WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings (Yovanovich)

Opinion is not relevant here unless, of course, if one is a useful idiot of the dem clown show.

 

Guess you lost the argument.

 

Well said, unfortunately! And I would be the first to say that Trump's problems would be few and small if he'd keep his mouth shut more often and stay the hell off of a moron's plaything like "Twitter"....

Now -- what I want next are the "whistleblower(s) themselves -- FRONT AND CENTER, and unless they show their faces and are open to full and unrestricted questioning from EVERYONE then this whole thing is nothing but a desperate, treasonous farce -- very consistent with the "Russia Collusion" conspiracy against the president, and, the attempted character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh just a year ago.

We've arrived at the point where some of these Democrat congressmen need to be held accountable UNDER OATH, for their words, AND their actions.

 

You love a lot of things about which you are objectively wrong.

 

Nor were they there and so it is still irrelevant opinion.

 

Those rules control this proceeding. Move on.

 

What is Schiff for brains afraid of? Why only this time? Others were allowed to question on Wednesday.

 

Why are Republicans attempting to define the confines of the investigation before Articles of Impeachment have even been drafted?

 

What is Schiff for brains afraid of?

 

Others will be allowed to question today AFTER the initial 45 minute block.

 

I understand he's otherwise occupied....

 

Who makes up these 'rules'... the same kind of devious creatures who would have fit-in well in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union?!

 

LoL.

He says "We can impeach the POTUS for any reason Congress decides" and says I'M "objectively wrong".

No, counselor, YOU'RE wrong.

Allow me to introduce you to the Constitution of the United States:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

 

His testimony would be as relevant as Yovanavich's testimony.

 

To keep the articles in single digits, I suspect...

 

Now - define "high crimes and misdemeanors"

 

Lol, fair

 

Michael Avenatti is a former Ambassador to Ukraine?? I did not know that... I just thought he was a lawyer in deep ****...

 

These were the rules passed by the House to govern the public phase of the impeachment inquiry.

But yes...Nazis and Commies wrote the rules.

 

Hahaha I see!

You think because jaywalking used the word "misdemeanor" and you saw that word in the impeachment clause, they're talking about modern misdemeanors!

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha omg hhahahahahahaha

 

No, you misunderstand. Impeachment does not require a crime - at all - before the President can be impeached. As Matthew Whitaker said, "Abuse of Power is not a crime."

I said that Congress gets to define "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" given that the Constitution provides Congress that authority. And, as such, if they wanted to define that term as "crossing the street using his left foot to step off the sidewalk on a Tuesday," and got a majority of Congress to agree with that definition, then the President gets impeached.

 

So far the whole effort is based on hearsay about hearsay.

 

Nope surely isn't an ambassador nor was the ambassador being on the suspect QPQ, I mean bribery... what I really meant was extortion call. Both have zero relevance to the accusations.

What I find ironic is that Schiff refused to allow Hunter or Joe to testify during these hearings as Schiff stated that they have no relevance to the current accusations, however somehow Yovanavich does...

 

I generally disagree... I think the current school of thought is that the formal WB was essentially a clearinghouse for information, and there would be no value in hearing them testify.

What would be interesting is finding out who fed them the information. "Multiple US Government officials".... although at the end of the day, they need to be protected as much as (or more) than the WB. If their information is good and they cannot provide additional facts outside of that information, there is no need to see them either (but I'm hella curious)

I have to imagine Vindman was one of the people feeding the WB...

Trump will get to face his accusers at trial... His accusers will be the US House of Representatives...

 

Then allow me to give you some legal training. No charge.

And no, Congress doesn't get to decide what the Constitution means.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1632&context=jleg

Thus, Ejusdem generis means that the phrase "or other highcrimes or Misdemeanors" should be limited to offenses of the same genusas "Bribery, Treason ...." Clearly, these are the offenses of a person-I1-who entrusted with governmental office, violates this trust. These arewhat we meant by "political offenses." "They are Constitutional wrongsthat subvert the structure of government or undermine the integrity ofoffice and even the Constitution itself.