Lindsey Graham On Witnesses at an Impeachment trial

[theHawk]

So why hasn’t Schiff released Atkinson’s behind doors testimony?

Because it has no bearing on the case, but I would be all in favor of everything coming out, just release all the emails and let all the witnesses testify. We know Trump withheld the aid -because an email that Trump tried to hide said he did- and the evidence points to Trump withholding the aid for a quid pro quo.

Just release the evidence, if Trump is not guilty what does he have to hide.

Riight, only one closed door testimony is being withheld from the public by Schiff, and it’s because it has “no bearing” on the case. It’s only the IG who alerted law makers about the whistleblower and altered documents and lied. He’s now under investigation himself.

But he has “no bearing” on the case.

Riiight, what you said has no factual basis what so ever.

Like I said I would be fine with having everything come out, the whistleblower complaint, all the emails that Trump has hidden, John Bolton, Mulvaney, the 3 amigos, Eisenberg and all the others testimony...

Trump is hiding the evidence because he is guilty. It's easy to claim you are not guilty when you have hidden all the incriminating evidence.

Uh-huh, it has “no factual basis” because you say so.

As for President Trump “hiding evidence”, then you are admitting the House provided no evidence of any crime, and Dems are relying on President Trump to provide evidence of his own guilt. Do you know how fucking insane you sound?

Provide real evidence that says it has "factual basis"

President Trump to provide evidence of his own guilt???
Huh? No president Trump is blocking the witnesses from testifying and hiding all the documents and emails that were subpoenaed. YOu see innocent people don't do that... only the guilty do that

LOL, how is the President “blocking” people from testifying? People make their own decisions if they will testify or not. Is he kidnapping them?

Besides, Congress doesn’t have any real authority to subpoena people. They aren’t the Justice Department, they aren’t the courts.

 

[Maxdeath]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.

Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

You mean executive privilege that the Supreme Court has ruled on in the past? Where they claimed that the president and his people need to be able to freely express ideas without fear of reprisal. The same executive privilege that 44 used?

Funny how back when Clinton was being impeached the Dems were grabbing every microphone they could and claiming that impeachment should never be political, it should never be partisan.

Yet they were claiming that Trump had to be impeached almost before he had spent a day in office. Pelosi stated that they had been trying for 21/2 years to impeach him. They claimed that they were forced to do it. That it had to be done quickly or Trump would be reelected.
Not only could they not get even one independent or Republican to vote for impeachment but they could not even get all of the dem party to vote yes.

Now not only is there no need to hurry but Pelosi is trying to tell the senate how they need to run their part. The Senate did not jump in and tell the house how they had to run theirs. The rules for impeachment have been in place since Johnson was impeached, they were agreed to again when Clinton was impeached. Now suddenly Pelosi wants things done her way.

Still waiting for that incontrovertible evedince that Schiff has claimed proved Trump was quilty of collusion with Russia.

It looks as if the Dems have a Third Reich trial they are trying to defend that they hoped would make their bad candidates look better to the voting public.

No I mean the executive privilege that the Supreme court ruled in 1974:
That executive privilege does not extend to information that’s germane to criminal investigations.

Executive privilege won’t shield Trump from the impeachment inquiry

You sound like a person who is scared to death of the facts coming out. We all know why... John Bolton's testimony will bury Trump, and all those emails I'm sure there is a reason they have been hidden. Like the newly released email that said the order to withhold the aid came directly from Trump... hmmm

Sorry the only thing I am worried about is the democrats stomping on the constitution in their need to get Trump no matter the cost to the nation, no matter the cost to our laws.

The Democrats have now shown the way. Don't like who is in office concoct an investigation. Make unverified threats that you have complete proof of wrong doing. Use impeachment as a nuclear partisan option. Lie during an impeachment trial. It does not matter just get them removed so that your party stays in office.

