So it IS a political process.
I just like to be consistent.
âI dont want those grapes anyway!â said the fox. âI think they are sourâ.
Man Iâve been saying that for months- The Mulvaney defense (âGet over it!â) is way better than the âNope I didnât do itâ defense- which is ludicrous.
1 Like
But not in House impeachment trials. Humpty Dumpty says there is absolutely no reason to not allow witnesses except if you are afraid of what the witnesses will say. And yet the Dems refused the witnesses Trumpâs defenders wanted to call in the House trial and want to exclude defense witnesses in the Senate trial. By his own lips he condemns the Democrats.
3 Likes
Shiff: âItâs a coverupâ
Nads: â Any Republican Senator who doesnât allow witnesses is guilty of supporting Trump in a coverupâ
These jokers did a shoddy job putting a case together for the Senate to proceed with.
They had their chance to interview witnesses in front of two House committees, they chose not to or to use the courts to enforce their subpoenas.
Somebody please call the Waaaambulance!
1 Like
Or here, posting on a tiny web forum all day.
Will every minute of the Senate Impeachment Trial be shown live on Fox News/
Do you think they should declare the coverage as an âin kindâ Campaign contribution for the Democrats? Or for Trump?
Witness to what exactly.
We had a panel of law professors in the house stacked 3 to 1 against the President for a full wasted day.
Those kind of witnesses?
Can we have the witnesses all wear purple dresses like Speaker Pelosi?
Its like I am watching our legislators collectively need to be moved into 24 hour care facilities.
Trump gets nothing more than a swift kick to the shin and new impeached nameplates.
That doesnât appear to be an answer to my question whether it is going to be shown live on Fox News.
Guilty until proven innocent???
No reason for watch Moscow Mitchâs Show Trial
Especially today when the subject is rules. Both parties will spend all day bashing how awful the other party is, trying to score soundbites for Twitter or campaign commercials.
No new evidence will be presented.
And besides, the fix is in.
For Clinton we had the White Water investigation.
For Trump we have the White Wash trial.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
6 Likes
They accepted a couple of the witnesses the GOP wanted to bring in.
They rejected those that were irrelevant to what was being investigatedâŠwho were being called merely to accomplish what Trump was trying to accomplishâŠa smear campaign.
Far more interesting are the witnesses the GOP themselves refused to callâŠpeople who supposedly would have bolstered Trumpâs defenseâŠpeople who statements they tried to get entered into the record without the statements themselves getting thoroughly vetted (I.e. John Solomon).
Interesting they want you to believe what folks like John Solomon and Mike Pompeo have to sayâŠbut they didnât want them saying those things under oath.
Very interestingâŠ
The Senate rules seem to be very similar to the House as to witnesses. Any side can propose witnesses and then the majority of the Senate determines if those witnesses will be called.
Give the people what they want.
In new CNN polling, nearly 7 in 10 Americans (69%) support new witnesses being allowed to testify. That number includes 86% of self-identified Democrats and 69% of political independents. Most intriguingly/importantly, it also includes 48% of Republicans who say they want to hear from new witnesses â higher than the percentage 44% who say they do not want any new witnesses to be called.
Enough evidence was presented at the House hearing for the House to determine that the President should be impeached. With the possible exception of Bolton, the House was in the same position to call witnesses as the Senate would be.
Now lets see if the evidence presented by the House is also sufficient for a conviction.
Am I the only person who remember all these people ignoring subpoenas while the White House continued to block them from testifying? Am I the only person who saw that story?
6 Likes
