Why Aren't the Republicans Calling Witnesses to Defend Trump?

[Syriusly]

Fascinating responses from the Trumpettes.

Most just hurl insults- because they love to imitate their Orange Messiah.
A few of them just lie.- because they love to emulate their lying Orange Messiah.

Not a one has actually answered the question.

Because we all know why the GOP doesn't want Pompeo, Pence, Giuliani or Mulvaney in public, under oath, on the witness stand.

Why are you so racist against orange people?

It is a problem I have

 

[bripat9643]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Why would they testify at this circus? That would only lend it an undeserved credibility.

Trumpbots are demanding witnesses thats why

ya f'n idiot

Not the witnesses Schiff wants, shit for brains.

 

[bripat9643]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Why would they testify at this circus? That would only lend it an undeserved credibility.

Why would they testify to refute all of the testimony against Trump?

Why wouldn't they?

If what Sondland and Taylor and the others have said is not true- why don't they get up there and tell us?

Your questions is disingenuous. You're trolling.

 

[bripat9643]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Why would they testify at this circus? That would only lend it an undeserved credibility.

Why would they testify to refute all of the testimony against Trump?

Why wouldn't they?

If what Sondland and Taylor and the others have said is not true- why don't they get up there and tell us?

It doesn't matter what they said. They didn't witness anything, moron.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Fascinating responses from the Trumpettes.

Most just hurl insults- because they love to imitate their Orange Messiah.
A few of them just lie.- because they love to emulate their lying Orange Messiah.

Not a one has actually answered the question.

Because we all know why the GOP doesn't want Pompeo, Pence, Giuliani or Mulvaney in public, under oath, on the witness stand.

Why are you so racist against orange people?

It is a problem I have

View attachment 290026

Of course your a racist tell that to stormy, she might spank you

 

[Rambunctious]

None of that prevents the Republicans from calling them as witnesses

Yes it does....Schiff will not let them call just whomever they want so that leaves only people who would be a waste of their time to call...its not that hard to understand....

Why do you think Pompeo and Mulvaney and Giuliani would be a waste of time?

Because we have the transcript...this should have ended the day Trump released it....

 

[lantern2814]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

Yeah, it's pretty funny that Jordan the Monkey whines that none of the witnesses so far had first hand knowledge (which is untrue), but he did not mention that Trump won't let the first hand witnesses testify. And as you aptly noted, the Republicans aren't calling them to testify.

That speaks volumes.

I wonder what Monkey Jordan's talking point will be when first hand witnesses testify and back up what the other witnesses have said.

Which witness had first hand knowledge?

So far, all I've heard is, "I was told"

You did not watch the testimony, did you.

Vindman had first hand knowledge of the July 25 phone call.

You really should read the transcripts instead of parroting your propagandists.


The witnesses in the public hearings so far had first hand testimony of the events in Ukraine.

Don't worry. Witnesses who had first hand knowledge of Trump will be coming. Even though Trump is doing everything he can to obstruct them.

You fools are acting as if the hearings are over.

What will be Monkey Jordan's talking point for you to parrot when more come forward who do have first hand White House knowledge?

What a lying racist retard. Use of the word monkey to describe a man means your opinion can be summarily flushed. Not that anybody takes you seriously anyway you racist retard.

 

[ElmerMudd]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

Agree, the Republicans look like fools in the defense they are throwing up.
they say the aid was given so there could not be extortion
The aid was not given until Trump found out there was a whistleblower and he was being investigated by congress. Attempting to extort is a crime.
They say it is the right of the President right to do all he did.
Trump does have the right or power to do most of what he did. But his intentions do matter. If his intentions were for his needs as opposed to the nations needs it is abuse of power.
They say this is all second hand information.
You covered this. Bring in the players who have first hand knowledge. All you mentioned plus Trump. Clintion was disposed in his impeachment.

 

[cnm]

Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

I suppose they don't want to expose them to the risk of perjury charges...

