Schumer proposes that Bolton and Mulvaney testify in Senate impeachment trial

This whole thing is based of speculation and options. When you really look at everything, and I mean really look. there is nothing to this whole impeachment thing

 

Direct as in presumption and no direct evidence, in fact the only direct evidence was Sondland saying Trump told him he wanted nothing like he told Ron Johnson before the call on the 25th.

 

Does it?

Well seems the norm to me

 

Don't play stupid. You know what it means.

 

I am not stupid. Tell me what you think "real" evidence means.

 

Not hearsay or presumption but evidence. Pretty simple really.

 

Thats just a lie

Schiff allowed the right to call whomever they wanted. But you knew that

 

Well, except for turning down every republicans request for witnesses, you might have something.

 

Really ?

Sondland said he did......

You guys keep trying to make this about "the call" when this is MUCH larger than that. You should easily be able to explain why the Presidents PRIVATE Lawyer was in a foreign country doing "government business" ?

 

You would be wrong

Trump denied everyone from testifying Thats just a FACT Hoosier.

 

Democrats want the American people to get the whole truth, except for those truths they don't want exposed.

 

You mean where Sondland admitted it was just presumption?

 

LOL, and the dem clown show abandoned process and the courts to decide if they could breech the separation of powers. They want to impeach Trump for doing what was done in every impeachment.

 

Can you give attribution for that bold? I just read Johnson's letter to Congress from November and he doesn't mention talking to Trump directly before the 7/25 phone call...

 

Also false... they got 3 from their list, the only 3 who were relevant. Just because the D's were probably going to call them anyway doesn't change that.

 

Speculation and Opinions, when rationally based on observable fact, are valid sources of evidence which are also permitted and expected in any trial.

But I am genuinely curious, if you look at the allegation that I detailed for you earlier (and I will quote again here), where precisely is the factual record lacking in your mind?

The President abused his power when he sought campaign assistance from a foreign government in the form of an announced investigation against his domestic political opponent while he simultaneously and unilaterally held up hundreds of millions in military aid, a requested meeting, and a restoration of trade rights. He then obstructed Congress when he tried to hide and lie about the contents of a whistleblower complaint and then further obstructed Congress when he demanded that all current and former employees refuse to cooperate on the grounds that the President is "absolutely immune" from all Congressional investigations.

 

Hearsay and Presumption are both valid (and judicially permissible) types of evidence. Pretty simple really.

But I will ask you again, is there ANY amount of evidence that would convince you that Trump has committed an impeachable conduct in regards to these specific allegations?

 

My god, stop playing pretend lawyer... It's too painful to watch.

 

Then where is the direct smoking gun evidence??? As it stand right now, all the evidence is hearsay, options and speculation.

 

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "Hearsay Evidence Rule") unless an exception to the Hearsay Rule applies.

Can you say which exception is in play at the senate trial?

 

Do you really mean to keep typing "options?" Or did you mean to type "opinions?"

 

Simple. The fact that it is a Senate Trial on Impeachment and the Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply.

 

Then stop watching. I grow tired of you following me around and posting simplistic nonsense anyways.

 

You're not that special and I don't follow you around.
If my posting on this board bother you, you've got a few option:

1- You can complain to the mods and accuse me of stalking you, which you'll never be able to prove since most of my post aren't directed at you.
2- Put me on ignore. Of course I'll still reply to your silly posts but your sensitivity will be spared.

 

A senate trial which the republican control... They're free to admit and reject what they want just like the dems did in the house.