It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Senate Impeachment Trial - Prove HOAX -or- Justify Ukraine Aid Delay by Proving Biden Corruption

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 01:51 AM
January 3, 2020

Since the Impeachment Trial in the Senate will be using Republican-led procedures, just as the House used Democrat-led procedures, Republicans Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham will decide how the trial is run.

President Trump has called the House side of the Impeachment a "Hoax", accusing Nancy Pelosi/Adam Schiff/Jerry Nadler of fabricating evidence out of thin air. There is also evidence that Adam Schiff conspired with Eric Ciaramella and Alexander Vindman to file the "Whistle Blower" complaint, that got the entire House Impeachment process started.

Trump Says - House Impeachment is another HOAX:

Eric Ciaramella's Whistle-Blower complaint alleges that President Trump delayed sending Military aid money to Ukraine, because he wanted the Ukrainian government to first investigate potential wrong-doing by former Vice President (Obama Admin) JOE BIDEN. Joe Biden is running for President on the Democratic ticket, and is presently leading the field of Democrat contenders.

W.B. Complaint that triggered the Impeachment Inquiry:

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sends the 2 Impeachment Articles (1. Obstructing Congress 2. Abuse of Power) over to the Senate, the trial Procedures and Processes will then be determined by Senate leadership.


1.) Attempt to prove the House Impeachment was a HOAX, by summoning Adam Schiff and asking if he worked with Eric Ciaramella to formulate a whistle-blower complaint that could be used to trigger House impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump?


2.) To accept the House Impeachment as LEGITIMATE, but prove that President Trump had good reason for believing that Joe & Hunter Biden were a part of Ukraine corruption. Which is why transmitting the $391 million military aid package was delayed until President Trump was satisfied that a legitimate Ukraine corruption investigation was underway.

ATS Members: Which of the two do you prefer? Or, do you prefer that the Senate pursue some other outcome?

I don't think you can prove "hoax" and then proceed to treat the articles as legitimate. In other words, it's #1 or #2, but not both.

Your thoughts, Por Favor.


edit on 1/3/2020 by carewemust because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:08 AM
a reply to: carewemust

I figure, dems have a choice, proceed with the articles, and prepare for Biden getting in the spotlight. Trump would need to prove Biden wrongdoing to be vindicated. If no obvious wrongdoing, dems get a victory and that would force a few republicans to turn on Trump and vote to impeach, even though the "evidence" is weak, but they could always claim it was political.

So in the end, it's a gamble for dems. Since they are stalling I would imagine they dont want Biden investigated more deeply. If he was clean...they could have had all this wrapped up already.

Somehow I think they werent thinking this through very diligently. Almost buffoonish. So I guess I think number 2...would want to see that go further. I like dirt.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:18 AM
a reply to: carewemust

3. They reject it as it has no merit and just vote it down.


posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:45 AM
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

The low-IQ media is declaring that crafty Pelosi has McConnell over a barrel. WRONG! McConnell said 2 weeks ago that he doesn't care if she holds the Impeachment Articles indefinitely. The Senate has more conservative judges to confirm. That's priority #1.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:47 AM

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: carewemust

3. They reject it as it has no merit and just vote it down.


That's what Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham wants to do. We should learn more when the Senate comes back into Session (after their holiday break) this (Friday) morning.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:55 AM
a reply to: carewemust

That's what Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham wants to do. We should learn more when the Senate comes back into Session (after their holiday break) this (Friday) morning.

I wouldnt. It will allow them to save face and yell from the top of the hill..."it was political !!!!". They can use that to claim illegitimate elections.

Better let the chips lay where they may

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 02:57 AM
There was no aid delay used as leverage, let alone known as a delay. That's just another bs political lie smeared across the propaganda media machine.

Prove me wrong...

There's no legitimate impeachment.
If there was, does anyone really think these theatrical hysterics would be necessary?


The so called Americans in our political establishment are literally waging political warfare against the American people. Not only that, they are illegally conducting propaganda that's being directed at the American people.

Think about why corrupt, career political parasites, whom have been in DC for decades, would be freaking out about the swamp they created, getting drained.

Why...just think about the why's.

Then, follow the money.
The corrupt decades old trail of money...

It's not leading to President Trump.
He's not a career politician who has been in DC for decades.

Like him or not, he didn't create this foolish mess.
Politicians did.


posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 03:04 AM
a reply to: ADVISOR would be way more fun to have it.

Also, if you want to drain the swamp...this would be a good opportunity to draw some of them out in the open.

Right ?

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 03:23 AM
a reply to: carewemust

It's not really the Senate's place to decide how to play the cards. The Senate is only the jury; Trump and his lawyers are the defendant and will make the final decision how to present their case. The Senate really has only one decision to make: hear the case through, or dismiss it as based on tainted evidence.

If they do hear it through, both of your options are possible. It can be shown that there was sufficient evidence for an investigation (and that's all that has to be proven... not that Biden (either one) did anything wrong), and it can be shown that the allegations against Trump are based on political angst instead of facts. Either theory can prevail.

What's going on right now (I think) is that McConnell is trying to convince Trump that the best thing for the nation is to let the Senate kill this thing on the vine. Pelosi has realized that she and a lot of others in Congress are caught between a rock and a hard place: if they do not remove Trump, they likely won't last four more years without having some damn serious accusations leveled at them; if they try to remove Trump, the evidence that comes out in the trial will implicate them all now.

