some evidence they wanted to introduce. but hey....having a complicit senate was a good thing for trump and his band of criminals. 4 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 15 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: Why didn’t the House procure said evidence. You literally ignored everything I just posted, so I'll post again. Maybe you'll try understanding that we're talking about the Senate trials and the Senate rules of presenting evidence and witnesses. 20 minutes ago, RedDenver said: The Senate sets up it own rules for the trial, in which Repubs hold the majority. So the Repubs blocked evidence by inventing rules to prevent that evidence from being presented. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/new-details-emerge-about-trump-s-senate-trial-democrats-protest-n1118801 It's hard for evidence to be presented when Repubs are blocking it. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-impeachment-trial-senators-vote-on-witnesses-11580508468 https://time.com/5775544/senators-just-voted-not-to-allow-new-evidence-in-trumps-impeachment-trial-these-are-the-questions-that-will-go-unanswered/ 3 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 12 minutes ago, RedDenver said: You literally ignored everything I just posted, so I'll post again. Maybe you'll try understanding that we're talking about the Senate trials and the Senate rules of presenting evidence and witnesses. I didn’t ignore you, I chose to ask what I feel is a more relevant question. Why didn’t the House secure that testimony that was not in the Senate trial. isn’t that the basic rules in a nut shell? The House investigates and charges, presents the evidence to the Senate, and the Senate votes to convict or not convict. And yes I know that the Senate sets the rules of the Senate, just like the House sets the rules of the House. Schifty Schiff had every opportunity to get whatever evidence he wanted or thought was out there. He chose not to. 1 Link to comment
commando Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 29 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: I didn’t ignore you, I chose to ask what I feel is a more relevant question. Why didn’t the House secure that testimony that was not in the Senate trial. isn’t that the basic rules in a nut shell? The House investigates and charges, presents the evidence to the Senate, and the Senate votes to convict or not convict. And yes I know that the Senate sets the rules of the Senate, just like the House sets the rules of the House. Schifty Schiff had every opportunity to get whatever evidence he wanted or thought was out there. He chose not to. new evidence emerged as they were debating in the senate. that evidence was barred from the senate even though some senators were asking for it to be considered. moscow mitch blocked it. having senate sycophants certainly was a good thing for the trump crime family. 1 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 54 minutes ago, commando said: new evidence emerged as they were debating in the senate. that evidence was barred from the senate even though some senators were asking for it to be considered. moscow mitch blocked it. having senate sycophants certainly was a good thing for the trump crime family. And what new evidence emerged? Maybe Schiff wanted to do the bare minimum to get a partisan impeachment and throw it to the Senate to try and do his work for him. not the Senates job. Schiff should have brought an actual case instead of a sham As renowned Liberal constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley eloquently said. your side tried and lost. Valiant effort trying to make a steak out of hamburger. Was just no there there 2 Link to comment
commando Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 Just now, Archy1221 said: And what new evidence emerged? Maybe Schiff wanted to do the bare minimum to get a partisan impeachment and throw it to the Senate to try and do his work for him. not the Senates job. Schiff should have brought an actual case instead of a sham As renowned Liberal constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley eloquently said. your side tried and lost. Valiant effort trying to make a steak out of hamburger. Was just no there there and as the great me said...Bulls#!t. 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 1 hour ago, Archy1221 said: I didn’t ignore you, I chose to ask what I feel is a more relevant question. Talk about some cognitive dissonance. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 2 hours ago, Archy1221 said: You are the one asking, do your own work. I think that was the rule I was told before. Lol....you don’t want to answer because you know what the answer is. It really is a simple question. You seem to act like you already know. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts