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

[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

Trump didn't get an announcement and the aid wasn't withheld. So in other words, the libs have bupkis.

 

[RealDave]

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?

So, you think the President of the Ukraine will admit that he was being bribed?

People don't hate Trump. They hate what a crook and liar he is. They hate ihis racism & bigotry. They hate his childish behavior.

 

[boedicca]

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?

^^^ Diagnosis: Terminal TDS ^^^

 

[Polishprince]

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?

So, you think the President of the Ukraine will admit that he was being bribed?

People don't hate Trump. They hate what a crook and liar he is. They hate ihis racism & bigotry. They hate his childish behavior.

Why wouldn't he, if it were true?

If he stands by his friend Donald J. Trump, and the libs are able to remove Trump from the throne, the libs will never give Ukraine another dime.

 

[Care4all]

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

Trump didn't get an announcement and the aid wasn't withheld. So in other words, the libs have bupkis.

if you attempted to rob a bank, but did not succeed at robing the bank of its money, does that mean you did not commit a crime? SERIOUSLY?

And the aid was not released until the WB complaint, that the admin was illegally trying to cover up and hold back from congress, came out in to the sunshine... 2 days AFTER THIS they were given the president's ok to release it.

IF the admin believed what they were doing was legal, they would not have scrambled to release it after being caught. The admin would have held their ground, insisting it was for the USA's best interest to hold it back.... don't cha think?

 

[Polishprince]

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

Trump didn't get an announcement and the aid wasn't withheld. So in other words, the libs have bupkis.

if you attempted to rob a bank, but did not succeed at robing the bank of its money, does that mean you did not commit a crime? SERIOUSLY?

And the aid was not released until the WB complaint, that the admin was illegally trying to cover up and hold back from congress, came out in to the sunshine... 2 days AFTER THIS they were given the president's ok to release it.

IF the admin believed what they were doing was legal, they would not have scrambled to release it after being caught. The admin would have held their ground, insisting it was for the USA's best interest to hold it back.... don't cha think?

The liberals would have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was the reason why the President released the aid when he did.

And that's of course in addition to proof of the reasons for the aid being withheld in the first place as well as proof that Ukraine was being extorted.

I see a lot of what can generously be called "theory", a lot of opinions by butthurt civil servants peevish about being left out of the loop, but not actual proof at all.

 

[Meister]

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.

Left out the 'so called' whistleblower and Schiff...duly noted.
No whistleblower goes through Schiff, they go through proper protocol.

 

[HenryBHough]

I thought Trump Humpers say, "buy American."

The use of "thought" suggests an ability to think.

Sorry, counselor. Facts not in evidence. Please take your seat.

 

[Care4all]

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.

Let me find you a link to it.... brb

 

[Care4all]

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.

okay, here is the link to the treaty with the Ukraine on criminal investigations over seas....

Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

the working central authority principles in the treaty are the DOJ/AG and Ukraine's Ministry of Justice/Prosecutor General, and does not include the president's involvement, what so ever!


Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central
Authorities and defines Central Authorities for purposes of the
Treaty.

For the United States, the Central Authority shall be
the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney
General. For Ukraine, the Central Authority shall be the
Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor General.
The article provides that the Central Authorities shall
communicate directly with one another for the purposes of the
Treaty.

 

[lantern2814]

STFU you stupid Obamanzee. Your utter ignorance of how things work isn’t astounding it’s expected. See stupid, YOU have to prove guilt. Trump does not have to prove his innocence no matter how many times you repeat your Dim masters talking points. May you be miserable with 5 more years of Trump.

Nice racial slur you fucking racist piece of shit.

Fuck you you uneducated, racist, illiterate Obamanzee. That’s a statements on your lack of intelligence and blind loyalty to the worst president of all time. But you can call Trump supporters Trumpanzees and that’s okay. GFY you hypocritical loser.

Racist fuck.

There is NOTHING more disgusting & ignorant than a racist piece of shit like you.

Last I looked, Trump was orange. Referring to an orange person as a chimpanzee is not a racial slur.

Again FUCK YOU you ignorant illiterate fuck. You just admitted you are a racist. Then cry that YOUR racism is okay. Meanwhile moron, the term Obamanzee describes you perfectly. Lack of any intelligence or education and projecting. Lashing out because you’re an insecure ignorant racist. There is nothing more disgusting than a lying ignorant fuck like you Obamanzee.

What race is being orange?

You are the ignorant racist.

I hate racists.

Especially the ones who spew slurs & then lie & hide & claim they didn't.

You and faun the little yellow coward can both go fuck yourselves. YOU are the racist you projecting Obamanzee. You continue to show your ignorance. Thus earning the title Obamanzee. Your lack of knowledge, continual kissing of the ass of Obozo, and general stupidity make you eminently qualified. I’d tell you to say your shit to my face, but cowards like you two would run away when looked at sideways. Prove it’s a slur or STFU moron.

