But Trump* is innocent. So, no matter what witness or evidence is brought to light, his legal team could easily refute it.
I don’t know why some would be worried about “surprise witnesses”.
1 Like
So we are just kinda piling on the election 2020 commercials now.
Talk to a lawyer. they’ll explain why to you but it’s going to cost you a couple hundred an hour.
As I said, this happens all the time in trials.
So long as there are rules in place so that the defense has the time it needs to prepare (and as @WorldWatcher has pointed out, there appear to be), I don’t see a problem.
So…why do you? And what witness do you think is out there anyway that we don’t already know about?
1 Like
Most Democrats won’t focus on the impeachment, most will tout about jobs and healthcare. Things that affect people on a daily basis.
During 2018, here in Virginia, idiot Corey Stewart spent his time blathering on about caravans and MS-13 and invasions. Tim Keane spent his time talking about jobs and healthcare.
Guess who won the US Senate seat?
During 2018, here in Virginia, Dave Brat spent valuable ad time on TV trying to link Abigail Spanberger to a student who ended up joining Al Qaeda. Abigail focused on jobs and healthcare.
Guess who won the House seat?
You mean like people coming to a thread to taunt people into not paying attention to that thread? Great job internet guy.
3 Likes
Bet that is why the circus puts up a tent.
So the people that don’t pay…don’t see the show.
No need I have a lawyer I can talk to free of charge.
With proper notification to the court and the defense yes late evidence can be admitted and witnesses called especially as means of rebutting evidence or testimony from the other side.
Prejudicial or exculpatory evidence has to be shared, witness lists have to be shared. But here is the key, when acting as the prosecutor she (i.e. my daughter) does not have to explain how that evidence or the witness will be used. It’s up to the defense to figure that out.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
2 Likes
Of course they won’t.
That is why we are impeaching now…So D can campaign and disavow.
What would constitute “paying to see the show” in this analogy?
Just curious…
1- It wont be just “Dismissed”. That wasnt even proposed by Mitch. We know at the very least we will get 2 days of opening statements by both sides.
2- You know how you can solve most of this witness issues? For Trump to stick with one plan. In PUBLIC he seems to be arguing that Sure -He pressured Ukraine for a investigation on Hunter Biden, Did it in a unconventional way, and it was the right call and he stands by it and its not impeachable.
But in his briefs he seems to argue that he didn’t do that all, that he didnt do that at all, and there was no pressure from him on Ukraine. The witnesses the Dems want to call simply prove that Trump wanted to pressure Ukraine to announce a investigation of the BIdens. Something he seems to have already admitted!
So his defense team should just come out and say “He did that. He pressured them. and Thats not impeachable!” It would make witness like Bolton unimportant. Trump would have already admitted to what Bolton would testify on.
If Trump believes that what he did was ok and not impeachable. ARGUE that. Then all witnesses would simply focus on “Is what he did impeachable”.
1 Like
I thought this was a political process with SCIFs and leaks NO R witnesses.
It is all very confusing for us not under the spell of Nancy Pelosi.
Do you get free cable?
No. I pay for it.
This didn’t answer my question.
Yes it did.
No it didn’t.
I pay for my government. Why can’t I see it in action?
Please explain your analogy.
You were lied to, there were plenty of R witnesses to the testimony as R member of the House were parts of the committee questioning witnesses.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
1 Like
Don’t forget Ed Gillespie , who focused a LOT on Statues dangers of immigration and MS13 vs Northam, who focused on Health care, Jobs, Budget, and Transportation (Infrastructure) . Northam won by the widest margin in VA since 1985.
1 Like
This is correct per the resolution filed by McConnell.
