Impeachment now certain

Prosecutor Adam Schiff says @realDonaldTrump
is not innocent! Way to go Democrats. No presumption of innocence, no constitutional guarantees. Welcome to America under Democrat rule. #outrage #prejudice #unfair #unjust #unconstitutional

gcomeau wrote:For an example of what the Fox News herd is being fed on this, "Judge" Jeannine Pirro, one of their hosts, is outraged... OUTRAGED... that Schiff is not presuming Trump's innocence and is instead saying he is guilty.

Prosecutor Adam Schiff says @realDonaldTrump
is not innocent! Way to go Democrats. No presumption of innocence, no constitutional guarantees. Welcome to America under Democrat rule. #outrage #prejudice #unfair #unjust #unconstitutional

That. Is. The. Prosecutor. In. The. Trial.

She appears to know this, since it was the first word in her freaking tweet.

Every prosecutor in the history of trials has said the person they are prosecuting is guilty. That is WHY they are prosecuting them. That is not an outrage. That is not prejudice. That is not unfair. That is not unconstitutional.

That. Is. How. Trials. Work.

Pirro was an actual real life judge once upon a time before she sold her soul and replaced it with a surgically implanted mechanized propaganda generator. She was also once a prosecutor. I assure you she knows how trials work, and how prosecutors do their jobs. I also assure you not once did she march into a courtroom to prosecute a suspect and tell the jury "Well people, I presume this guy is innocent... so what am I even doing here? Let's wrap this up right now and all go home early!"

This is not a misunderstanding. This is not a difference of opinion. This is orchestrated lies designed to insulate a guilty Republican president from being recognized as guilty by his voter base on a "news" channel that was created for that exact purpose.

smr wrote:Gcomeau every time you wear those rose colored glasses you type the dumbest posts. Thank you for the laughs and keep on red pilling everyone else with outlandish conspiracy theories about Trump and the Republicans. These last 3 years have been amazing watching you continually being wrong about Trump and his demise. Fear not you only have to be right once to be vindicated. Remember, Impeachment only takes 67 Senators to secure a conviction. Maybe you should try calling the Senator's offices and implore them to convict Trump. God Bless and have a great day. (Great Joat42 is going to complain that I spoke about God! Oh well at least I know he is unhappy with me!)

...
In Trump's case, though the House chose delicately not to accuse the president of specific crimes, there is enough evidence here to do so. Federal election laws proscribe as criminal the mere solicitation of help for a political campaign from a foreign national or government. There is no dispute that Trump did this. In fact, the case for this is stronger now than it was when the House impeached him last year. Since then, more evidence, which Trump tried to suppress, has come to light.

That evidence consists of administration officials' emails that were obtained by the media pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. Those emails demonstrate conclusively that Trump ordered a halt on the release of the $391 million within minutes of his favor request, and the aid sat undistributed until congressional pressure became too much for Trump to bear.

This implicates two other crimes. One is bribery -- the refusal to perform a government obligation until a thing of value is delivered, whether the thing of value -- here, the announcement of a Ukrainian investigation of the Bidens -- arrives or not. The other is contempt of Congress.

If the request for the announcement of an investigation of the Bidens manifested "nothing wrong" as Trump has claimed, why did he whisper it in secret, rather than order it of the Department of Justice?

...

Where does all this leave us at the outset of Trump's Senate trial?

It leaves us with valid, lawful, constitutional arguments for Trump's impeachment that he ought to take seriously. That is, unless he knows he will be acquitted because Republican senators have told him so. Whoever may have whispered that into his ear is unworthy of sitting as a juror and has violated the oath of "impartial justice" and fidelity to the Constitution and the law.

What is required for removal of the president? A demonstration of presidential commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, of which in Trump's case the evidence is ample and uncontradicted.