Bozo's days are numbered . . .

"Yes, normally the religious person."

Used to be IMO, but these days the progressive snowflakes need their safe spaces and even the odd gender pronoun can set them off....chaos...

And the truth starts to come out . . . despite the swamp's best efforts!

This article (and several others) show how the Department of Justice tried to cover up multiple warnings from the Pentagon that a freeze on the Ukraine aid was illegal and the instructions came from Bozo himself.

It's all starting to look a lot like Watergate!

Lock him up!

N o proof at all about anything,   The freeze was for two reasons - stated by Senators Johnson  and Murphy (DP):-

*   Trump insisted that the other NATO members must also contribute to Ukraine defense; and 

*    Trump froze projects to get confirmation that the grants would not be used for looting and corruption in the countries to which aid was.    That was the case in Ukraine as well.

He in fact acted in the interests of taxpayers of the US as a whole.    Correspondence on admin level means nothing in any case like this,  They cannot say "illegal" since the final signing of approval rests entirely with the President and the staff may not even know why approval is delayed.

Fact is the new evidence means zero since the story was circulated months ago,               

Vo proof at all about anything,   The freeze was for two reasons - stated by Senators Johnson  and Murphy (DP):-

*   Trump insisted that the other NATO members must also contribute to Ukraine defense; and 

*    Trump froze projects to get confirmation that the grants would not be used for looting and corruption in the countries to which aid was.    That was the case in Ukraine as well.

He in fact acted in the interests of taxpayers of the US as a whole.    Correspondence on admin level means nothing in any case like this,  They cannot say "illegal" since the final signing of approval rests entirely with the President and the staff may not even know why approval is delayed.

Fact is the new evidence means zero since the story was circulated months ago,               

Notice how the articles of impeachment dropped the quid pro quo bit and bribery charges. 

Notice how not a single fact witness provided any evidence of wrong doing. The only fact witness, Sondland, said Trump told him he wanted nothing from the Ukraine and there was to be no quid pro quo. 

Note the President of the Ukraine and the Foreign Minister said no pressure was placed on them. 

Note that the ukrsnians never even knew the aid was being held up!!

Note also under US law Trump had to ensure the Ukraine government was not corrupt before giving aid. 

But also note how the whole massive Democrat corruption in the Ukraine is coming out. The Bidens are done. 

Also please note rooibozo is a laughing stock and should not be relied upon for correct comment. 

Crash goes ou rooitwit YET AGAIN!!! 

Senator Josh Hawley will bring a motion on Monday to dismiss Piglosi slap dash sham impeachment.

What will be interesting will be to see how Rinos like Mittens vote. Some demorats could vote with Republicans. 

What more facts does any intelligent person need?

Typical Trumpanzee deflection tactics. Ignore the question or the issue and start whining about Obama or Clinton . . . or Schiff . . . or Nadler or Mueller or Biden or whoever . . . the fact that any of them did naughty things makes Bozo's actions excusable.

LMAO! 

So everyone's been sworn in and Tuesday sees the start of the Senate trial that will decide Bozo's fate.

As I've said all along, the chances of the Democrats succeeding in getting Bozo removed from office are almost nil . . . mainly because the Republicans are such a gutless, arselicking bunch of cowards . . . but there are two factors that could change the picture.

Firstly, there's the question of allowing witnesses and documents at the trial. Personally I think this should be a no-brainer . . . why would you not allow witnesses and documents if you have nothing to hide . . . but the Republicans will argue that their job is to consider the evidence and findings of the House investigation, not to start a new trial. They may have had a legitimate case if not for the fact that the White House itself prevented several key witnesses from testifying in the House investigation. In the unlikely event that the Republicans do allow new witnesses then it all becomes very interesting, especially if John Bolton and Lev Parnas are among those witnesses. Parnas in particular. In fact, I'd go a step further and predict that if Parnas is allowed to testify he'll be bumped off before he gets the chance.

The other potential game-changer is if the Democrats manage to negotiate a secret ballot rather than an open one. They effectively need 20 Republicans to jump ship and the chances of them getting even a single one to turn on Bozo is very remote if it's an open vote. A secret ballot would change things significantly. Some of the Republican cowards might actually show some courage and integrity if they knew their pro-removal vote wouldn't be career suicide . . . which is what it would mean in an open vote knowing Bozo's vengeful and petulant character.

So two glimmers of hope . . . but in all likelihood, I suspect it will end in victory for Bozo which will be followed by a lot of gloating, claims of exoneration from Bozo and his brainwashed Trumpanzees and - sadly - a landslide win for Bozo in the 2020 election.

 Insane. Commemorative pens and all. 

Under the constitution the House impeaches and the Senate reviews the evidence produced by the House. It's not the role of the Senate to call more witnesses. 

The House led by Piglosi could only get Bolton etc to testify if they went to court and won. There is something called executive privilege rooibozo you ignorant halfwit. 

The House investigation led by congenital liar Adam Schiff wouldn't allow Republicans to call witnesses, including the corrupt  whistle-blower etc. He prevented question being asked, he never allowed Trump's lawyers to participate and to date he never released the Whistle lowers transcript.

All in all a total disgusting sham. 

Now does one simply allow the managers to testify and Trump's lawyers answer and then vote to dismiss. Or does one allow the calling of witnesses. 

Seems to me Bolton etc still won't come because of Executive privilege. Schill, Bidens, Whistleblower etc would have to come

Do you dignify this absurd impeachment any longer or do you go for the jugular and kill the demorats by allowing witnesses. 

Whatever happens demonrats lose. 

Picture in the New York Post front page shows on one side Piglosi's hilarious impeachment signing and next to this Trump signing the phase 1 of the China Trade deal. Says it all. 

The Senate passed the USMCA deal. TWO HUGE WINS FOR TRUMP. 

Anybody think poor rooibozo isn't an ignorant halfwit? 

“ They may have had a legitimate case if not for the fact that the White House itself prevented several key witnesses from testifying in the House investigation. ”

The WH exercised executive privilege. They could have forced the WH through the courts but “...there was no time...”. It was an urgent matter and then the withheld the articles for weeks on end. They chose not to have the so-called key witnesses being withheld. That was the only way they could have a second article added to the first flimsy one. 

Their entire list of charges were already reduced to rubble. Had they gone to court and got their docs and witnesses, they would have lost that article as well, leaving them with only the one about flimsy abuse of powers one. 

Their strongest witnesses on abuse of power, Sonland, sank their case of abuse all in his own when he was forced to admit that there was no quid pro quo. 

“ . . why would you not allow witnesses and documents if you have nothing to hide . . .”

Exactly the same question the Republicans asked when Schiff denied them to call, among others, the whistleblower after he, Schiff himself, said on national TV on numerous occasions that he would be allowed to testify. That was after he lied about not knowing the identity of the whistleblower. The Republicans also asked the question when Nadler denied the Republicans their customary “minority hearing”. Asking the Republicans, at this stage, what they have to hide is hypocrisy of the highest order. 

The whole impeachment stinks of hypocrisy, especially if you look at how the Dems reacted to the Clinton impeachment. Specifically Nadler and Schumer themselves. And remember that Clinton was even proven guilty of federal crimes. He lost his law license and he was ordered to pay compensation. 

Yes Draad this extreme hypocrite wore black and was all sad about having to impeach Trump and was praying etc. What a performance. She must this people are as stupid as rooibozo! ??