You can tell immediately who made up their mind long before Trump ever took office that they did not want him in. You happen to be one. You prefer the status quo, the same rotten electorate. You would vote for Stalin or Hitler if they were part of the "good old boy" same old political favor, get what you can gang.

 

[berg80]

Why Is Mitch McConnell So Afraid of John Bolton?
The Senate must hear his testimony in an impeachment trial.
Opinion | Why Is Mitch McConnell So Afraid of John Bolton?

The core principle behind the rule of law is that justice is blind and partisan identity should not influence a trial’s outcome. But anyone watching Mr. McConnell twist himself into knots in trying to block witnesses and documents has to wonder whether this notion ever took root in his mind. He has gone so far as to say that “there will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this to the extent that we can.” He also said, “There’s no chance the president is going to be removed from office.”

How can Mr. McConnell make such a claim without having heard from Mr. Bolton? Remember that the diplomat Fiona Hill testified at the House impeachment hearings that Mr. Bolton called the pressuring of Ukraine by the administration a “drug deal” and said he wanted no part of it. Mr. Bolton himself has said that he possesses new information that has not been revealed. He even gave a speech saying that some of Mr. Trump’s foreign policy decisions were made in his self-interest, not in the interest of the American people. Particularly after the United States’ killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani of Iran, such questions have arisen once again.

And how can Mr. McConnell make such a claim without having heard from the most important witness of all, Mr. Trump? The president has been too scared to testify, and too scared to let anyone else in his administration testify. This is not a particularly compelling demonstration of innocence. When the House was holding impeachment hearings, Mr. Trump said he wanted the acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry to testify. Even that pretense is now gone.

There is only one possible explanation for this behavior: He is afraid of the truth. Otherwise, what argument can there be for refusing to hear from a central witness like Mr. Bolton, who other witnesses have indicated was exceptionally concerned about the suspension of military aid to Ukraine?
...................................................................................................................................
Why are Moscow Mitch and Vlad's favorite candidate so afraid the truth will come out if Individual 1 is innocent?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.

Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

I believe President Trump invoked Executive Privilege (as many before him) and was waiting for a court determination. Pelosi, et.al, decided to rush their "judgement", forgoing further testimony in favor of expediency. They just cannot accept the results of a legitimate election because their c-u-next-tuesday failed to appeal to enough Americans to gain the office.

Yes Trump blocked the witnesses and emails, like the one just released that said the order to withhold the aid comes directly from the president. We need to hear from John Bolton, and we need to hear the facts.

Funny how all of you are so scared of the facts. If Trump is not guilty then let the facts come out...

Facts? Your camp has no facts. Innuendo, rumor, suggestions, second/third hand observations? Yah, I'd love some real FACTS. Your camp has none. Let's try real accusations. If you had facts, all that should have been available during the House "investigation". Y'all lost the election in 1916!!!! Get over it. Run someone who can top President Trump in 2020. Without cheating, lying, or otherwise relying on foreign manipulation. Good luck.

 

[Coyote]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

Oh wait...didn't the White House forbid relevant witness' from testifying? Oh please say it ain't so.

 

[basquebromance]

"I will compliment myself - because I do a pretty good job for him." Rudy Giuliani discusses his role as Trump's defense lawyer

 

[lennypartiv]

Only two witnesses Ukraine president and trump.. move on

And Rudy.

 

[lennypartiv]

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.
Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

There were already multiple witnesses and they failed to show there was any quid pro quo.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.

Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

The House could have waited for the Court cases to end, instead they claimed going to court was obstruction. That charge is out since the Courts ACCEPTED the cases.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

Clinton lied about consensual sex with an adult.
Trump is lying about matters of war and peace

Clinton LIED in a court case about having sex with an underling, the Court case was about HAVING sex with an underling........ Moron.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

Clinton lied about consensual sex with an adult.
Trump is lying about matters of war and peace

Clinton lied under oath.

So far, Trump hasn't that I know of.

