Pelosi...Guilty of Quid Pro Quo?

@averagejoe1 said
Let’s say that is a good point. But this thread is Pelosi. She can be proven to be asking a favor a favor. Let’s drop the Latin phrase.

Now here we go. Is Pelosi OK to ask a favor for a favor which is not provided for in this process? Whew. Libs.

@kazetnagorra said
If there is a legal statute saying it is illegal for Pelosi to delay moving the Senate trial forward, produce it.

can we just start a fundraiser to get her some proper fitting dentures?
😳

@mchill said
She is holding back the Impeachment report from the Senate until the Senate trial rules are set and agreed upon by both sides. In addition President Trump is still blocking key witnesses from testifying, and ignoring Congressional subpoenas for records, though Democrats already have enough of both. A trial is not a trial without evidence and witnesses.

You really don't know much - do you?

@medullah
Which goes to show you how much you DON'T know. By withholding witnesses, that is a political tactic for a very specific purpose called running out the clock. Trump knows full well when you stack up the whole court system with his buddies, he already has two on SCOTUS and they are loading down the whole court system with dozens of ultrarightwingnut judges as we speak so the idea there is Trump now basically owns the courts as well as the senate so the house is alone with nowhere to go legally so the net result would be run it through the courts, that takes 6 months to get a verdict, it gets to SCOTUS and now his buddies pronounce it is too close to the coming elections, a decision now would affect the elections therefore we decline to take the case and now the whole thing is dead and the impeachment therefore is also dead and he goes on a rampage screaming he was framed, he was innocent all along and he WILL extract revenge on those he considered did him harm. He is a vengeful man and that is not in doubt. The country suffers as a result.
Trump has abused the executive protection bit to the hilt. He cannot legally say executive privilege to someone who is no longer in WH employ and the only way to counter that is through the courts so the house is stuck relying on witnesses who have the balls to defy Trump, not many of those.
Trump wants to be King Trump and there is no doubt about that.
He wants to be above the law and there is no doubt about that. Pure and simple. He does not have the interests of the US at heart, he ONLY has the interest of Donald Trump at heart.
And all that about the courts is moot because Moscow Mitch and Graham Cracker have already decided the case before there even is a senate trial. That makes THAT part of the case a sham a kangaroo court with an innocent verdict before it even starts.
THAT is why Pelosi is holding up the articles, she wants to get Moscow Mitch to agree to a real trial with witnesses on both sides but of course Moscow Mitch has one thing in mind, derail the whole procedure so he just says, ok, we'll allow the witness you want, we want both bidens and the whistleblower to testify. THEN we have an agreement and of course THOSES witnesses are not FACT witnesses AND that would expose the whistleblower to Trump's revenge despite laws in place to protect them.
THAT ALONE will cause potential whistleblowers to think twice or three times about bringing up wrongdoing if the protection laws can be carved out by an American King.

@sonhouse said
@medullah
Which goes to show you how much you DON'T know. By withholding witnesses, that is a political tactic for a very specific purpose called running out the clock. Trump knows full well when you stack up the whole court system with his buddies, he already has two on SCOTUS and they are loading down the whole court system with dozens of ultrarightwingnut judges as we sp ...[text shortened]... ree times about bringing up wrongdoing if the protection laws can be carved out by an American King.

@averagejoe1 said
I have no idea. But. why do you ask that in the middle of this thread? This is a LOL thread, that y'all are all over Trump about asking a favor for a favor, but you are NOT all over Pelosi about asking for a favor. Liberals such as yourself have an innate problem which causes you to go off track in EVERY thread, or just avoid the track all together. One again, w ...[text shortened]... avor for a favor? I can probably think of another way to ask the question if this is complicated. 🤔

@kazetnagorra said
It is not illegal or wrong in general to ask for favours.

It is illegal and wrong for Trump to ask for the specific favour concerning the Ukraine scandal.

@wolfe63 said
How about... she is exercising political power? Just like republicans do.

McConnell thought nothing of exercising his when he stopped Merrick Garland's nomination a full year ahead of time.

Conservatives hate it when they're not in control. I like that!

@sonhouse said
@medullah
Which goes to show you how much you DON'T know. By withholding witnesses, that is a political tactic for a very specific purpose called running out the clock. Trump knows full well when you stack up the whole court system with his buddies, he already has two on SCOTUS and they are loading down the whole court system with dozens of ultrarightwingnut judges as we sp ...[text shortened]... ree times about bringing up wrongdoing if the protection laws can be carved out by an American King.

@kazetnagorra said
It is not illegal or wrong in general to ask for favours.

It is illegal and wrong for Trump to ask for the specific favour concerning the Ukraine scandal.

@averagejoe1 said
Looks like the findings of people who studied it 24/7 for years would disagree with you.. Just sayin....

@kazetnagorra said
You don't need to "study 24/7," all you have to do is read the U.S. constitution.

@averagejoe1 said
Well,, what 'happened' is the stuff that the hearings did Not find to have been in violation of the constitution...... I have been very busy starting my new company, MyTowel, and no time to read all the hearings findings. He will be proven innocent in the trial, so I guess you are wrong with your comment about the constitution.

@mott-the-hoople said
show me this "protection" law you speak of.

I can show you the law that says the accused has a right to confront their accuser. Im waiting.