Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

[TreeFrogTrader]

No. The senate should follow the law.

The Senate should follow the impeachment clause of the constitution if we get that far. The rules of procedure and evidence and rights to cross-examination cannot be limited by any statute. Laws may be established to outline the rules of procedure and to bring orderliness to the proceeding but not to diminish the rights of the Senate to conduct an impeachment trial.

 

[kingjelly]

Question to conservatives, if it comes out that beyond a reasonable doubt there was a quid pro quo, would you then support impeachment?

 

[UsualName]

Yes, I want to develop complete knowledge of the origins and motivations and connections and background of the spy.

If your looking for spies might I suggest you start with Rudy Giuliani’s associates and leave duty bound American whistleblowers alone.

I’m done with this as it is becoming circular and you don’t have anything of substance to back up your wants and assertions.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

If your looking for spies might I suggest you start with Rudy Giuliani’s associates and leave duty bound American whistleblowers alone.

I’m done with this as it is becoming circular and you don’t have anything of substance to back up your wants and assertions.

I also do not need to engage in a discussion of the legality and appropriateness of outing the whistlespy because - this is DC afterall- and he is soon to be outed anyway.

Then we will take it from there.

Lots of things to be examined once he is outed. ENJOY!!

You can post a long dissertation covering the reasons why he should not have been outed and we will all read it. Won't we class?

gig.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

If your looking for spies might I suggest you start with Rudy Giuliani’s associates and leave duty bound American whistleblowers alone.

I’m done with this as it is becoming circular and you don’t have anything of substance to back up your wants and assertions.

Seriously, why are you wasting your time on a glue huffer?

 

[Tsing Tao]

Question to conservatives, if it comes out that beyond a reasonable doubt there was a quid pro quo, would you then support impeachment?

Yes.

No one gets to be above the law.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The whole point of having whistleblowers is to protect them from the powerful people they accuse. Anonymous witnesses are allowed in trials as long as prosecutors can prove that testimony puts them in danger, I think the most powerful man in the world with a pattern of seeking revenge who is also over the agency you work for qualifies.

You think Trump is going to assassinate this person?

Please. I am fully in line with a total investigation and then impeaching Trump if guilty of wrong doing. But you can't just rely on anonymous testimony with no proof or cross examination.

If the whistle blower had hard evidence, like "the murder weapon can be found here" and then prosecutors go and find the murder weapon, sure, the person can remain anonymous. That's the whole idea behind programs like "crime stoppers". But if the whistle blower is using testimony like "Trump said x, y or z" then the whistle blower has to make an appearance and offer testimony so that the witness can be determined to be credible through cross examination!

 

[Black_Cat]

 

[Frederick Foresight]

What people post when they've got nothing:

View attachment 211017

 

[Buy1Sell2]

I also do not need to engage in a discussion of the legality and appropriateness of outing the whistlespy because - this is DC afterall- and he is soon to be outed anyway.

Then we will take it from there.

Lots of things to be examined once he is outed. ENJOY!!

You can post a long dissertation covering the reasons why he should not have been outed and we will all read it. Won't we class?

gig.

It's already a known fact that both whistlewhores were registered Dems and both worked for Biden.