Makes a difference

And now you know why Trump REFUSES to testify under oath

And once again...Clinton lied about a consensual sex act with an adult.

A question a sitting President should never have been asked

The Trial was about him having sex with UNDERLINGS, it was completely relevant and important.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

Oh wait...didn't the White House forbid relevant witness' from testifying? Oh please say it ain't so.

They took it to court, the House could have waited for the cases to be resolved. Instead they claimed taking it to court was obstruction, a none starter if ever there was one.

 

[Lesh]

He could have lied about the color of his socks, same result.

It wasn't WHAT he lied about, it was the fact he LIED.

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

Clinton lied about consensual sex with an adult.
Trump is lying about matters of war and peace

Clinton lied under oath.

So far, Trump hasn't that I know of.

Makes a difference

And now you know why Trump REFUSES to testify under oath

And once again...Clinton lied about a consensual sex act with an adult.

A question a sitting President should never have been asked

And once again...Clinton lied about a consensual sex act with an adult.

He could have lied about the color of his socks, same result.

It wasn't WHAT he lied about, it was the fact he LIED.

That is THE definition of the "perjury trap" Trumpers feared would ensnare Trump. The difference being HE was being asked about things that have substance.

 

[Auld Phart]

He could have lied about the color of his socks, same result.

It wasn't WHAT he lied about, it was the fact he LIED.

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

Clinton lied about consensual sex with an adult.
Trump is lying about matters of war and peace

Clinton lied under oath.

So far, Trump hasn't that I know of.

Makes a difference

And now you know why Trump REFUSES to testify under oath

And once again...Clinton lied about a consensual sex act with an adult.

A question a sitting President should never have been asked

And once again...Clinton lied about a consensual sex act with an adult.

He could have lied about the color of his socks, same result.

It wasn't WHAT he lied about, it was the fact he LIED.

That is THE definition of the "perjury trap" Trumpers feared would ensnare Trump. The difference being HE was being asked about things that have substance.

considering the charges, Bill being asked about sex had substance.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

Clinton lied about consensual sex with an adult.
Trump is lying about matters of war and peace

Clinton LIED in a court case about having sex with an underling, the Court case was about HAVING sex with an underling........ Moron.

LOL. I got a BJ in the Oval Office from a consenting adult..and that's so the same as consulting with a foreign power to swing an election in my favor, obstruction of both Congress and justice, and strong arming a foreign power to swing an upcoming election in my favor..yikes...I'm out of breath.

 

[OKTexas]

I want to know the truth and the facts, and that is the reason why I want to hear from the witnesses and see all the hidden emails. If Trump has nothing to hide this should be easy. And if he did nothing wrong then let the evidence prove that, but don't hide the evidence and then try and claim you are not guilty? That makes you look even more guilty. Funny how Lindsey Graham has changed his tune...

The house said they had all the evidence they needed to vote for the articles, now let them present that evidence to the senate and see if they think it's sufficient for removal. The senate is the place for the trial, not continued investigation, that was the job of the house.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.

Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

The house had remedies, they just refused to use them, then they said they had enough to impeach and did. Stop crying if the house screwed the pooch.

.

 

[OKTexas]

A couple weeks ago, we were told that the House had sewn up a rock-solid, "unimpeachable" case for impeachment/removal. Trump was sure to be removed.

Now they say they need more witnesses to buttress the "rock solid" case. Hmm.

There are no facts that are in dispute. We have a fucking transcript of the conversation in question.

Most important, even assuming arguendo that President Trump delayed (or even would have withheld) the military aid in order to induce the Ukrainians to investigate the Biden's...that ain't no crime, LET ALONE an impeachable offense. It is well within the Executive's discretion, and motivation is "rock solid." Former U.S. VIce President bragging about getting a prosecutor fired????

Are you shitting me?