 

[debbiedowner]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

They haven't been allowed to call their own witnesses, you fucking dumbass. Didn't you read about the list they submitted to Schiff-for-Brains?

Where's that link?

 

[RandomPoster]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

Trump has to prove he's not guilty? Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the prosecution?

 

[cnm]

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

No need....

[...]

So true

 

[Siete]

first hand knowledge.

the idiots learned a new phrase.

first hand knowledge witnesses wont be credible enough for those pukes when they show up and shit on Goldilocks.

not in 100 years -

 

[Siete]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

Trump has to prove he's not guilty? Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the prosecution?

witnesses provide exculpatory evidence in our courts on a daily basis - its called DEFENSE.

 

[Syriusly]

Fascinating responses from the Trumpettes.

Most just hurl insults- because they love to imitate their Orange Messiah.
A few of them just lie.- because they love to emulate their lying Orange Messiah.

Not a one has actually answered the question.

Because we all know why the GOP doesn't want Pompeo, Pence, Giuliani or Mulvaney in public, under oath, on the witness stand.

Why are you so racist against orange people?

It is a problem I have

View attachment 290026

Of course your a racist tell that to stormy, she might spank you

Naw- i don't want to be spanked by the hand that spanked Trump.

 

[Siete]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Why would they testify at this circus? That would only lend it an undeserved credibility.

Trumpbots are demanding witnesses thats why

ya f'n idiot

Not the witnesses Schiff wants, shit for brains.

bb brain yammers ...... NOT THOSE WITNESSES - DIFFERENT WITNESSES !!!!!!!!

 

[Nostra]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Nobody ignored a subpoena......they challenged them in court, as our system allows.

Now, cry about something else.

 

[Mike473]

So far all Republicans have done is try to smear the witnesses before the House. The witnesses the Republicans want to call have no knowledge of Trump's activities in Ukraine.

Why don't the Republicans call Pompeo?

Why don't the Republicans call Giuliani?

Why don't the Republicans call Pence?

Why don't the Republicans call Mulvaney?

These are all people with first hand knowledge of what happened- if there was no bribery attempt- they could testify as to their first hand knowledge that there was no bribery attempt.

If the President wasn't demanding an investigation into Biden's in exchange for arms or for a visit in the White House- these people could make that absolutely clear- easily.
'
Why don't Republicans want to mount a defense with witnesses who can refute those who say there was a quid pro quo for Trump's personal benefit?

The witness today defended Trump and was clear she had no knowledge of any criminality.

Stewart: Do you have any information regarding the president of the United States accepting any bribes?

Yovanovitch: No.

Stewart: Do you any have information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?

Yovanovitch: No.

 

[Nostra]

I listed the Trumpbot Republicans who ignored the subpoena requiring them to testify.

they refuse to testify -

so STFU about witnesses.

Why would they testify at this circus? That would only lend it an undeserved credibility.

Why would they testify to refute all of the testimony against Trump?

Why wouldn't they?

If what Sondland and Taylor and the others have said is not true- why don't they get up there and tell us?

Fourth hand knowledge, feelings about fourth hand info, and interpretations of fourth hand info needs no refutation.

 

[Syriusly]

So.....I just got ...dismayed by the usual dreck in a thread here at USMB.....and decided to look at the statistics
out of 110 responses
not responsive 58
Just insults 13
Slightly responsive 19
responseive 20
Just threats 1

So 58 out of 110- roughly 50% had nothing to do with the question in my thread.
13- about 10% were nothing but an insult
19 were slightly responsive- on topic somewhat but just somewhat
20 were actual responses.
1 was just a threat

Some like Brip- who can't post without insulting anyone- I gave credit for being somewhat responsive and didn't include as just insults.
Others like Bear- well Bear just is trolling. Almost all- maybe all- of his posts are not responsive.

And I think this is on par with USMB. Mostly just people talking shit, and you are lucky if there are even 10-20% of the posts who have anything to do with the thread.