The Impeachment Trial in the Senate

Forum » Beenos Trumpet » The Impeachment Trial in the Senate

Jan 22, 2020, 10:36

The hammering of poor Adam Schiff by the lawyers of Trump has already started and they have not even got to the Articles of Impeachment yet.   The bugger is made to look silly as the stupid arse he really is, 

The DP realizes that the present articles is totally baseless and wants to continue with a fishing expedition hoping that's something will come up,   They want to call witnesses before the present articles of Impeachment are dealt with and proposed that witnesses be called now.  This was totally different to the 1998 Impeachment trial of Clinton where the process of witnesses was decided upon by the Senate after the evidence supplied by the House was considered.  

Both motions about the issue of calling new witnesses now was defeated 53 - 47,  Not a good sign for the Democrats, while CNN has a fit about it and praising Schiff for his performance.  Nadler said nothing thus far.   

The love for the Constitution thus far is amazing - they undermine it and want to undermine rewrite it constantly and destroy it in their routine actions - but is not making any headway,              

Jan 22, 2020, 12:10

A total waste of time.

Jan 22, 2020, 12:19

Now Nadler got it in the turtle neck.  He spoke about presidential privilege as nonsense and was reminded of the Supreme Court ruling on the issue.   It was also used by Clinton and Obama and was never queried by the Democrats.   

However, a shouting match erupted and the Chief Justice eventually intervened and reminded the House Manger and the President's  legal representatives of the need for decorum in dealing with issues.

Senator Schumer submitted nine amendments to the proceedings used in the Clintomn case in 1998 - but all of those were rejected by the Senate.

Now the presentation of the Articles of Impeachment is starting today - 3 days is set aside by the Senate for that purpose an the fun and games would really start.  The process is as follows:-

*   The House Managers present their case

*    The President's legal team counter the allegations

*    Senators submit written questions to both parties and the answers must then be provided,

This is going to be fun to watch.  The show starts at 20:00 hours SA time and CNN si going to show it, breaking away only when the Trump lawyers put their case,   Weird how propaganda works,      .



Jan 22, 2020, 12:59

So far not a single Republican with any spine or integrity. 

All proposed amendments rejected on pure party lines so it looks like no documents and no witnesses. Not much of a trial in that case. Republicans happy to be part of a massive cover up.

Jan 22, 2020, 13:12

Mike it's been hilarious. 

The halfwit demonrat clowns said their case was overwhelming. 

Now they say the must get additional witnesses!

The case was so urgent but they sit on it for 33 days. 

The Constitution requires the House to make the case and the Senate to review the case.

The demonrat bone heads never subpoenaed the guys they now want!!!! Now they want the Senate to do it for them. Hahahahaha.

Then the Constitutional principle of Executive Privilege must be ignored just because the demonrats were afraid to take the matter to court!!! Bwhahahahaha.

The that arch clown and liar Schiff says never mind about the totally biased House procedures, forget about that he says what counts is what happens now. Hahahahaha. 

No crimes have been argued in the two reasons for impeachment. They have no case and no evidence. 

As Radcliffe said its like taking a hammer to crush a fly. Trump's lawyers are going to shred these clowns as they have already started to do. Too funny! 

Hearing Schiff lying and his faux outrage had me in stitches. 

Jan 22, 2020, 13:36


Jan 22, 2020, 13:48

Draad that picture didn't work, cant see it

Jan 22, 2020, 13:58

Here you go . . .

Jan 22, 2020, 14:08


No cover up needed - the Democrats  invented Articles of Impeachment and the problem is that the DP is now looking for further evidence through a fishing expedition to back up their claims.   If witnesses is to be called there is scope for it later in the Impeachment trial.  

Why do you think that the Democrats want to veer from the processes adopted in the case of the Clinton Senate Trial - where witnesses were called after the impeachment articles were dealt with?

