Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??

[VanceMack]

I think what the OP really means is "Why wont the republicans in the Senate allow the democrats to call the shots and turn this thing into another embarrassing leftist shit show like they did in the house?"

 

[Care4all]

Because they never intended to track the weapons!

And what was your theory for the purpose for that...??

So they could get themselves killed when going after drug or gun smugglers???

 

[Care4all]

why was it impeachable, in your opinion?

was it cheating? was it self dealing? was it self enriching? was it abusing his power?

or was it a crappy, imperfect, policy decision?

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

You have it backwards here. Its up to the Liberals to PROVE it was self-dealing. Not for the President to prove it wasn't. I see libs hypothesizing that President Trump did this for political benefit, but where is the smoking gun? Where is the letter from President Trump explaining how they were going to take Sleepy Joe out like this?

There is none. And that's the point.

In actuality, you have President Trump tweeting how much he actually would love to face a slow witted dullard like Biden. It would seem there is no motivation for the supposed motive.

They already have probable cause it in the house, and will do so in the Senate to even a higher burden and degree, beyond a reasonable doubt..... imo, from what they have gathered and will gather.

the issue is, will trump have a defense to what they prove beyond a reasonable doubt?

And it does not appear that he does, at this moment.... but we will see what his defense presents in the trial to counter the prosecution's evidence....

 

[Oldstyle]

Because they never intended to track the weapons!

And what was your theory for the purpose for that...??

So they could get themselves killed when going after drug or gun smugglers???

My theory is that they wanted to call for stricter gun control laws claiming it was needed because so many guns sold in the US were ending up in the hands of criminals. They only stopped the program when US border patrol agents went to members of Congress to expose what Fast & Furious was doing. They literally were willing to put weapons into the hands of narco terrorists that were murdering thousands of Mexican nationals if it furthered their political agenda. If that weren't the case...if they really WERE trying to track the weapons crossing the border then why wouldn't they have informed the Mexican government like the Bush Administration did?

 

[Polishprince]

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

You have it backwards here. Its up to the Liberals to PROVE it was self-dealing. Not for the President to prove it wasn't. I see libs hypothesizing that President Trump did this for political benefit, but where is the smoking gun? Where is the letter from President Trump explaining how they were going to take Sleepy Joe out like this?

There is none. And that's the point.

In actuality, you have President Trump tweeting how much he actually would love to face a slow witted dullard like Biden. It would seem there is no motivation for the supposed motive.

They already have probable cause it in the house, and will do so in the Senate to even a higher burden and degree, beyond a reasonable doubt..... imo, from what they have gathered and will gather.

the issue is, will trump have a defense to what they prove beyond a reasonable doubt?

And it does not appear that he does, at this moment.... but we will see what his defense presents in the trial to counter the prosecution's evidence....

I haven't seen proof beyond a reasonable doubt yet,why do you think that Schiff is holding it so close to his vest?

As far as the Senate, they are just sitting in judgment, they aren't going to do any investigation whatsoever. So what we have is what we have.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Um, the stock market is not an economic indicator.

Ok, what about record low unemployment? Is that an "economic indicator?"

You mean the record low unemployment that started under Pres. Obama.

What about record wage growth? Is that an "economic indicator?"

Which jobs are these record wage growths growing under.

What about record housing sales, is that an "economic indicator?"

When did these record home sales start?

Did you want to take a crack at telling us all what economic policies of Barack Obama's it was that caused unemployment to go down?

You've been shown, lying con tool. Keep in mind, you call claim the Impeached Trump lowered the unemployment rate even before he became president and before he passed any policies.

Actually he did. The positive vibes that Trump created throughout the business world after his vanquishing of Hillary, helped the economy immensely even before inauguration.

The business community realized that the large dark night of Obamunism was over and it was dawn in America.

In other words I can't point to nothing specifically, it's just Trump the Messiah that has made all wholesome and good in America.

 

[Oldstyle]

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

You have it backwards here. Its up to the Liberals to PROVE it was self-dealing. Not for the President to prove it wasn't. I see libs hypothesizing that President Trump did this for political benefit, but where is the smoking gun? Where is the letter from President Trump explaining how they were going to take Sleepy Joe out like this?

There is none. And that's the point.

In actuality, you have President Trump tweeting how much he actually would love to face a slow witted dullard like Biden. It would seem there is no motivation for the supposed motive.

They already have probable cause it in the house, and will do so in the Senate to even a higher burden and degree, beyond a reasonable doubt..... imo, from what they have gathered and will gather.

the issue is, will trump have a defense to what they prove beyond a reasonable doubt?

And it does not appear that he does, at this moment.... but we will see what his defense presents in the trial to counter the prosecution's evidence....

