Graham: Impeachment 'dead on arrival' in Senate if House bars 'whistleblower' testimony

He'll preside...but, it's pretty much an administrative role.

 

Once the emails were stolen they were fair game. If we had any real journalists they would have published them.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...nts-were-illegally-obtained-joe-digenova-says

IMHO Mueller didn't write his report, it was probably written by the corrupt Andrew Weissmann, the guy who attended Hillary's 'victory' party.

 

Yes, but as I understand he can somewhat ensure it isn’t blown off.

 

You don’t even have CNN & MSBC on your side when you say Mueller was fine.
He looked like Leslie Neilson in the Naked Gun 4.

You don’t have much support with that statement, but you are entitled to your opinion.

 

The FISA warrant conclusion was diGenova's opinion/prediction. Cite the IG report itself. And, no, the use of stolen goods for personal gain would be a crime...not "fair game."

 

Could be. They'll all agree on the procedure prior to beginning and then he pretty much "referees."

 

Yes, Roberts SCOTUS CJ shall preside. I assume he will act just like a Trial Judge, and determine witness relevance etc.

 

How does that contradict what was said?

 

Nonsense. From the Trump campaign:

"But the right to free speech, the campaign’s lawyers argued, supersedes the right to privacy. “At a minimum, privacy cannot justify suppressing true speech during a political campaign,” they wrote. Quoting from the Citizens United case, they added that the First Amendment leaves parties “‘free to obtain information from diverse sources in order to determine how to cast their votes.’ It would eviscerate that guarantee to punish true disclosures made in a political campaign.”

They were actual, real emails, right?

Funny how differently the Wikileaks people were treated from the Ukraine whistleblower. Guess which one is a hero to the Swamp?

 

Exactly.

And even if they have Trump on video committing a Capital Crime the GOP Senate will Acquit Him. :smh:

 

Scumbaggery house of reps style

 

The Senate is the Jury. They have the finale say. And the Congress has hand!ed this and Schiff there is no way they can fairly vote to impeach Trump. He has done nothing that all previous Presidents have done.But he has been fully transparent, in my opinion.

 

Just like Democrats didn't approve of Clinton's perjury and obstruction but didn't think it warranted removal from office, the GOP will think the same of a favor that was never delivered, and foreign aid that was.

 

See my ninja edit.

 

Who Biden? No never took him seriously

He stole my lunch money once

 

Totally.

Clinton's "Impeachment" was a GOP-Orchestrated SHAM Trial (with ZERO Chance of Senate Conviction).

Trump's "Impeachable Offenses" have Exponentially More Reason for Removal (than Clinton's).

STILL, the GOP won't remove Trump (under any circumstances).

 

I believe you'll find that there is statute law that holds the stealing of e-mails from private accounts to be a form of theft. Knowingly profiting from the use of stolen goods would, I would think, make you an accessory to the crime.

 

Y'know, we keep telling our kids that the reason we study history is because you want to learn from other peoples mistakes and not suffer the same consequences that they did. We're about to see an example of this play out in front of the world right now.

You'd think that the Dems would realize it, and some of the saner ones - or maybe the "less-cray-cray ones" might be a more accurate description - see what's coming. Pelosi, among a few others. But the agenda is being driven by their more radical members who are themselves being whipped into some kind of emotional frenzy by the grass-roots LW-ers who are screaming for Trumps blood. And it's not like we haven't seen it before - but I would have hoped the Dems as a whole would have remembered what happened when Bubba was impeached - and it didn't end up well for the GOP.

And now we're about to see the same thing all over again - except that this time, the Dems have less than the GOP did back in the day. This probably won't end well for the Dems - and when it doesn't, who knows what kind of rioting will result? We did sorta see an example of it when Trump was elected.

This won't end well.

 

More proof that the LW actually does what they accuse the GOP of doing. They're running a Deep State orchestrated SHAM trial with ZERO chance of Senate conviction. Makes you wonder why they're doing it, a year before the election.

Clinton's perjury and obstruction of justice were OK?

 

And yet again.......obsession with 'whataboutisms.' That bores the crap out of me. Trump is POTUS, not Clinton.

 

ANCIENT History.

That was Then, this is NOW.

Anyway, there is ZERO Chance for conviction in GOP Senate...

...so IF Trump really has nothing to hide, then why are his Cronies so worried about The House Process?

 

Its been dead on arrival because the Senate is in Trump's pocket and nobody with two brain cells thinks producing the WB, will change that fact. Anybody that thinks this Senate is interested in a fair trial based on House evidence is beyond ignorant. The House should just dump the articles of impeachment at Mitch's doorstep and walk away having done what it could. It absolutely should not produce squat to help persuade the unpersuadable republican majority leader. The GOP will just move the goalpost and talk about how unfair the process has been. Ignore the United States Senate.

 

as you said dead
on arrival in Senate because it is obvious obstruction by the Dems in the 2020 election.

 

As much as a judge is in an administrative roll in any court.
Lindsey Graham should know that the senators play the role of the jury and that is their only role. They can't stop the proceedings, dismiss them or anything of the kind. The House sends prosecutors and Trump sends his defense team. Roberts rules over the proceedings and the senate votes. It's a very simple concept. If you think the Republican senators can just walk out and stop the proceedings you're wrong. There is no quorum involved, in the vote 2/3rds of those voting is the threshold for a conviction and if the republicans boycott then the vote for conviction could be unanimous.
As to Lindsey's premise that the whistle blower has to testify for legality any competent lawyer, which it appears the republican caucus lacks, could tell him no, not true. If the police receive an anonymous tip and investigate and can prove wrongdoing beyond a doubt from evidence that they gathered do you think any judge, anywhere, would throw out a case because it was an anonymous tip that led the police to investigate? Only if they want to be overruled.

 

All Presidents ask other countries to open investigations into their political opponents?