Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 12:24:53 -0500, John wrote:

"Specific witnesses are still subject to approval by Senate vote." (WaPo)

Well, that will ensure a fair trial, eh Wayne?

===

Reportedly, the rules for an impeachment are different from the rules
for a trial, or so I am told, reportedly. Also reportedly, is that
you are acting a bit of a snark, reportedly.


So the rules say we can be like Russia and let only our supporters testify

On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 00:58:17 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 12:24:53 -0500, John wrote:

"Specific witnesses are still subject to approval by Senate vote." (WaPo)

Well, that will ensure a fair trial, eh Wayne?

===

Reportedly, the rules for an impeachment are different from the rules
for a trial, or so I am told, reportedly. Also reportedly, is that
you are acting a bit of a snark, reportedly.


So the rules say we can be like Russia and let only our supporters testify

You're even snarkier than Greg!
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 00:58:17 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 12:24:53 -0500, John wrote:

"Specific witnesses are still subject to approval by Senate vote." (WaPo)

Well, that will ensure a fair trial, eh Wayne?

===

Reportedly, the rules for an impeachment are different from the rules
for a trial, or so I am told, reportedly. Also reportedly, is that
you are acting a bit of a snark, reportedly.


So the rules say we can be like Russia and let only our supporters testify

That is pretty much true when the same party controls the House that
voted to impeach and the Senate that gets to run the inquisition.
Everything can come down to a vote and if you have the votes, you make
the rules.
In this case there wasn't even the hint of an impartial person
presiding.
Did you watch Leahy reading the verdict? He looked like a person who
ate a bad street tamale in Tijuana and had a long bus ride home with
no bathroom on board.