 

[Care4all]

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.

the whistleblower was not just allowed to make accusations silly one!

The IG investigates every whistle blower complaint as prescribed by law, and the IG DETERMINES if the whistle blower complaint is valid and or urgent, by interviewing first hand witnesses, and gathering evidence...

ONLY IF THE IG finds evidence to support the complaint, does the WB Complaint move forward. The office of inspector general finds many whistle blower complaints do not have legs and they DO NOT MOVE FORWARD.

tHIS COMPLAINT, WAS FOUND TO HAVE LEGS AND WAS DETERMINED BY THE ig TO BE URGENT.... (oops on caps)

When an IG determines it is correctly designated URGENT, the IG is required by law to turn it over to the Congressional Intelligence committee.

The Admin, decided to break the law, and hide it from Congress... but the fine print in the law states that if the DNI DOES NOT TURN IT OVER TO CONGRESS, then the IG can tell Congress directly that an urgent WB complaint is being held from them, as long as he notifies the DNI he is doing such....

THAT is how the Intel committee FINNALY got the complaint, from the admin who had it held back.

AND THIS is what made all hell break lose....

IF the president, and his admin, had simply followed the law, allowed the WB Complaint go to congress as per the law, then that would have been in secret, and the intel committee would have investigated it, in secret
and the president would not be in the world of poo-pee house, he is in today... his cover up attempt, bit him in the butt.

 

[Care4all]

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.

Left out the 'so called' whistleblower and Schiff...duly noted.
No whistleblower goes through Schiff, they go through proper protocol.

they did not go through schiff, they asked a staffer, what should he do.... since the complaint was made by 2 other WB's to their superiors and legal counsel and their legal counsel's for their department they worked in complaints were snubbed by the DOJ? The advice given to the WB was to report it to the IG on official form, and that he better get a lawyer.... which he did get a non profit, WB specializing Law firm, to represent him... and did file the official WB Complaint form, with the IG.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

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

Which jobs are these record wage growths growing under.

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.

If all these good times started under Pres. Obama your theory is trash.

 

[Polishprince]

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.

If all these good times started under Pres. Obama your theory is trash.

But they didn't start until the people saw that the Obama Regime was over on Election Day 2016. Trump's election gave the people REAL hope, not the phony hope that Obama promised.

I remember the date of Obama's Immaculation, 20 January 2009.

The liberals, and especially the black liberals, thought their ship had come in. They felt they were finally would be living on Easy Street as the brother ascended the American throne. A lot of joy that day that people were feeling.

The Obama Program was a complete failure however. All he provided was free money, free phones, free food. Kept the people on the Democrat Plantation.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The House is the prosecutor and his grand jury, determining if there are crimes to be indicted with in the impeachment process.

The Senate is the trial, senators are the jury, chief justice Roberts is judge....

That has not been started yet.

So you don’t see it as 100% political theater?

This is about the US Constitution. This is about the law.

The ones playing politics are the Republicans.

Oh, bullshit! This was never about "the law"! This was always about removing Donald Trump no matter what! Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff and Schumer know that Trump hasn't done anything that most Presidents before him have done...impeaching him on some vague "abuse of power" charge is farcical! This is a political maneuver because the Democrats are terrified that their candidates suck and that Trump is doing such a good job with the economy that he's going to get reelected. What's happening now is the very definition of political theatre!

This is 100% about Trump breaking the law.

If Obama would have done similar, Republicans would have impeached him.

Trump is a crook & is fucking over America & you are too stupid to see it.

The expe t GDP growth this yerar is 2.3%

You assfucks were dancing naked around the fire when Obama would have such a rate. Where is that promised 4%?

If the stupid fat ass fuck can't lower the deficit in the best economy ever, when is he?

LMAO

I disagree. Bush lied about WMDs and cost us 1000s of lives an trillions of dollars and he was not impeached.

If Bush lied about WMD so did a hell of a lot of democrats:

Democrat Quotes on WMD

A small snippet:

Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

 

[airplanemechanic]

If Trump broke so many laws, why weren't real laws broken in the articles of impeachment that seem stuck to Pelosi's little fingers?

 

[Mac-7]

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?

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 are completely wrong

Biden is only coincidently running for president

Before that he was a corrupt vice president enriching his son the bum in ukraine

 

[Mac-7]

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!

The best and most logical explanation is that they want murders to increase which the lib media would use to demand tougher gun laws

But someone blew the whistle on the whole sordid scheme

 

[Mac-7]

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....

It is the House’s job to investigate BEFORE impeaching

Not afterward