Double Jeopardy

We could save this waste of time and taxpayer money by electing a president with morals, ethics and a strict duty to obeying the Constitution above his personal needs.

We did. Trump has not violated the constitution. 
Dems/FBI officials are upset they are being actions in 2012-16 are being examined.

Trump, ... has morals, is THAT what you are insinuating, M2c? Really? 

So, when did that happen?

I heard his hysterically unhinged rant in Hershey yesterday, did Pres. Pu$$ygrabber have an epiphany,... this morning? 

Poor, misled apologist/enabler.

This post was edited by Don Barzini at December 11, 2019 10:38 PM MST

I'm surprised you can say he did not violate the Constitution with a straight face.  Actually, I'm not at all surprised.  In your eyes, he can do no wrong.  If Trump was so concerned with what Hunter Biden did those many years ago, why didn't he ask for an inquiry or an investigation when he took office, or in his second year,  No, he waited until Joe Biden threw his hat in the ring and became his arch rival.  The, all of a sudden, Trump finds something with which to divert the public's attention from being investigated himself.  It's so obvious Stevie Wonder can see it.

I do not think a President is allowed to order an investigation. (I could be wrong) 
Also Rudy was looking in to this stuff as early as fall 2018....long before Biden was a candidate for the Dem nomination. He was looking into the origins of the Russian collusion debunked allegations. 

I am sure Trump is aggrevated about the treatment he gets as opposed to the treatment others get. Imagine what would be going on if you exchange the names Biden with Trump. 
Trumo asked for help looking at 2016 election and interference there by Ukrainian officals (Ukr courts ruled in Dec 2018 they did interfere)

If a president can't order an investigation, why was Rudy looking into anything?  If the allegations were debunked, why would he be wasting time investigating?  If Trump is aggravated about the way he's being treated as opposed to the way others are, perhaps behaving in a presidential manner would alleviate some of that aggravation.  

Mueller debunked them. Rudy was investigating to get to the bottom of what happened and be ready IF they tried again. 
As the IG Horowitz report shows...the FBI made numerous errors and all were not in Trumps favor. There was misinformation given to the FISA court and exculpatory evidence ignored. 

Did they commit errors?  Yes, but Horowitz said that the errors were not politically biased, which is what Trump has been claiming.  They were debunked by Mueller after extensive investigation.  

No. He stated he could not find documented bias. ie No email/text/testimony stating they were deliberately biased. That the errors omissions were "gross negligence and incompetence" and was not happy with the FBIs answers. But he could not read minds as to motivation. 

He did say he believes the opening was unbiased and no doctumenary bias as to the errors and omissions. 

Well, if the investigators were not found to come to their conclusions because of their bias, then doesn't it stand to reason that the conclusions to which they came were based on documented evidence?  Face it, Trump did not like the conclusions to which they came (unbiased), so he created a smoke screen.  That they may not have properly obtained the FISA warrant(s) doesn't negate the negative information they discovered.  

Actually in a normal court process any information from a improper warrent would throw out the information gained from the warrent. 

Undoctumented bias (not unbiased). You do not have the texted from Struke and Page, lying on 4 FISAs warrents, and multiple other "errors" and "misinformation" all in one direction. 
Durham is investigating more indept (he can supena and has access to people who no longer work for the gov) If is now a criminal investigation. I look for some indictments in the next few months.

In the first place, this is not a normal court proceeding.  In fact, the House is not the court - the Senate is the trier of issues.  I believe I have explained this to you before, yet you can't or won't process that.  

If Trump is as innocent as he claims, why has he refused to allow key members of his administration to testify?  He claimed the hearings were one-sided, yet when he had an opportunity to present his own witnesses, he declined.  That is not the behavior of someone who is innocent.  

True the House would not be the trial court. 
Tjey are.more like a preliminary hearing to see if a prosecutor will move forward with charges. And as such there are law regarding what is and is not allowed. And evidence from a illgotten warrent would not be allowed along woth hearsay. And in most cases the defendant will not offer their defense in this phase of the process. And as I said before courts have ruled due process does apply to Congressional hearings. 

The Republicans on the House Committees interviewed their own witnesses.  All testimony is allowed.  It is up to the committee to determine what testimony is considered valid to proceed upon.  

No. There were several witnesses that the GOP were not allowed to call. 
So again shows a biased process all the way through.

When I said all testimony, I meant first-hand as well as hearsay.  I don't know the reason(s) why the Repubicans' witnesses were not permitted to testify.  Do you?

Yes. Schift and Co. said no.
Just as under Nader, they said the Dems get 2 and the GOP get 1.  Nader then chose 2 who are openly biased and had been calling for impeachement for years. The GOP chose an a Dem (not a GOP or a Trump voter) who applied the Constitution evenly. 

I know they said no, but what reason, if any, was given?

If Rudy decided to do some pro bono work for me and guard me against unauthorized intrusions of wild elephants into my house while I am sleeping, I would suggest that would have more value than all of his so-called investigations have provided.

....And I live in the DFW metroplex in Texas.

You said it, GOP voters are motivated by BS alright. Just look at who they worship. 

Now if you can regale us with your take on Trump’s supposed ethics....

Well, just like a serial killer whose similar "actions" produce similar "deaths," and for any of which that killer may be charged. there will undoubtedly be numerous other similar but not identical grounds (in other words---"Not the same grounds") upon which additional articles of impeachments may be again drawn by the House.

And for accuracy, the word believe means to rely upon the word of another for your opinion.

If instead, your opinion is simply based on your own conclusions, the proper verb to use is think.