It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A lot of Senators are not to happy about his diversion of Pentagon funds for his wall, either.
originally posted by: Ahabstar
Okay. Impeachment is criminal as in high crimes and misdemeanors right? Do I really need to bold the text?
The evidence the Democrats have exposed thus far has
originally posted by: ChefFox
a reply to: Caractacus
The evidence the Democrats have exposed thus far has
They have really now? i dont think so.
originally posted by: Wildmanimal
a reply to: xuenchen
Actually,
The President of the United States of America
has to prove nothing to the political Soviet Style Inquisition.
They, Pelosi and Crew, must prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. The politically biased accusations and method of
"guilty by accusation in a court of public opinion"
will not hold water nor merit.
We no longer have to "Sign The Bill before We The People Read It".
S A V V Y ?
That's not exactly what she said. Frankly, if he did have anything to prove his innocence, then he should submit it to help hire cause albeit not legally necessary. It would probably be wise to save it for the actual impeachment so ther Dems don't have much time to twist it all up.
originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha
But Nancy said in plain English that Trump needs to show some evidence of innocence.
Why are YOU hacking-up the facts ? π π π π π π π π
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
...
If and when...(not really if), the House Judicial Committee reviews the evidence from the investigation, they will craft "Articles of Impeachment". These articles will be sent to the Senate, where the public trial will be held.
Then the president's legal team can present a vigorous defense, confront witnesses, etc. with the "impartial" Senate jury and Chief Justice judge.
This is not a criminal case where the "reasonable doubt" standard applies. Actually, the Constitution does not set out any particular standard for either the House or Senate
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: St Udio
At least that's the current discussions within the group I confer with, lately on an almost daily basis
Let me guess...This group has something to do with "Q Anon"?
Wrong.
Schiff doesn't plan on allowing Republicans to...
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Pelosi sure knows how to pull those triggers doesn't she? Her and everyone else in Washington are putting on quite the show, it's been very effective in creating the Divided States of America.
Divided we fall. Pelosi is doing a great job of playing her part. I wonder how good of friends her and Trump actually are behind the curtains? Probably the best of friends.
originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: F4guy
This is not a criminal case where the "reasonable doubt" standard applies. Actually, the Constitution does not set out any particular standard for either the House or Senate
No , it sets it out as a right for all of us .......constitutionally.......therefore it still applies.. ...House or Senate doesnt matter, thats not how constitutional law works.