Legal question
Comments
-
To vote? Not usually as it's a judge but move to acquit is about as common as it gets.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
-
this might help - https://news.yahoo.com/pelosi-clinton-allowed-witnesses-to-come-forward-during-his-impeachment-trial-trump-has-done-the-opposite-180953795.html
Clinton's impeachment witnesses were not live - it was taped. and they were deposed previously. For Trump the house did not take the time to subpoena the witnesses they are requesting. I don't think there is any legal precedent to fall back on as they make the rules up as they go -
Sure but the jury acquits. The Senate is essentially the jury right? Is there any circumstance in which the jury votes not to hear witnesses?UW_Doog_Bot said:
To vote? Not usually as it's a judge but move to acquit is about as common as it gets.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
-
good shit here thxLebamDawg said:this might help - https://news.yahoo.com/pelosi-clinton-allowed-witnesses-to-come-forward-during-his-impeachment-trial-trump-has-done-the-opposite-180953795.html
Clinton's impeachment witnesses were not live - it was taped. and they were deposed previously. For Trump the house did not take the time to subpoena the witnesses they are requesting. I don't think there is any legal precedent to fall back on as they make the rules up as they go -
The jury expected the prosecution to have their case made when they presented it
They listened to the House managers and were not impressed
Nixon didn't even have to get to the Senate before he knew he was toast. The House nailed him
Clinton was not removed. I don't recall dire thoughts of the end of America but it was awhile ago -
Not to hear additional witnesses. They heard from plenty of witnesses. The House managers are just upset that the Senate didn't call the witnesses they declined to call.WilburHooksHands said:
Sure but the jury acquits. The Senate is essentially the jury right? Is there any circumstance in which the jury votes not to hear witnesses?UW_Doog_Bot said:
To vote? Not usually as it's a judge but move to acquit is about as common as it gets.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
-
It's not the jury's job to help the prosecution make their case.WilburHooksHands said:
Sure but the jury acquits. The Senate is essentially the jury right? Is there any circumstance in which the jury votes not to hear witnesses?UW_Doog_Bot said:
To vote? Not usually as it's a judge but move to acquit is about as common as it gets.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
-
Are there any circumstances where the prosecution asks the Jury to help them present their case?WilburHooksHands said:
Sure but the jury acquits. The Senate is essentially the jury right? Is there any circumstance in which the jury votes not to hear witnesses?UW_Doog_Bot said:
To vote? Not usually as it's a judge but move to acquit is about as common as it gets.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
-
Wilbur is a smart kid so you can see that the strategy to have no case and then blame the refs can resonate some
Its about all the Democrats have. They get the media to amplify it daily -
It's an impeachment trial. It's not like a normal trial. The house presented it's case and the witnesses which they picked testified and the Senate said you ain't got Shit!
No impeachable offense. -
In a REAL trial you have a thing called discovery. All witnesses are 'discovered' and deposed - by both litigants - prior to a case going to trial.WilburHooksHands said:Is there any other trial circumstance in which a vote is taken not to hear witnesses? What was the original intent behind that in the Senate?
In the context of a REAL trial, what is being asked for here would almost never happen.
Also, nothing is stopping the House from calling and deposing Bolton this minute. And that hasn't happened. -
And remember this is a political process first.
-
A solemn one.GrundleStiltzkin said:And remember this is a political process first.
-
Right now, the media is all we have. Kind of like being a Mariners fan, reallyRaceBannon said:Wilbur is a smart kid so you can see that the strategy to have no case and then blame the refs can resonate some
Its about all the Democrats have. They get the media to amplify it daily -
This is the essence of the whole deal- i.e., partisan impeachment doesn’t work. Nixon resigned because both sides wanted him out.RaceBannon said:The jury expected the prosecution to have their case made when they presented it
They listened to the House managers and were not impressed
Nixon didn't even have to get to the Senate before he knew he was toast. The House nailed him
Clinton was not removed. I don't recall dire thoughts of the end of America but it was awhile ago
I don’t like Trump. I’d rather the voters remove or not remove him from office. -
The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it. -
you are giving our? congress folks a lot of credit herePitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
I think it is going to be impeachment free-for-all for the next 6 presidents and then I will be dead and won't care -
I'm more worried this will give president's even more power than they have now.LebamDawg said:
you are giving our? congress folks a lot of credit herePitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
I think it is going to be impeachment free-for-all for the next 6 presidents and then I will be dead and won't care -
Race will still be here lobbing bombs from the cheap seats. 20 Presidents from now I'd imagine.LebamDawg said:
you are giving our? congress folks a lot of credit herePitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
I think it is going to be impeachment free-for-all for the next 6 presidents and then I will be dead and won't care -