Whoa...wait a second! How do you go from probable cause...which is the rationale for having an investigation...to claiming that the Senate will gather proof beyond a shadow of a doubt? That was the House's task! They are the ones charged with investigation and the bringing of articles of impeachment based on that investigation. The Senate simply rules on what the House declares it has found.

As for Trump's defense? Right now if this were an actual trial in an actual courtroom there is a very strong likelihood that the judge would dismiss the case on motion from the defense because the prosecution's evidence of any wrong doing was so weak. You don't have to mount a defense against a case that the prosecution hasn't even begun to prove. Telling the jury that the defendant needs to prove he's not guilty would get you a lesson on our legal system from the judge!

 

[Oldstyle]

Ok, what about record low unemployment? Is that an "economic indicator?"

You mean the record low unemployment that started under Pres. Obama.

What about record wage growth? Is that an "economic indicator?"

Which jobs are these record wage growths growing under.

What about record housing sales, is that an "economic indicator?"

When did these record home sales start?

Did you want to take a crack at telling us all what economic policies of Barack Obama's it was that caused unemployment to go down?

You've been shown, lying con tool. Keep in mind, you call claim the Impeached Trump lowered the unemployment rate even before he became president and before he passed any policies.

Actually he did. The positive vibes that Trump created throughout the business world after his vanquishing of Hillary, helped the economy immensely even before inauguration.

The business community realized that the large dark night of Obamunism was over and it was dawn in America.

In other words I can't point to nothing specifically, it's just Trump the Messiah that has made all wholesome and good in America.

Getting rid of burdensome regulations and passing tax cuts stimulated the economy. Business responds when they see opportunity. They pull back when they see an Administration that's erecting barriers to growth.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Dems broke the laws by keeping the WB anonymous and not letting Trump/Congressmembers question the WB validity.

Keeping the whistle blower anonymous is the law

What law? Please quote the law that states a federal whistleblower has a right to make accusations and then remain anon.

 

[Rambunctious]

The house calls the witnesses in the house inquiry...all Pelosi wants is another show trial...this time in the senate.....she can suck my .........

 

[Care4all]

why was it impeachable, in your opinion?

was it cheating? was it self dealing? was it self enriching? was it abusing his power?

or was it a crappy, imperfect, policy decision?

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

What is "US Policy" on dealing with corrupt foreign governments, Care? What policy was it that Trump violated when he asked the President of the Ukraine to look into suspected corruption involving the Biden's and Burisma?

1. The treaty we have with foreign gvts and the Ukraine on how investigations in to American citizen corruption, taking place overseas... and it does NOT involve the president being any part of it. It is initiated by the DOJ, with the Prosecutor General of the other Nation, AFTER the attorney General here has determined there is probable cause that a crime has been committed by the American citizen overseas.

2. You do NOT SEND your personal campaign lawyer overseas to run our diplomatic policy and run the conspiracy to go after the Bidens....

3. You do not make part of the agreement for a Washington DC coveted meeting and/or congressionally passed military aid, the President of Ukraine having to make an announcement to the public, on CNN that his upcoming rival in the election, and his son, are being investigated for corruption in the Ukraine. sigh... HOW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THIS IS WRONG?

4. Campaign finance law does not allow candidates, to involve foreign country's help in an election.

5. The impoundment countrol act of 1974, does not permit a president to hold back, congressionally passed financial aid to other countries without Congressional approval. The president did not ask for congressional approval to hold back the military aid to the Ukraine, which was initially passed I believe in December of 2018.

Two govt employees quit on the spot when Trump Politicos ordered them to hold back on sending the aid to the Ukraine because they believed it broke this law, and did not want to be caught up in the scandal of breaking the law.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Schumer is guilty of being a Fascist scumbag

You’re demented

The Intelligence agencies will get you!

Fascist

 

[Oldstyle]

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

What is "US Policy" on dealing with corrupt foreign governments, Care? What policy was it that Trump violated when he asked the President of the Ukraine to look into suspected corruption involving the Biden's and Burisma?

1. The treaty we have with foreign gvts and the Ukraine on how investigations in to American citizen corruption, taking place overseas... and it does NOT involve the president being any part of it. It is initiated by the DOJ, with the Prosecutor General of the other Nation, AFTER the attorney General here has determined there is probable cause that a crime has been committed by the American citizen overseas.

2. You do NOT SEND your personal campaign lawyer overseas to run our diplomatic policy and run the conspiracy to go after the Bidens....

3. You do not make part of the agreement for a Washington DC coveted meeting and/or congressionally passed military aid, the President of Ukraine having to make an announcement to the public, on CNN that his upcoming rival in the election, and his son, are being investigated for corruption in the Ukraine. sigh... HOW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THIS IS WRONG?