The other process the Democrats wants changed is the way that the Senate witnesses has to submit statements under oath and other evidence supporting their claims and the documents are then dealt with.   Will not work either I am afraid,   

The main problems will arise from today onwards for the next three days when the Democrats from the House must state  their case and the Presidents legal team will deal with the defense of the President,   The problem is that thus far the Democrats used generalized statements with no   legal substance through  a show trial method and that did not work and is not going to work.

Shumer and Schiff is up to their necks in the "whistleblower" story and that is going to cause fireworks over the next three days.   Why was the "whistleblower" - if indeed there was one - not called to give evidence in the House?   Why is the evidence provided by the IG of Intelligence not included in the Impeachment documents sent to the Senate?   This evidence was taken in secret without any representative of the RP being allowed to make any inputs or ask any questions.  So why is it missing from the impeachment articles submitted to the Senate?   

Nobody is creeping up anybody's arse.   Anything like this must be done constitutionally and on a sound legal basis.   The House did not use that basis in framing Articles of Impeachment and  now the Democrats wants the Senate to do the same.   If their method is followed every President will in future be impeached if the House being controlled by the Party opposed to him. That is BS - if the Democrats wants an impeachment they need to follow the rules and not create new rules as the process goes on.  

By the way the real reason for the Impeachment is that the Democrats with their shit candidates know they have no chance against Trump in the elections in  November and want him out of the way by hook or by crook.   Not a sound reason for trying impeachment at all and bound to backfire on them.                        

Jan 22, 2020, 16:15

Well said Mike. 

Honesty is not something ou rooibozo is familiar with. He has just been caught out big time lying about his son and affirmative action. 

Next week is going to be very bad for the demonrat coup plotters and their absurd sham impeachment. 

Jan 22, 2020, 18:13

99% of the viewers are Trumpanzees. They are glued to their seats watching their master. :D

Jan 22, 2020, 18:31


Trump is in Davos - not at the trial  

Jan 22, 2020, 18:40

Image result for trumpanzee

Jan 22, 2020, 18:44

Image result for trumpanzee international

Jan 22, 2020, 18:45

Image result for trumpanzee international

Jan 22, 2020, 19:19


Oh my, but you've got a bad case of TDS!

Jan 22, 2020, 20:07


Jan 23, 2020, 01:29

The fact is that the House Managers used statements by some people evidence given by their agents,  They do not even know the names of people from the Ukraine and did not keep near to the truth about the issues involved and they are going to come short.


Jan 23, 2020, 01:30

The fact is that the House Managers used statements by some people evidence given by their agents,  They do not even know the names of people from the Ukraine and did not keep near to the truth about the issues involved and they are going to come short.

I gain the impression that the DNC and the House members involved was determined that Biden must be the Democratic candidate and that they do not want to see the dirty dealings of the Biden's to be exposed during the campaign,  

The first priority is getting rid of Trump - there next one the protection of Biden in case his corrupt dealings come out during the election.   The House never investigated the Burisma issue and the corrupt leadership of the FBI and CIA would not do so for the same reason.  

The conveniently also forget that there will be a number of criminal charges laid stemming from the 2016 election soon and also refused a request  for the IG of Justice to give evidence in the House,   They will get it eventually that the DNC and Obama colluded with foreigners to try and ensure that Trump loses.                  

Jan 23, 2020, 11:00

The most important and also the first witness that has been withheld and hidden away......... the whistleblower him/herself. That is despite Schiff himself saying several timed on every news network and to every news outlet that the whistle blower will personally testify and be heard.

I haven’t heard either of Schiff or Schumer saying anything.

PS. Is it a coincidence that the start of Schiff and Schumer both rhyme with shit?

Jan 23, 2020, 11:14

I have watched Lou Dobbs, Hannity and Ingraham. 

Honestly disaster looms for the Demonrats. Outstanding clips. 

Mike and Windpomp towards the end of the Laura Ingraham clip there is huge news about the Bidens. Laura has managed to get hold of State Department emails that show the Obummer administration's concerns about Hunter. Also NYT role in the matter. The Bidens are definitely finished. 

Oh yes poor old sharktwit is a profoundly ignorant jackass. In case he doesn't know. Hahahahaha. 

