Info PSA- Public impeachments start today- UPDATE 2/5/2020- Trump wins.

[Jhhnn]

Pretty sure it's a conflict of interest if they're representing someone guilty of the same crime they're guilty of (or at least guilty of facilitating), given that they won't be acting as an an independent representative. They're essentially defending themselves without stating as such, and are more likely to lie/cheat/steal to get an acquittal.

It's like Bruce Cutler-

When Gotti was indicted in 1990 for the 1985 murder of Paul Castellano and several other crimes, presiding judge I. Leo Glasser disqualified Cutler and two associates from representing Gotti. Citing evidence from wiretaps at Gotti's Ravenite club, prosecutors contended that Cutler and his colleagues may have known about criminal activity. Since the attorney-client privilege does not apply in these circumstances, prosecutors argued that Cutler was "part of the evidence" and thus liable to be called as a witness. They also argued that Cutler had represented other potential witnesses and thus had a conflict of interest. Glasser sided with the prosecutors, contending that Cutler was the "in-house counsel" for the Gambino family.

Bruce Cutler - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Cippolone is the in house counsel for the Trump/GOP crime family & McConnell is their guy in the Senate, their Caporegime.

 

[kage69]

Traitors.

Team Treason says can't indict, can't impeach. Guess assassination is going to make a come back now.

 

[ivwshane]

Traitors.

Team Treason says can't indict, can't impeach. Guess assassination is going to make a come back now.

You would think so...

 

[qliveur]

Traitors.

Team Treason says can't indict, can't impeach. Guess assassination is going to make a come back now.

Irony's kinda lost on you, isn't it?

 

[ivwshane]

Irony's kinda lost on you, isn't it?

And 2nd amendment remedies are what exactly? Watering the tree of liberty is only allowed for team right, now? There is only irony in the statement if you believe the president hasn’t violated the constitution, I’m guessing he doesn’t believe that.

 

[Sunburn74]

Murkowski being a piece of shit as usual

Agreed. I will definitely be sending money to her opponent. Her, Collins, McConnell, for sure.

 

[Sunburn74]

Traitors.

Team Treason says can't indict, can't impeach. Guess assassination is going to make a come back now.

I think so. Pretty much why impeachment was put in place was to prevent assassination. There's a reason why we as a country have had so few assassination attempts on politicans. Once you gut it, that's what you invite. These GOP guys don't seem to grasp that they are setting precedents that will take hundreds of years to undo. It's really all very sad what's happened to their party.

 

[ivwshane]

The defense and their use of maladministration vs high crimes is so bogus. For one, asking a foreign power to announce a fake investigation on a political opponent isn’t a matter of good/bad policy, it’s a matter of abusing the power of the office. Had the issue been about trump simply holding up aid because he thought Ukraine wasn’t doing enough about corruption, that would be an example of maladministration. The key difference being that the president asked for a favor to hurt a political rival.

But it doesn’t matter, we know this is a bull Shit trial with a bull shit defense defending a bull shit president.

 

[interchange]

Why not? A defendant can represent themselves, why couldn’t they represent a co defendant?

Conflict of interest is one thing, but more important is that the co-conspirator wasn't known until now. If nothing else, they have access to knowledge that wasn't available for discovery, and since they were hiding that they might have knowledge of the crime, there wouldn't be reason for them to be called as a witness. That's a big problem. Of course, the whole thing is screwed up because we probably won't get witnesses at all, but to allow a defendant the opportunity to coordinate with a co-conspirator and not even have the prosecution know about it or ask questions of the conspirator as a witness? Yeah, that's a big problem. Cipollone would also be able to influence his co-counsel in ways that might protect his criminal liability from being discovered.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol Sekulow is doing his best to explain exactly why witnesses should be called. I’m sure the irony is lost on him.

 

[qliveur]

And 2nd amendment remedies are what exactly? Watering the tree of liberty is only allowed for team right, now? There is only irony in the statement if you believe the president hasn’t violated the constitution, I’m guessing he doesn’t believe that.

Funny how you worded that part.

I don't need to believe a negative, much less prove one.

 

[Jhhnn]

The defense and their use of maladministration vs high crimes is so bogus. For one, asking a foreign power to announce a fake investigation on a political opponent isn’t a matter of good/bad policy, it’s a matter of abusing the power of the office. Had the issue been about trump simply holding up aid because he thought Ukraine wasn’t doing enough about corruption, that would be an example of maladministration. The key difference being that the president asked for a favor to hurt a political rival.