Guiliani has broken silence, and he has a lot to say. And before anyone decides to start bashing Guiliani, he is Trump's personal lawyer. He has every right to defend his client, regardless of what anyone/everyone thinks of him. In this country, a person's lawyer is not determined by popular consensus.

I am certain Lindsey Graham has some skeletons in his Ukrainian closet; wouldn't surprise me if McConnell does too. I'd bet good money Romney is hip-deep in that cesspool of corruption, and there are likely others. It's not just Democrats; it will bite some Republicans as well. Someone is going to mention, why not just hold a summary trial and convict/remove Trump, then? The short answer is, they can't per the Constitution. If Trump is placed on trial, he then has the right to confront his accusers, which means the right to representation and to call witnesses in his defense. That's never been in dispute; what is in dispute where witnesses are concerned is whether or not the Senate will consider the impeachment as the rested case of the prosecution or will allow for the prosecution to make their case again in the Senate with new witnesses. That's what Schiff is doing now: trying to concoct some "new evidence" to support a second chance in the Senate for the prosecution.

I expect this will boil down to a pretty simple solution: Trump will not get a full trial; the case will be dismissed under summary judgement (assuming the impeachment is ever finished) despite Trump's protests. Guiliani is already presenting evidence to the DoJ. The DoJ will start their own investigation into the Ukraine situation and will have the (partial) results ready just in time for an October Surprise that will seal the coffin on the DNC... Barr does have a history of protecting his party members. Then (and this part may be wishful thinking on my part) the next four years will see the Republicans split into two parties: the conservative part with Trump at the helm, and the establishment part. That will set off new arguments over the investigation and what was buried.

Not an optimal solution; I would like to see everyone involved punished to the fullest extent of the law (which according to OAN's expose could include firing squads). But I guess it's a step in the right direction; the swamp is draining, but it will not be dry by 2024.


posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 03:24 AM
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly


Drawing them out, hell they out them selves every day.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 03:35 AM
a reply to: ADVISOR

hell they out them selves every day.

I realize why you say that but...every once in a while I depart from my echo chamber to see what the other side is doing...and it's unbelievable...they dont see it that way at all. It's like an alternate universe over there. The record has to be straightened officially or it will never stop.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 03:49 AM
I like politicians , they are like Santa Claus giving me the presents I want for Christmas.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 05:22 AM
#2. The abuse of power article is clear that the Democrats have charged the President with seeking foreign help to influence an election.

That means the 'front and centre' issue for the Senate is Ukranian corruption and efforts to help the Democrats in the 2016 election. All the evidence for that needs to be part of public hearings to show that there were grounds to investigate corruption. Note : corruption does not have to be proven, only that there were grounds for an investigation.

The Democrats don't want that to be the focus - and I think we all know why... the overwhelming evidence will be brought to light to a much wider audience... evidence that the US media have been covering up.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 07:02 AM
a reply to: carewemust

The goal people under oath testified was NOT to prove Biden broke any laws. What Trump was asking for with his quid pro quo was just an "announcement" of an investigation in order to score cheap political points against his rival.

Clearly Trump broke the law by doing this but Republicans refuse to put the Constitution and the rule of law before what is good for their own political party. Republicans always put party before country.

posted on Jan, 3 2020 @ 12:47 PM
Did the Democrats push Biden to become a candidate after they caught wind of Trump's inquiry?

posted on Jan, 6 2020 @ 11:50 AM

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: carewemust
What Trump was asking for with his quid pro quo was just an "announcement" of an investigation in order to score cheap political points against his rival.

Once... just once... I'd like to see someone who makes such ludicrous claims provide actual evidence.

So, by all means - point me to the evidence that Trump ever said any such thing.

Clearly Trump broke the law by doing this

Clearly TDS sufferers believe this, but...

but Republicans refuse to put the Constitution and the rule of law before what is good for their own political party. Republicans always put party before country.

democrats refuse to acknowledge reality because TDS/Orange Man Bad.

posted on Jan, 15 2020 @ 01:44 AM
As more about the processes leading up to the Whistle-blower complaint become known, it's becoming clearer that it was a FABRICATION (aka Hoax)...straight out of the Democrat's same old playbook.

While Devin Nunes is focused on the false statements of ICIG Michael Atkinson, the key is the contact between the ‘whistle-blower’ (Eric Ciaramella) and the House Intelligence Committee, via Mary McCord.

There’s a very strong likelihood this entire impeachment construct was manufactured out of nothing.

National Security Council resistance member Alexander Vindman starts a rumor about the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call, which he shares with CIA operative Eric Ciaramella (a John Brennan resistance associate).

Ciaramella then makes contact with resistance ally Mary McCord in her role within the House.

McCord then helps Ciaramella create a fraudulent whistle-blower complaint via her former colleague, now ICIG, Michael Atkinson….

…And that’s how this impeachment operation gets started.

Prove the Hoax, and House Impeachment is nullified. Case Closed. Democrats can begin working on constructing the next fake crime they want to pin on President Trump.

posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 01:18 AM
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM gets it right! He knew as far back as November that Schiff-Ciaramella-Vindman-ICIG Atkinson CONSPIRED to FABRICATE the Whistle-blower complaint that lit the fuse for Trump's ultimate Impeachment.

Graham - Whistle-blower Farce Must Be Exposed:

This must be exposed early in the Senate trial...preferably right after the Democrats finish their 2 days of whining and lying, on Wed and Thurs, Jan 22nd/23rd.

Once it's proven that President Trump was set up, the House Impeachment is nullified, and the Senate Trial either ends, or pivots to trying Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi/Jerry Nadler, if they were aware of the scheme.

new topics

top topics


log in