Jan 23, 2020, 16:34

Tonight show start at 8 - it is no clear whether President Trump's lawyers  may only make their  presentation or whether they also have the right to ask questions and whether  there will eb tme for the Schiff group to ask questions too.

I think the questions by the lawyers will be even more interesting than those asked by the Senators. Senator Graham asked for transcripts of three Biden phone calls to President Zelenski after the home of the chair of Burisma was raided and before his visit to Ukraine where he demanded the dismissal of the Ukraine Chief Prosecutor.  Shokin.   Wonder whether he got it.  

One of the House Manager discussing the incident referred to Lusenko  as the fired Prosecutor.  The fact is they did their homework badly,   He also named the Ukraine President as Vladimir Zelesky got it wrong too.  Zelensky's name in Ukrainian is Vlodomyrr.  Ye pronounciation si different and as per normal poor homework,

I did not know the USA and Russia are in  in a state  of war between each other,  Is Schiff trying to start such a war on instruction of Soros?     




Jan 23, 2020, 18:09


Jan 23, 2020, 20:28

The Trumpanzees are stuck to their seats in anticipation... 

Meanwhile, the rest of the world is watching little to nothing of the trial

Image result for trump impeachment jokes

Jan 24, 2020, 06:19

The problem is once an idiot ways an idiot,  It was Clinton who started the foreign borne story  about Obama in the primary elections in 2008 - not Trump.   He had it checked out and stated that there was no problem,   So the BS continues on all levels.     

Jan 24, 2020, 06:19

The Democrats were given twenty four hours to present their case and spent their first eight hours wasting their opportunity,   They yesterday had another 8 hours and the last tine I looked at CNN one was talking about the history of  Ukraine of which she obviously knew nothing about.   

After the silly earlier statement of Schiff about the pending Russian land attack on the USA, the situation is getting sillier and sillier,

Wonder what the Democrats will do with the remaining 8 hours they have to state their case?  I think the Republicans were giving them the 24 hours just to hang themselves.   If I were them I would give up the remaining 8 hours today,                 

Jan 24, 2020, 14:42

The longer this goes on the more the case of the DemoKKKrats look like turning into toast.

Jan 26, 2020, 19:01

Irrespective of who or how many are watching or following this trial finally the TRUTH is going to prevail and all the untruths are going to be exposed.

It is shameful and disturbing to hear these Demorats making up stories, embellishing lies and showing their hatred for the President to the world. 

No politician who has any class would stoop as low as these Democratic vermin.

It is obvious to all (except the Snowflakes) that the Democratic political party is made up of members who have no allegiance to the USA, the Flag or democracy.

Their aim is to fill their pockets, lie, cheat, steal and terminate anyone or anything that stands in their way and gain control of the government with any means possible.

Examples Walters, Green, Polisi, Pencil Neck, Humpty Dumpty, Biden, Obama, Clinton, Kerry, the Media and Holder to name just a few.

  SCUMBAGS to the core.


Four More Years.

Jan 26, 2020, 20:11

I'm am very worried about  the opinion polls that keep on indicating that Trump will not win re-election.

The only way he can lose is if his supporters do not work hard on his behalf and convince their neighbors and all people they know to support him.   If I look at comments on Fox News one realizes how many people brainwashed by the Trump-hating media there are,  

Trump  can only win if every supporter do his or her  work and  work exceptionally hard for him.  On the positive side - I think that the Senate is going to have an investigation done as to the Biden issue and he may not be the DP candidate in the end.                

Jan 27, 2020, 00:11

Jan 27, 2020, 04:38

Image result for trumpanzee jokes

Jan 27, 2020, 04:39

Image result for trumpanzee jokes

Jan 27, 2020, 04:45

Image result for trump  jokes

Jan 27, 2020, 20:48

Gutless Republican Cowards and Arselickers: "There is no evidence of a quid pro quo, only hearsay."

Adam Schiff: "Well then let's put John Bolton under oath and hear what he has to say. That wouldn't be hearsay, that would be testimony from the horse's mouth/"

Gutless Republican Cowards and Arselickers: "Oh but we're not here to hear new evidence and why didn't Bolton testify to the House?"