4. Campaign finance law does not allow candidates, to involve foreign country's help in an election.

5. The impoundment countrol act of 1974, does not permit a president to hold back, congressionally passed financial aid to other countries without Congressional approval. The president did not ask for congressional approval to hold back the military aid to the Ukraine, which was initially passed I believe in December of 2018.

Two govt employees quit on the spot when Trump Politicos ordered them to hold back on sending the aid to the Ukraine because they believed it broke this law, and did not want to be caught up in the scandal of breaking the law.

Cite the treaty that you're referring to. I'd like to read how it's set up to function.

 

[RealDave]

i.) Everything the Dems complain about Trump doing, every act, is some act which the same Dems stayed silent about when they observed Obama Admin doing the same things from 2012-'16.

like what? When did Obama use his presidency and power to solicit a foreign president to make an announcement on CNN to the whole world, that the foreign gvt was opening an investigation in to the president's upcoming election political rival?

ii.) Trump stayed away from the House's impeachment sham, exactly because they refused to let him call his own witnesses and to invalidate the whistleblower. But now MitchMc & the Senate Repubs are dead wrong, for repeating what the Dems just did? go figure

"]The House did not have to refuse to let Trump question his whistleblowing-accuser's validity ---to legally guard any President from his critics concocting fictitious impeachable acts.

the president's goal was to out the whistleblower so he and his attack dogs could go after him in a personal way...

it's important to make WB's feel at ease with reporting all kinds of wrong doings of our gvt. Being anonymous, as with any anonymous tip line, is important. If not for any one single tip or complaint, but for the overall program that ends up saving us billions in fraud and corruption within the gvt... so if we can, we promise anonymity.

In this case, the whistle blower IS NOT NEEDED and CAN NOT exonerate the president, can not give the president any kind of a defense because there are 17 other sworn 1st and 2nd hand witnesses that showed up, who substantiated what was in the complaint,

along with the IG, who in his investigation FOUND the WB complaint credible and urgent. the IG said he spoke directly with FIRST HAND witnesses that confirmed the complaint.

if the IG found that the WB complaint had no legs, it would not have been pegged by the IG as credible and urgent... or gone forward. Not all or not even near all WB complaints are found credible... many DIE an early death after the IG investigates them.

So, this bulloney on not letting the president call witnesses is nothing but Trump obfuscating.... it was not a defense at all.

and not meant to be a defense.... just a smear and vengeance he could bring towards the WB and the whole WB program that is very beneficial to the USA...

ONLY CROOKS AND THE CORRUPT, hate it and work to destroy it.

Obama and his attorney general knowingly sold semi automatic weapons to the mexican drug gangs

That was an impeachable offense

why was it impeachable, in your opinion?

was it cheating? was it self dealing? was it self enriching? was it abusing his power?

or was it a crappy, imperfect, policy decision?

They sold nothing.
They allowed illegal cross border sales so they could track them.

This is sound policy when trying to break up smuggling operations. Let so go through to see where they go.

It was a local office effort & a local office botched plan.

They allowed sales that they knew were going to cross the border and end up in the hands of narco terrorists and that they KNEW they couldn't track! The Bush Administration attempted to track gun running across the board with the full cooperation of the Mexican Government but stopped the program when they realized that they couldn't track those weapons. The Obama Administration didn't inform the Mexican Government about what they were doing with Fast & Furious. Why? Because they never intended to track the weapons!

Actually, they thought they could track them. If they couldn't track them, why do the program?

What is stupid is you NRA fed morons who permitted people to buy AR-15 40 at a time, no questions asked. THAT is fucking stupid.

The White House & the DOJ was not driving this operation.

 

[RealDave]

why was it impeachable, in your opinion?

was it cheating? was it self dealing? was it self enriching? was it abusing his power?

or was it a crappy, imperfect, policy decision?

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

What is "US Policy" on dealing with corrupt foreign governments, Care? What policy was it that Trump violated when he asked the President of the Ukraine to look into suspected corruption involving the Biden's and Burisma?

The policy of not using federal funds to bribe foreign officials for personal gain.

 

[RealDave]

The Stimulus lowered the une,ployment rate between 1/2% and 1 1/2% & shortened the lerngth of the recession.

So, you think by allowing more pollution, unsafe work places & food supply created all these supposed jobs?

Why aren't you taking about the 1.5 trillion he borrowed?

The Stimulus cost US taxpayers a trillion dollars. Unemployment went up after the Stimulus was employed. It didn't start to come down until the Democrats lost the House and could no longer implement their progressive agenda. Only THEN was it safe for private capital to come out of hiding and start investing again!

