- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
For those advocating the theory of Trump dropping "The Evidence" at his impeachment trial
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:34 am
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:34 am
My question is:
How much evidence was he allowed to drop at his first impeachment?
This Democrat led Senate is no venue to finally get it all out to the American people via this trial.
That's it. Just wanted to impart that.
How much evidence was he allowed to drop at his first impeachment?
This Democrat led Senate is no venue to finally get it all out to the American people via this trial.
That's it. Just wanted to impart that.
9
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:36 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
How much evidence was he allowed to drop at his first impeachment?
He could have dropped all the evidence he wanted to at his first impeachment. He just didn't because he didn't need to in order for it to be tossed out.
Which brings me back to a question I asked a few days ago. Why didn't he ever play his cards? I think it's because he's still not ready to. I don't think this is over.
That being said, I don't think he will be dropping evidence at this impeachment either because I highly doubt this impeachment trial even takes place.
This post was edited on 1/24/21 at 9:39 am
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:36 am to Meauxjeaux
There will be no evidence related to the election presented. Not sure why anyone would think that there would be, considering the Democrats control the Senate.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:37 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:doesn't sound impartial
Just wanted to impart that
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:39 am to BoarEd
quote:
I don't think this is over.
Remember when you said it would be over when Biden was inaugurated? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:41 am to BoarEd
quote:
He could have dropped all the evidence he wanted to at his first impeachment. He just didn't because he didn't need to in order for it to be tossed out.
You're correct on the Senate side of the first impeachment, but not on the House side.
The D-led House denied Trump the ability to contest the phone call and obstruction charges.
Now that the Senate is D-led, it will be the same thing in this part of the "trial".
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:41 am to Esquire
quote:
Remember when you said it would be over when Biden was inaugurated?
Remember when you ever had an original thought? I don't.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 9:43 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
Now that the Senate is D-led, it will be the same thing in this part of the "trial".
Nah. It wouldn't work like that. In the Senate is when it becomes like an actual trial. They can't keep the defendant from defending themselves.
Besides which, it isn't even going to happen anyways. The chief justice is saying it's a non-starter as are members of the Senate from both sides of the aisle. They can't impeach someone who isn't a public official.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:03 am to BoarEd
quote:
Remember when you ever had an original thought? I don't.
Sooner than the last time you’ve had a sane one.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:04 am to Esquire
Why do you keep stalking Boar?
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:06 am to Meauxjeaux
There will be NO impeachment trial
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:12 am to SDVTiger
quote:
Why do you keep stalking Boar?
Why do you keep stalking me?
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:17 am to Esquire
So you are refusing to answer the question?
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:21 am to SDVTiger
No, I just don’t respect you enough to give you a serious answer.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:23 am to Indefatigable
quote:
There will be no evidence related to the election presented. Not sure why anyone would think that there would be, considering the Democrats control the Senate.
Sadly, this seems likely unless someone like Kennedy steps up.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:25 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
question is:
How much evidence was he allowed to drop at his first impeachment?
There was no trial at the first one.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:29 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
You're correct on the Senate side of the first impeachment, but not on the House side.
The D-led House denied Trump the ability to contest the phone call and obstruction charges.
Now that the Senate is D-led, it will be the same thing in this part of the "trial".
My God. It does not work that way. It does not work that way in the house either.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:30 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
How much evidence was he allowed to drop at his first impeachment?
My recollection is that somehow the Democrats wanted them to use ONLY the evidence that was introduced in the House.
In this instance - the House introduced no evidence. Interviewed no witnesses. There will have to be some evidence. But you are correct, the problem ls what kind. Scheumer/Turtle/Roberts will be the evidence gatekeepers. What they want in, can come in- and what they want out, they can keep out.
Pelosi fricked up by accusing Trump of making false statements about election fraud. Truth is a defense. So there should be some evidence about it, if this were a just or fair process. There are no safeguards to ensure it is.
My concerns are the short time frame to prepare and the fact that most of these corrupt state officials have failed to provide evidence, and in some cases destroyed it.
Further since there are no discovery or evidentiary control rules, and no appeal if and when Scheumer/Turtle/Roberts frick Trump around on evidentiary rulings.
This post was edited on 1/24/21 at 10:34 am
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:32 am to BoarEd
To be fair, no jurisdiction that would have made a difference, wanted to hear any evidence before January 6th. Maybe this is a great time to present everything since the dims were stupid enough to list false fraud claims in their article of impeachment.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:45 am to Meauxjeaux
Just like the last impeachment. Online fantasy land people thought every crime would be exposed. (Some here thought Pelosi was really a centrist smartly keeping AOC at bay-this is a pipedream)
The only evidence will be Trump's entire JCS and last minute threesome hires sayin that... Trump gave them the okay for the NG but then didn't answer his phone on Jan 6th and therefore protected the loons storming...
This is already in the news...
As with anything in DC; all will be shown they want you to see. Never anything incriminating against them.
Case and point Fiona in the last impeachment. A complete set-up.
It is also pure fantasy that any Biden election fraud will be allowed to be spoken. It will be, Trump incited to stop the DC Congress critters from certifying Biden because he was a sore loser.
The only evidence will be Trump's entire JCS and last minute threesome hires sayin that... Trump gave them the okay for the NG but then didn't answer his phone on Jan 6th and therefore protected the loons storming...
This is already in the news...
As with anything in DC; all will be shown they want you to see. Never anything incriminating against them.
Case and point Fiona in the last impeachment. A complete set-up.
It is also pure fantasy that any Biden election fraud will be allowed to be spoken. It will be, Trump incited to stop the DC Congress critters from certifying Biden because he was a sore loser.
This post was edited on 1/24/21 at 10:51 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News