Adam Schiff: "Ummm . . . because the White House refused to let him testify . . . along with Don McGahn and Mick Mulvaney/"

Gutless Republican Cowards and Arselickers: "Buh-buh-but if you wanted to hear Bolton's testimony you could have gone to court."

Adam Schiff: "As we've seen with McGahn, that process would take so long that the very election that Trump is trying to influence would be over already. Let's call John Bolton as a witness now because his testimony is pertinent, relevant and important to this impeachment trial."

Gutless Republican Cowards and Arselickers: "Bolton's a liar and he's just trying to promote his book."

Adam Schiff: "But you haven't even heard what he's got to say yet?"

Gutless Republican Cowards and Arselickers: "This is all a hoax. It's not fair. Look at the economy!"

That is pretty much the gist of what's happened in the last few days. Republicans burying their heads in the sand and pretending they're not part of a massive cover-up because they're a bunch of cowards and arselickers. Looks like Mitt Romney and one or two others might show a bit of backbone and vote to allow the Bolton testimony that would blow the Republican's pathetic "defence" out of the water . . . and then we'll finally be where I predicted we'd end up . . . Republicans finally admitting that the "perfect phone call" wasn't actually that perfect but doesn't constitute impeachment.

Watch this space . . .

Jan 27, 2020, 21:22

If they so badly want Bolton to testify, why not offer Hunter Biden to testify in exchange?

Why should the Trump admin cooperate with a process in Congress that doesn't even allow council for the accused?

 Bolton was never subpoenaed in the first place...The impeachment of a president is a very serious affair and if they have to go to court to get a witness to testify, that's what they have to do. If it takes time, that's what it takes. The law should run it's course.  Due process is there for a reason.

This isn't about impeaching Trump really...they know they have nothing. This is about impeding his presidency and putting him in a bad light. This is about appeasing their gullible base. This BS is a last desperate ploy to try and make him look bad, and it's not working.

They've been accusing him of all sorts of things for tree years now, without offering one piece of credible evidence to support their nonsense.  Why should the Senate have this charade continue? They had their chance to submit evidence in Congress.  Why didn't they?

 Hunter and Daddy Quid Pro Joe are going down... and that's just the tip of the iceberg.  Watch this space...

Jan 27, 2020, 21:55

 Biden is an Idiot that should have retired long ago.

Jan 27, 2020, 22:25

Question for the brainwashed Trumpanzees . . . what has Hunter or Joe Biden got to do with the impeachment articles in question?

Whether the Bidens are 100% guilty of corruption or not has absolutely zero bearing or relevance to the charges against Bozo of holding back aid for Ukraine or obstruction of justice.


Jan 27, 2020, 23:52

Nonsense...American aid is contingent on the recipient not engaging in corruption. If the government at the time fired the prosecutor to protect the corrupt activities of Biden and their friends in Burisma, the administration is obligated to insist that those activities be investigated.

Jan 28, 2020, 08:53

"Whether the Bidens are 100% guilty of corruption or not has absolutely zero bearing or relevance to the charges against Bozo of holding back aid for Ukraine or obstruction of justice."

Well sorry for being pedantic, but that's not the actual articles of impeachment against him.

"The first article charges him with abuse of power for pressuring Ukraine to assist him in his re-election campaign by damaging Democratic rivals. The second article charges him with obstruction of Congress for blocking testimony and refusing to provide documents in response to House subpoenas in the impeachment inquiry."

 If the Charges against the Bidens are in fact legitimate, it was his duty to investigate it...and it is yet to be proven that he was holding back aid to pressurize the Ukrainians...there is absolutely no evidence of any of it. There is no probable cause to subpoena White House staff in order to try and prove something the Dems think (and hope) might have happened, because they have no hope of beating him in the up coming election. Pathetic misuse of a majority in Congress.

Rooi, have you read the whole transcript of the conversation and if you did, do you believe it's an accurate transcript of the actual conversation?