Unemployment was on the way up/. That is why we needed the stimulus you stupid shit.

Without it, unemployment could have surpassed 11% & the recession lasted a lot longer.

The CBO said the stimulus did was was intended.

The Obama Administration said that if the stimulus wasn't granted that unemployment would rise above 8% but if it were granted that unemployment would go to 6%. They got the stimulus money but utilized it so poorly that unemployment rose above 10%! Only a progressive would claim that the stimulus worked as intended!

The unemployment rate was already about 8% when the stimulus was passed.

Obama's economic advisors promised that if given the stimulus that rate would drop to 6%...instead it rose to over 10%.

They said it would lower the rate by 1/2% to 1 1/2%. When the report was written the rate was estimated to peak at a certain rate. Two months later the recession was far worse & worsening.

 

[RealDave]

why was it impeachable, in your opinion?

was it cheating? was it self dealing? was it self enriching? was it abusing his power?

or was it a crappy, imperfect, policy decision?

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

You have it backwards here. Its up to the Liberals to PROVE it was self-dealing. Not for the President to prove it wasn't. I see libs hypothesizing that President Trump did this for political benefit, but where is the smoking gun? Where is the letter from President Trump explaining how they were going to take Sleepy Joe out like this?

There is none. And that's the point.

In actuality, you have President Trump tweeting how much he actually would love to face a slow witted dullard like Biden. It would seem there is no motivation for the supposed motive.

The testimony clearly showed that Trump was withholding aid until he got his announcement of a Biden investigation.

Clear as day. Trump is a crook. IMPOTUS

 

[Polishprince]

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

What is "US Policy" on dealing with corrupt foreign governments, Care? What policy was it that Trump violated when he asked the President of the Ukraine to look into suspected corruption involving the Biden's and Burisma?

The policy of not using federal funds to bribe foreign officials for personal gain.

Where is the "bribery"? All that you have is that Ukraine felt NO PRESSURE at all, to investigate Sleepy Joe- who is just one of hundreds of liberal extremists that have hatred for President Trump.

Does the fact that someone hates Trump exempt them from the laws of the land?

 

[Polishprince]

Gun running is a crime

Says WHO? Although they may not have had any F-ups, wasn't it also done under President Bush2 policy as well?

Yes

it was a stupid idea that did not work and was terminated

obama comes along and does it again after it has already been demonstrated not to work

See, that's a case that perhaps could be made, if a charge could be made against them... and if congress truly believed it was illegal as you claimed previously, what congress should have done is insisted on Eric Holder recusing himself as AG over this case and had the DOJ appoint a Special Counsel, to investigate any criminality.... imo.

but see, because it was policy, another likely route would be a suit against them, claiming it was unconstitutional for them to do this, perhaps? the good Lord knows, Republicans and their groups sued the Obama admin for absolutely everything.... they won some of those suits and lost some of those suits....

but with God as my witness, this issue with what president Trump has done, is not about US Policy differences... or making a mistake with US Policy....

it is about him self dealing, cheating, abusing his power for his own personal and political benefit, above US Policy of which he takes an oath of office to always put above his own or anyone else's.

And even though he got caught on this one, what else is he doing in his presidential position to self deal himself? What else has he done already?

Now maybe the president can have some first hand witnesses that help him claim it was not self dealing...? But he has YET to do that.....

You have it backwards here. Its up to the Liberals to PROVE it was self-dealing. Not for the President to prove it wasn't. I see libs hypothesizing that President Trump did this for political benefit, but where is the smoking gun? Where is the letter from President Trump explaining how they were going to take Sleepy Joe out like this?

There is none. And that's the point.

In actuality, you have President Trump tweeting how much he actually would love to face a slow witted dullard like Biden. It would seem there is no motivation for the supposed motive.

The testimony clearly showed that Trump was withholding aid until he got his announcement of a Biden investigation.

Clear as day. Trump is a crook. IMPOTUS

President Trump said nothing of the sort, and no one has come forward to say they heard Trump say it. Not even the phony WB.

 

[RealDave]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

The question should have been, "Why were the dems so afraid to have the GOP call their witnesses in the House proceedings?"

They wanted to call witness that had nothing to do with whsat Trump did.

Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Devon Archer - all had to do with Joe Biden's actions as VP. What Joe Biden did is not relevant to Trump's bribery.

They also wanted to call the whistleblower only to find out who they were.

Cool story, bro.

View attachment 296770

You assfucks are welcome to investigate your fast asses off.

Biden did it in 2016. Note that the Republican House & Senate & DOJ never thought to investigate it. I wonder why? Could it be there is nothing there? Could it be you are duped again by Trump?