This is Treason by any stretch of the word.

Except as that word is defined in the Constitution and the United States Code.

H**l, it's not even Treason for the Buffoon to withhold military aid to Ukraine thus giving "aid and comfort" to Russia.

The Chief dresses 'em down.

Good lord, Nadler is a disaster.

= witnesses are still on the table.

Since you will buh-lieve anything, I have some swamp land, er, I mean real estate down here you might be interested in.
#215 | POSTED BY CORKY

I will wait until the point in the process is reached that a motion can be filed for witnesses to be called before I lash out. You are lambasting something that hasn't even happened - yet.
#219 | Posted by JeffJ

Common trial tactic. Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em, tell 'em then tell 'em what you told 'em.

Argue amendments substantively, present substantive opening statements then argue motions for subpoenas substantively.

The "'em" ain't the Senate. That conclusion is foregone.

... but in fact passed an open carry law for handguns during this time.

Texas requires a CHL to open carry handguns. "Constitutional" open carry of handguns is still prohibited.

Not just Presidents, but judges too? Has the Senate ever impeached anyone without a crime being committed?

Yes, an article against Judge John Pickering (1804, U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire):

a man of loose morals and intemperate habits ... [who] ... in the year 1802, being then judge of the district court in and for the district of New Hampshire, did appear on the bench of the said court for the administration of justice in a state of total intoxication, produced by the free and intemperate use of intoxicating liquors; and did then and there frequently, in a most profane and indecent manner, invoke the name of the Supreme Being, to the evil example of all the good citizens of the United States; and was then and there guilty of other high misdemeanors, disgraceful to his own character as a judge and degrading to the honor of the United States.

Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States, did, on the 18th day of August, in the year of our Lord 1866, and on divers other days and times, as well before as afterward, make and deliver with a loud voice certain intemperate, inflammatory, and scandalous harangues, and did therein utter loud threats and bitter menaces as well against Congress amid the cries, jeers, and laughter of the multitudes then assembled and within hearing ... .

#22 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Drank the kool-aid and its stronger than the "criminal like" flavor that even Dershowitz is willing to serve.

Stumbled across this.

So, IOW, it was a crime.

Idiotic, parochial decisions like this last for only a few years usually before being overturned.
#11 | Posted by danni

We have ... on our side.
#3 | Posted by HeliumRat

The problem. Team politics.

The solution?

We have ... on our side.
#3 | Posted by HeliumRat

The problem. Team politics.

The solution?

And then there's the issue of appointing mostly young White Male judges who've have NEVER spent a day in a courtroom nor ever taken a deposition or made a motion and who get a "not qualified" rating by the ABA ...

Of the 115 evaluations that the standing committee has completed on judicial candidates nominated since January, 80 were voted well qualified, 32 were voted qualified, and three have been voted not qualified. Trump has nominated eight people to the 9th Circuit in 2019; VanDyke was the only one rated not qualified. Bridget S. Bade, Eric D. Miller, Daniel P. Collins, Kenneth K. Lee and Danielle J. Hunsaker were rated well qualified; Daniel Aaron Bress and Bumatay were rated qualified.

...

During the current administration, the ABA Standing Committee has conducted 264 ratings and issued well qualified' or qualified' ratings to 255" 97%"of those individuals.

There's your criminal act ...

Maybe not going to the Senate yet!

A possibility considered at JustSecurity and Volokh Conspiracy a couple days ago.

#15 | Posted by snoofy

And the Oscar for Strawman goes to ...

The POS troll!.

The fact is anything on a government phone or computer is government property. There is no expectation of privacy on a government device, ...

That means the government can collect the information without the user's consent. However, once collected private information about the user cannot be cannot be disseminated to third parties except as provided by the Privacy Act. There is no provision in the Act permitting dissemination to the media.

No where in the constitution does it say you have the right to buy ammunition.

Nor does it say the press has the right to buy ink or newsprint but without them the right of a free press is useless. Same principle applies to ammunition. The government cannot do indirectly that which it cannot do directly.

#14 | POSTED BY GREATAMERICAN

"The essence of impeachable bribery is a government official's exploitation of his or her public duties for personal gain. To the Framers, it was received wisdom that nothing can be "a greater Temptation to Officers [than] to abuse their Power by Bribery and Extortion."67 To guard against that risk, the Framers authorized the impeachment of a President who offers, solicits, or accepts something of personal value to influence his own official actions. By rendering such "Bribery" impeachable, the Framers sought to ensure that the Nation could expel a leader who would sell out the interests of "We the People" to achieve his own personal gain."

"When a man unprincipled in private life[,] desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper . . . known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty " when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity " to join in the cry of danger to liberty " to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion " to flatter and fall in with all the non sense [sic] of the zealots of the day " It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may ride the storm and direct the whirlwind."

Interesting observation.

"The Bill of Rights protects everyone, including undocumented immigrants, to exercise free speech, religion, assembly, and to be free from unlawful government interference."

Can someone, Ira, Tony or anyone else, enlighten why the Biden's are relevant to impeachment of the Buffoon? More specifically, how or why does any of the s&&t from the last few hours of posting inform "any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence?" Iow, how does any of that make it more or less probable the Buffoon used his position to seek private political gain? Anyone?

Wtf does the judiciary or the legislature have to do with a subpoena issued by an executive branch department controlled by a Buffoon appointee?

My first topless beach was ...

Lake Chiemsee. Lot's of mind bleach and time had erased similar images.

Thanks for the memories, M*&!@%F@$*&%^

#21 | Posted by JeffJ

I too think she goes out with her boots on.

Why not? What's she got to loose?