Jan 28, 2020, 09:18

Same old Trumpanzee nonsense . . . there's no evidence that Bozo withheld the aid . . . but we definitely don't want to hear from the person who can provide that evidence!

It's laughable.

Jan 28, 2020, 09:32

The irony is that the person coming out of all this with honour, integrity and dignity is Adam Schiff . . . the person that Bozo and the Trumpanzees call a corrupt politician and a liar.


Just for the record . . . before the Trumpanzees start squealing, I'm no fan of John Bolton. He should have had the guts to testify after his subpoena and I don't believe it's any coincidence that his latest revelations happened just before his book launch. A weak, self-serving and opportunistic coward . . . typical of a Bozo appointee . . . but that doesn't change the fact that his testimony will implicate Bozo which is why the Replublicans are so opposed to him being called as a witness. It's a massive cover-up and the cowardly arselicking Republican senators are accountable. 

Jan 28, 2020, 10:14

They did not follow due process. They should have subpoenaed him to testify in Congress if they wanted him as a witness. They never did, They merely asked him. This is political gamesmanship. If time had anything to do with their refusal to pursue the correct legal avenues, why did they sit on the articles for weeks before forwarding to congress?

Schiff is a proven liar and fabricated a scenario to suit his agenda. Self serving prick. Congress should have gathered evidence and questioned witnesses before sending the articles to the Senate. Why didn't they? It gives them a lame arsed back door for failing to impeach a president. All optics for the idiots foolish enough to swallow all their BS.

"Bolton's lawyers said they were "dismayed" at the decision not to subpoena him. They said Bolton and former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman, who are represented by the same lawyers, wanted a "definitive judgment from the Judicial Branch determining their Constitutional duty in the face of conflicting demands of the Legislative and Executive Branches."

Jan 28, 2020, 11:53

Bolton’s “evidence” will not change a thing. I have watched the entire defence case until close to the end of Dershowitz’ evidence. The defence has so far done a good job of tearing Schiff et al to pieces. And they have done it all by using the Dems’ own evidence and witnesses. They have not even introduced a single piece of their own evidence. They didn’t need to.

Pelosi, Schumer, etc must be seriously pissed off with Pencilneck and Turtleneck by now.

Jan 28, 2020, 13:02

Schiff , Nadler, Pelosi and Schumer have done serious damage to the demonrats.

Watched to late last night until the lunch break. Then watched Dershowitz the morning. They have smashed the demonrats. Frankly all these COUP plotters must be indicted for treason/ sedition and hung.

Fantastic viewing these guys in action destroying one lie after another with hard evidence. Wonder how many demonreat Senators will vote against impeachment.

Jan 28, 2020, 13:25

I loved the part where they basically used past expressions of both Schumer and Nadler, on impeachment, in evidence in defence of Trump. I wished they would show the expression on their faces at that moment.

They basically used Nadler as evidence against himself. What a tool!!

Jan 28, 2020, 13:44

There is another issue that really troubled me and I am sure the Senators as well.   In a clip of a meeting between  Obama and Medvedev - the Russian President at the time - Obama told Medvedev that he will have more flexibility to deal with issues affecting Russia-USA relations fate the 2012 elections.   That is not in any way the manner in which international relations issues should be handled.   

So after the 2012 election what happened?   In 2014 Russian separatists and Russia itself got involved in a war against Ukraine.  Congress approved armament  aid to Ukraine and Obama vetoed it since it would upset Russia.

Now we know that Obama, Clinton and a host of DP leaders had questionable issues on corrupt agreements with Russia,  We also know that there is written prove of that.   Afraid of it becoming an issue in the 2016 election campaign - the Obama Administration and Clinton connived with foreign sources to accuse Trump of being supported by Putin in the election through Russian meddling.   This is becoming clearer daily - so who would Putin rather have as President.  Definitely not Trump, more likely the corrupt Clinton.         