But it doesn’t matter, we know this is a bull Shit trial with a bull shit defense defending a bull shit president.

It would have been just as egregious had Zelensky played along. We need less foreign influence in our elections, not more. It's deeply immoral & wrong to have solicited Ukrainian help at all. That sums up the Trump presidency in general, sad to say.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Actually no, because of the obstruction of Trump. there are many witnesses and 1000's of documents that still have not been presented, and the Senate doesn't want to allow them. Even in a normal Trial, all witnesses must testify, even if they testified in the indictment investigation. The same SHOULD hold true with the impeachment, but that isn't how they want to do it, because it is all about getting an Acquittal for trump, and doing it as quick as possible, the Truth be damned. I am guessing that there are far more government officials involved and the corruption goes deep into the Republican's holding office, with the corruption going much deeper than just Trump's election interference

There are millions of witnesses and billions of documents that were never presented because the House made no effort to request them and never followed through the legal requirements to have them. It is and was the duty of the House to call those witnesses, not the Senate.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Call it what it is. A sham trial.
Seems the founding fathers made a mistake when it comes to how impeachment should actually proceed.
Seems they made a lot of mistakes actually.

OK, it was a sham impeachment.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

It started with the electoral college and probably Congress itself.

Damn shame that the Constitution keeps getting in the way of Democrats winning.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

The was bipartisan opposition to the partisan impeachment of President Trump and my opinion is that there's going to be a bipartisan acquittal of President Trump in the impeachment.

 

[ivwshane]

Damn shame that the Constitution keeps getting in the way of Democrats winning.

If only that were the case. But the issue isn’t the constitution that the founders set up, it’s that the founding fathers never envisioned such corrupt people in such lockstep to pervert the system they set up.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Traitors.

Team Treason says can't indict, can't impeach. Guess assassination is going to make a come back now.

I don't think advocating murder and/or political assassination is a particularly good idea in a public forum.

 

[ivwshane]

The was bipartisan opposition to the partisan impeachment of President Trump and my opinion is that there's going to be a bipartisan acquittal of President Trump in the impeachment.

Yes and there is bipartisan support to hear witnesses and there is bipartisan support that trump is guilty of committing the offenses in the articles of impeachment.

 

[ivwshane]

I don't think advocating murder and/or political assassination is a particularly good idea in a public forum.

Good thing he didn’t do that. Reading is hard.

 

[hal2kilo]

Repubs in caucus now, trying to figure out how to kill this and pretend they haven't destroyed the Senate.
Most useless body in our separation of powers.

 

[interchange]

There are millions of witnesses and billions of documents that were never presented because the House made no effort to request them and never followed through the legal requirements to have them. It is and was the duty of the House to call those witnesses, not the Senate.

WTF? What or who of relevance to determining the facts of Trump's actions was not subpoenaed? Only Bolton. And there is clear reason why he wasn't subpoenad at the time.

More broadly, let's assume the House fucked it all up. And here we are in the Senate where there is clearly credible evidence of a possible crime. So long as the House's fuckery didn't taint the underlying evidence and led to enough evidence to justify moving to the sentence, why does that mean the Senate should just pack up and go home without investigating? These arguments from the party who won't let Benghazi die. It's sickeningly hypocritical. If you want to find out what happened and don't have enough evidence to determine it yet, then subpoena witnesses and documents. It's that simple.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Irony's kinda lost on you, isn't it?

Actually, impeachment (not the farcical current abomination) was seen as an alternative to assassination by some of the Founders.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

WTF? What or who of relevance to determining the facts of Trump's actions was not subpoenaed? Only Bolton. And there is clear reason why he wasn't subpoenad at the time.

More broadly, let's assume the House fucked it all up. And here we are in the Senate where there is clearly credible evidence of a possible crime. So long as the House's fuckery didn't taint the underlying evidence and led to enough evidence to justify moving to the sentence, why does that mean the Senate should just pack up and go home without investigating? These arguments from the party who won't let Benghazi die. It's sickeningly hypocritical. If you want to find out what happened and don't have enough evidence to determine it yet, then subpoena witnesses and documents. It's that simple.

Don't even bother with that troll, he's not interested in any reasonable version of honest discourse.

 

[hal2kilo]

Don't even bother with that troll, he's not interested in any reasonable version of honest discourse.

I have him on ignore but I see him. He always shows up when the talking points says he's (his team) winning.