1) The transcript is an unofficial recollection of the call made after the fact and Vindman testified under oath that it left out key details about Biden, with the official transcript hidden away on the ultra top secret NICE server with nothing to warrant it being there hmmmm. And in the transcript Trump clearly asks about the investigation into Biden.

2) You are scared of the facts, emails, and witnesses. You know John Bolton and the others will tell the truth and admit to the quid pro quo, so you want the truth hidden.

You're a liar, Vindman said not once but twice in his open testimony that the transcript was very accurate. BTW that is the only official transcript that exist.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Wait, why didn't the House call all relevant witnesses during their "investigation"? Oh, right, only the liars, cheats, and TDR sufferers responded to their summons.
The Senate rules that governed Clinton's impeachment are just fine. They were fair at the time so they should be more than adequate now.

They did call them and Trump blocked them from testifying.
SO you think rules that block evidence are fine. I guess I'll go rob a bank, then block all the evidence against me because Trump did it and you would not have a problem with that.

Really you know why Trump is blocking the evidence, he is 100% guilty.

You mean executive privilege that the Supreme Court has ruled on in the past? Where they claimed that the president and his people need to be able to freely express ideas without fear of reprisal. The same executive privilege that 44 used?

Funny how back when Clinton was being impeached the Dems were grabbing every microphone they could and claiming that impeachment should never be political, it should never be partisan.

Yet they were claiming that Trump had to be impeached almost before he had spent a day in office. Pelosi stated that they had been trying for 21/2 years to impeach him. They claimed that they were forced to do it. That it had to be done quickly or Trump would be reelected.
Not only could they not get even one independent or Republican to vote for impeachment but they could not even get all of the dem party to vote yes.

Now not only is there no need to hurry but Pelosi is trying to tell the senate how they need to run their part. The Senate did not jump in and tell the house how they had to run theirs. The rules for impeachment have been in place since Johnson was impeached, they were agreed to again when Clinton was impeached. Now suddenly Pelosi wants things done her way.

Still waiting for that incontrovertible evedince that Schiff has claimed proved Trump was quilty of collusion with Russia.

It looks as if the Dems have a Third Reich trial they are trying to defend that they hoped would make their bad candidates look better to the voting public.

No I mean the executive privilege that the Supreme court ruled in 1974:
That executive privilege does not extend to information that’s germane to criminal investigations.

Executive privilege won’t shield Trump from the impeachment inquiry

You sound like a person who is scared to death of the facts coming out. We all know why... John Bolton's testimony will bury Trump, and all those emails I'm sure there is a reason they have been hidden. Like the newly released email that said the order to withhold the aid came directly from Trump... hmmm

You poor little retard, impeachment is NOT A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, if fact the DOJ Criminal division reviewed the call and didn't find ANY CONCERNS. So enough with your lies and propaganda.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I take it you are a Trumper by that statement?

Show me where I have lied? Pretty much you had no real reply and had to try and divert.

"Yea they were wrong then and you and Graham are wrong now."


You saw my reply.

Pubs and dems both have done a 180 in the last 20 years.

You have selective outrage.

SO you are trying to say that this statement is a lie?

"Yea they were wrong then and you and Graham are wrong now."

In the end all the facts came out in the Clinton impeachment... even the stupid cum stained dress, I guess Bill Clinton should have just hid all the evidence like Trump. It's easy to claim you are not guilty when you have hidden all the evidence.

It's easy to claim you are not guilty when you have hidden all the evidence.

Clinton tried like hell to hide it.

Didn't even admit to lying under oath til the day he left office.

I know of some, and they are now on this board, that it took nearly 2 years to admit Clinton lied.

BTW, I stopped listening to Trump LONG before he won the election

Clinton tried to hide it because he was guilty. The same reason Trump is trying to hide the evidence. They are both guilty.

KEWL, so you've already made up your mind and all this bullshit about needing evidence is just so much BULLSHIT. GOT IT!!!!!!!!!!

.