Jan 28, 2020, 14:21

"Bolton’s “evidence” will not change a thing. I have watched the entire defence case until close to the end of Dershowitz’ evidence. The defence has so far done a good job of tearing Schiff et al to pieces. And they have done it all by using the Dems’ own evidence and witnesses. They have not even introduced a single piece of their own evidence. They didn’t need to.

Pelosi, Schumer, etc must be seriously pissed off with Pencilneck and Turtleneck by now."

It's moving the goal posts in the hope that their demands get rejected, then they can yell:"foul/unfair/cover-up!". If they get Bolton, they'll want someone else. They are throwing sh!t, hoping enough will stick to impede Trump, or hoping they'll get lucky and actually find some wrong doing by chance. They've spent millions to get dirt on him...if there were, they would have found it by now. The best they could do was "Stormy" and the "grab them by the p...", and where did that go? Nothing-burger. Obstructionism taken to the next level.

Jan 28, 2020, 17:28

Anybody believing what Schiff came up with is a nutcase,  He, Pelosi, Biden and Podesta is neck deep involved in Ukraine corruption.  His election in 2018 is funded by a Ukraine Company.  

The Russian company manufacturing arms in Ukraine was a beneficiary of previous US grants - part of that was kicked back to two institutions in the USA  on the boards of which Schiff staff members are serving.  As crooked as hell that one,   

His other sponsor and crony is George Soros - the Nazi-turned-Communist - who funded his studies and previous election campaigns,   One of the main reasons for the firing of that previous Ambassador if the USA in Ukraine was that Trump found out she while in charge of  Grant funding applications in Ukraine she channeled millions to a Soros front organization.            

Jan 28, 2020, 17:56

Dershowitz’ testimony was a bolt of intellectual insight in a soup of emotional twaddle. Presidents have to be able to seek advice. They have to be able to entertain ideas, express frustrations....without that becoming public. None of this is illegal.....unless they act on it and literally order it. 

In this case all we have so far is a very reasonable request to look into the corruption of a senior US politician. And even if aid was withheld for a short while to register a point, which hasn’t been proven....nothing meaningful happened provided the aid was timeously given. Which it was.

The standard the Left  is applying to Trump, that all his private musings be Simon pure, are so high that literally every President of the US would have been impeached. Certainly Johnson, Clinton, Kennedy, Obama and Roosevelt, especially Roosevelt, would have been gone.

Jan 28, 2020, 17:59

@Draad. I have now actually watched the rest of Dershowitz’ testimony and it seems like he left the best for last, so to speak. I wanted to watch to the end but decided to leave it for later because I was actually getting a bit bored with his lesson.

The last part of his testimony was, however, the most powerful of all. It was interesting to watch the other testimonies taking the Dems’ own evidence and turn it against them but then came Dershowitz.

He delivered the most brilliant plea and I believe that any of the Dem Senator, who watched that, and also paid close attention to what he said, and still believe that this warrants the removal of Trump is either delusional or seriously dishonest. Particularly if they bear in mind the dire consequences, for future Presidents, if they were to succeed in removal based on these articles.

Jan 28, 2020, 18:30

Just as an afterthought - the fact is that the DP and their media sidekicks are making hay about Bolton and what he will come up with,  But we have been hearing the same claims for three years now - the Mueller report being the big example of that.  Probably another dream coming tumbling down when it is exposed.

Remember how the NYT ad Washington Post claimed that Horowitz have exonerated Comey and co about the FISA report.   Horowitz waned to stay out of the political mayhem by saying he found no evidence of political bias  as the to papers claim - but there  were clear indication that there were  need for further investigation as t criminal activity  involved,

I just don't believe the claims of the DP and the media anymore.             

Jan 28, 2020, 21:07

The Bolton story is another “timeous” leak by the New York Times, I think it was.

From what I understand, the crux is that it is based on something that a journo heard from somebody about something Bolton allegedly says in the manuscript of a book that is to be released somewhere in March. Speaking of solid evidence. Sounds like yet another example of dodgy evidence to me.

Jan 28, 2020, 22:18

A pox on all  these public servants writing tell it all,  or more accurately imagine it all,  books the moment they leave office.

You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top