House impeachment manager Rep. Jerry Nadler has declared that the impeachment case against President Donald Trump has been proven by Democrats “beyond any doubt at all.”
Nadler repeatedly boasted the claim during Wednesday’s Senate impeachment trial, despite demands by Democratic colleagues that they need to see more witnesses and documents in the trial.
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
Breitbart.com reports: The House Judiciary Committee chairman played an unusually understated role in the first day of the question-and-answer session in the Senate.
Hunter Biden Emails Reveal He Fathered Child With ANOTHER Prostitute, Left Her Addicted to Narcotics
Lindsey Graham Caught on Tape Saying Joe Biden Is ‘Best President’
Trudeau’s Canada Will Pay Poor People To Be Euthanized
Video Footage Shows Demon at Pro-Abortion Protest
Ghislaine Elite Pedophiles | Ghislaine Maxwell Vows to ‘Name & Shame’ Elite Pedophiles
Queen Elizabeth Is ‘Direct Descendant Of Prophet Muhammad’ - Study
President Biden: ‘Trump Supporters Are Domestic Terrorists’
Democrats Forcing Schools To Put ‘Menstrual Products’ in Boys’ Bathrooms
Woke Far Left Propaganda | Midwives Taught How To Deliver Babies Through ‘Male Genitalia’
Republicans have asked that if Democrats are so confident in their case — confident enough to impeach a president for only the third time in American history — then they should allow that case to stand or fall based on the evidence collected in the House, not by adding new evidence.
Nadler added, at one point, that simply because the House Democrats had, in his view, proven their case beyond all doubt, that was not a reason to stop adding more evidence. It “doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have more proof if it comes forward,” he told the Senate.
Democrats and White House lawyers disagreed over the standard of proof. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) told Senators they were the individual arbiters of the standard required, according to their constitutional oath.
Deputy White House Counsel Patrick Philbin disagreed, arguing that the Constitution likened impeachment to a criminal process and therefore proof beyond a reasonable doubt was required.