Kind of depends on the November results. If Trump loses, impeachment is probably the new political tool until it does in fact backfire. If Trump wins, there'll be no shortage of people blaming the House for handing him back the office.Pitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
The rule of thumb was always you better be damn sure that you have both parties and a large majority of the country behind you if you're going to try to remove POTUS. Regardless of the allegations, I think it's pretty clear the dems never had enough political capital to make this a win in the short-term. Whether or not this third quarter hail merry ends up working is going to be quite the litmus test for future political strategy. -
Race's real name is Methuselah.Swaye said:
Race will still be here lobbing bombs from the cheap seats. 20 Presidents from now I'd imagine.LebamDawg said:
you are giving our? congress folks a lot of credit herePitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
I think it is going to be impeachment free-for-all for the next 6 presidents and then I will be dead and won't care -
Race delivering his thoughts on Scotlands program, c. 1255Sledog said:
Race's real name is Methuselah.Swaye said:
Race will still be here lobbing bombs from the cheap seats. 20 Presidents from now I'd imagine.LebamDawg said:
you are giving our? congress folks a lot of credit herePitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
I think it is going to be impeachment free-for-all for the next 6 presidents and then I will be dead and won't care
-
I dont know shit about govt process. I know stuff about making fake rap songs about teen bois and Dick Rod photoshops.RaceBannon said:Wilbur is a smart kid so you can see that the strategy to have no case and then blame the refs can resonate some
Its about all the Democrats have. They get the media to amplify it daily -
Dick Rod photoshops are the best photoshops.WilburHooksHands said:
I dont know shit about govt process. I know stuff about making fake rap songs about teen bois and Dick Rod photoshops.RaceBannon said:Wilbur is a smart kid so you can see that the strategy to have no case and then blame the refs can resonate some
Its about all the Democrats have. They get the media to amplify it daily -
I only want one witness, President Trump. Will never happen because the coward has spent his entire life hiding behind an army of lawyers.
-
There’s absolutely no obligation under the US Constitution for any accused to testify.HustlinOwl said:I only want one witness, President Trump. Will never happen because the coward has spent his entire life hiding behind an army of lawyers.
This is a fundamental right of being a US Citizen.
Jesus fuck. -
Bro. You realize Trump is running against joe fucking Biden?GreenRiverGatorz said:
Kind of depends on the November results. If Trump loses, impeachment is probably the new political tool until it does in fact backfire. If Trump wins, there'll be no shortage of people blaming the House for handing him back the office.Pitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
The rule of thumb was always you better be damn sure that you have both parties and a large majority of the country behind you if you're going to try to remove POTUS. Regardless of the allegations, I think it's pretty clear the dems never had enough political capital to make this a win in the short-term. Whether or not this third quarter hail merry ends up working is going to be quite the litmus test for future political strategy.
It'll be a landslide victory -
Biden will be wearing a drool bib by November.Pitchfork51 said:
Bro. You realize Trump is running against joe fucking Biden?GreenRiverGatorz said:
Kind of depends on the November results. If Trump loses, impeachment is probably the new political tool until it does in fact backfire. If Trump wins, there'll be no shortage of people blaming the House for handing him back the office.Pitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
The rule of thumb was always you better be damn sure that you have both parties and a large majority of the country behind you if you're going to try to remove POTUS. Regardless of the allegations, I think it's pretty clear the dems never had enough political capital to make this a win in the short-term. Whether or not this third quarter hail merry ends up working is going to be quite the litmus test for future political strategy.
It'll be a landslide victory -
PurpleThrobber said:
Biden was wearing a drool bib in November.Pitchfork51 said:
Bro. You realize Trump is running against joe fucking Biden?GreenRiverGatorz said:
Kind of depends on the November results. If Trump loses, impeachment is probably the new political tool until it does in fact backfire. If Trump wins, there'll be no shortage of people blaming the House for handing him back the office.Pitchfork51 said:The thing I find dumb is that people are like yeah now when a dem president is in office they'll impeach him
No. They realized it backfired. They won't do it.
The rule of thumb was always you better be damn sure that you have both parties and a large majority of the country behind you if you're going to try to remove POTUS. Regardless of the allegations, I think it's pretty clear the dems never had enough political capital to make this a win in the short-term. Whether or not this third quarter hail merry ends up working is going to be quite the litmus test for future political strategy.
It'll be a landslide victory -
Well, the first clue is that in a real criminal trial, if the prosecutor can't allege a specific crime, the judge dismisses the case and it never goes to the jury. The House never alleged a crime. The allegations are purely political. You don't need to do the time if there is no crime. What is sad, is that leftards from the Hondo Bros to Stretch and the Shiffster all know there was no crime and had no problem putting party ahead of country. Leftards lie and love to be lied to. Never more true in the attempt to impeach Trump beginning before he was inaugurated. You can toss that POS mittens and Roberts into this hot mess.
