WATCH LIVE | Impeachment trial of President Trump continues in Senate (Day 2)

The fact that the House can already prove their case, and they can, is not a justifiable reason for excluding more evidence - especially in light of the fact that the new evidence could be harmful or helpful to the House.

 

Every single previous impeachment Senate trial has included witnesses that were not included during the house investigation.

So tell us again how this works.

 

Ok lady

 

Can Senators consider evidence like the documents released to public through FOIA lawsuits or the GAO report?

 

Oh sure, and you'll be bolt upright when the Defence Team start their 'droning.'

 

At the end of the second day (technically the third day, but whatever), the thing that stands out to me and most analysts is the tour de force that is Adam Schiff. His initial 2.5 hours speech drew rave reviews and praise from both sides of the aisle. And his summary of the timeline at the end of the day, along with an admonishment for Senators - even those who will vote to convict - to continue attempting to learn about the full extent of everyone involved in the scheme designed to pressure Ukraine into a quid pro quo and then to cover it up has the potential to actually move needles.

Cable News Pundits Fawn Over Adam Schiff’s ‘Amazing’ Impeachment Speech: ‘Very Powerful and Forceful’

 

I thought he did a great job myself but I did not see it all. Perhaps the last half. He was cogent and his ending was great.......a challenge to the basic honesty and courage of Senators with if 'Marie Yovanovitch had the courage, we should too,' or similar.

 

It's Al Capone tried by the Mafia, he do have a lot of pats on the shoulder I suppose.

 

Violence now from the Trumpeteers? Nah. This is ugly.

 

Half of Congress is the House. They voted for impeachment. The Senate didn't. It's their obligation to do their job and pay attention to detail before they send the articles to the Senate. It is up to them to challenge what is covered by executive privilege and what isn't. Not everything is covered a but in the same breath just because the House wants information doesn't mean that they trump executive privilege. The House did a crappy job. That's on Schiff.

 

If the house can prove their case then there is no need for witnesses. It's pretty simple.

 

Good question. Can they? It seems that people are presenting videos and such so I can't see why not. It's their time to spend presenting what they want.

 

You are just repeating the argument, but I'll adjust to make it clear.

The lack of a need for new witnesses is not a justifiable reason for excluding more evidence - especially in light of the fact that the new evidence could be harmful or helpful to the House.

 

Then take the next logical step.

If the Senate can consider evidence like that made public from the FOIA lawsuits or the GAO Report, evidence which came out after the House Report was completed, then there is already precedent for the Senate to consider new evidence outside of the evidence solely collected and reviewed by the House.

 

Day 2 into 24 total hours of Democrats' presentation of "evidence". I'm sure today will be more exciting.

Or maybe just more of the same action as yesterday.

 

LOL nobody is watching this, be honest. They finish the day, run to the MSM to get their praise for the wacko house managers, then come repeat what they heard. Schiff did amazing, lol no one on this board could watch him for 2 hours talking about his opinion and not fall asleep. This trial is crashing quicker than an airliner flying over Iran.

 

You mean like Biden and the whistleblower as a witness? Good idea.

 

If they need a new witness then the House should have enforced their subpoena in court and deposed the witness and not left it to the Senate to clean up their sloppy presentation. Yes I am repeating the same argument because the issue hasn't changed. Schiff did a Schiffy job. (see what I did there?)

 

I know! I put C-SPAN on in the background often, and have for years.

This Impeachment Manager "Prosecution Show" in the Senate is next to impossible to listen to, much less watch. They are just embellishing a rerun of the "Best of 100 Hours" of televised House investigations though, as if putting lipstick on a pig by adding more of their own commentary will make the pig look prettier.

 

Bolton, Mulvaney, Perry, Giuliani, and Vought have relevant information.

The two (three?) that you are referencing either do not have relevant information or they are protected by whistleblower protections.

 

*eyeroll*

Trump broke his tweet record yesterday and nearly every one was about the impeachment trial.

 

The House is in the Court enforcing their subpoena. That case is currently at the appellate level.

And again, the Senate is already considering new evidence. The fact that the House already has an overwhelming amount of evidence is not a justifiable reason for excluding more evidence.

 

That poster (a) doesn't grasp how long appeals take, and (b) didn't follow the House's process. There's a ton of evidence they developed, and a great deal more that the WH is hiding.

Adam Schiff is doing a masterful job as a case manager.

 

Trump's quote in Davos yesterday is only serving to prove the House Managers are correct in the obstruction of congress article...

"Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material."

 

HAWHAWHAW! Like, it's so funny that Bonespurs is trying to get away with betraying the country! Nobody is watching it! *LOL* It's so amusing watching him take a dump on the rule of law! *guffaw*

You've got serious issues if you think an impeachment trial is "funny".