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

[hadit]

Quid pro quo is not a crime. PERIOD

Soliciting a foreign national to help with Impeached Trump's campaign is a crime. Even if there was no quid pro quo.

That is funny, Faun.....That's not even what he was impeached for, and if it was as obvious to them as it is to you, they would have brought it forward. lol

Hate to mention it Mr Meister but the longer Pelosi waits the better the chance of finding more impeachable evidence Then Trump could have a double header ..1st president impeached in 1st term and 1st with a double impeachment

That would be super stupid for them to try.

It would bring joy to my heart to see trump lose it

Just as it would bring joy to my heart to see the House democrats slink home in utter defeat.

 

[Wapasha]

Are you involved in any kind of business, Biff? If you were...you'd have a good idea how much time and money we waste in this country jumping through hoops set up by government.

Your company, or mine, does not exist in a bubble. Regulatory changes don't have to only be affecting your company. If your suppliers are positively impacted, they may lower their costs. New suppliers may now be available to provide for you. Or your customers might purchase more because they were positively affected, either directly, or indirectly like the examples above.

 

[Oldstyle]

Are you involved in any kind of business, Biff? If you were...you'd have a good idea how much time and money we waste in this country jumping through hoops set up by government.

Your company, or mine, does not exist in a bubble. Regulatory changes don't have to only be affecting your company. If your suppliers are positively impacted, they may lower their costs. New suppliers may now be available to provide for you. Or your customers might purchase more because they were positively affected, either directly, or indirectly like the examples above.

What I'm trying to make both Faun and Super understand is how much time and money businesses in the US waste every year having to comply with governmental regulations. Trump has addressed that by forcing departments to get rid of two regulations if they want to add another. It's simplistic but effective. It's counters the tendency of government to constantly intrude more and more on the Private Sector.

Before the wails start up about how all this regulation is here to protect us and if we start doing away with them then we're all going to perish...let me state unequivocally...we're not doing away with OSHA or the EPA...but we are doing away with ridiculous regulations. There are literally tens of thousands of regulations...we're drowning in them and it was getting worse with each passing year.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Nice list, but you are not telling us how they changed the economy.

It's just inferred that removing regulatory burdens that stifle growth and productivity, by either eliminating regulations or amending them to make them more friendly towards economic growth, does help the economy.

I remember Steve Jobs saying that we have creating so many new regulations today, that it would have been impossible to create Apple back then, if he had to operate under the regulations we have today.

Hell, our society has gone crazy with new laws and regulations, that little kids are even having their lemon aid stands shut down

West Virginia correctional cadets who gave Nazi salute in photo will all be fired

Child's Lemonade Stand Shut Down For Lack Of Permit

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-up-a-lemonade-stand-then-she-was-fined-200/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-stands-these-lawyers-work-for-big-lemonade/

yadda, yadda

Again just explain how that list of regulations boosted the economy, if that is what they have done it should be easy to explain.

Can you understand how money spent on compliance with frivolous regulations can't be spent on hiring? On R & D? On advertising? On new plants? Just how clueless are you, Super?

I keep hearing that, but tell me what corporations have raised wages, bonuses, built new plants, etc. as a result of the removal of all these regulations.

Now you're unaware that wages are up? That businesses have been investing in growth? What's your source for news, Super? You're amazingly uninformed!

So post the links and inform us all.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Again just explain how that list of regulations boosted the economy, if that is what they have done it should be easy to explain.

Can you understand how money spent on compliance with frivolous regulations can't be spent on hiring? On R & D? On advertising? On new plants? Just how clueless are you, Super?

I keep hearing that, but tell me what corporations have raised wages, bonuses, built new plants, etc. as a result of the removal of all these regulations.

Now you're unaware that wages are up? That businesses have been investing in growth? What's your source for news, Super? You're amazingly uninformed!

Wages have never in the history of this country went up due to de-regulation....

In fact, the golden age of "no regulations" occurred during the worst of times for working class people...and despite unions winning collective bargaining rights, enforcing 8-hr work days, OSHA, EPA and a whole host of other labor regulations --- wages went up...how is that possible??

Especially when you consider the top marginal tax rate was north of 70% for much of that time we refer to as the "good old days" for the middle class

And yet wages ARE going up? What's causing that, Biff?

That's what we are asking you to tell us specifically.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Again just explain how that list of regulations boosted the economy, if that is what they have done it should be easy to explain.

Can you understand how money spent on compliance with frivolous regulations can't be spent on hiring? On R & D? On advertising? On new plants? Just how clueless are you, Super?

I keep hearing that, but tell me what corporations have raised wages, bonuses, built new plants, etc. as a result of the removal of all these regulations.

Now you're unaware that wages are up? That businesses have been investing in growth? What's your source for news, Super? You're amazingly uninformed!

Wages have never in the history of this country went up due to de-regulation....

In fact, the golden age of "no regulations" occurred during the worst of times for working class people...and despite unions winning collective bargaining rights, enforcing 8-hr work days, OSHA, EPA and a whole host of other labor regulations --- wages went up...how is that possible??

Especially when you consider the top marginal tax rate was north of 70% for much of that time we refer to as the "good old days" for the middle class

And yet wages ARE going up? What's causing that, Biff?

Which wages are going up?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

You say all that and you have yet to explain what regulations that were cut raised wages.

 

[Jackson]

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...

1. The Impeachment has been stalled because Pelosi has not sent the Articles to the senate, a delaying tactic on the part of the Dems.

2. McConnell is not refusing to call witnesses. It hasn't reached that stage yet.

3. Trump never said, "I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden"
READ: White House transcript of Trump call with Ukrainian president Trump tells the Ukranian president that Joe Biden bragged about stopping the prosecution of Hunter Biden in the Ukraine. Could you look into that? It sounds awful to me. Never a mention quid pro quo.

4. Of course McConnell is in lock step with the president. It is the Senate's job to defend him.

 

[DrLove]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

 

[hadit]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

Yes, it's terrible that we already know beyond a shadow of a doubt how most of the democrats are going to vote, before the first word is spoken. So the whole thing is fake and should be tossed in the fire.

 

[Oldstyle]

You say all that and you have yet to explain what regulations that were cut raised wages.

How do I "explain" something as obvious as this...

"Cutting Rules: Baseball season is winding down and, as it does, so is another grueling annual event: The U.S. government's fiscal year. But this year, with just two months to go, something remarkable is happening: Regulations are being slashed at a record rate.

A new report by the American Action Forum (AAF) says that not only is President Trump meeting his deregulation goals, he's exceeding them — in some cases, by a large amount.

"Collectively, executive agencies subject to regulatory budget remain on pace to double the administration's overall saving goal," wrote the AAF's Dan Bosch. "On an individual basis, 12 of 22 agencies have already met or surpassed their savings target."

"The Department of Labor enjoys the largest total savings of covered agencies with $417.2 million," Bosch wrote. "The Department of Health and Human Services comes in second in savings ... at $285.6 million. The Department of Transportation ranks third in annualized savings, followed by the Department of Justice."

All told, the government aimed for savings of about $686.6 million from deregulation so far this year. Right now, the government has saved some $1.308 billion from 47 separate deregulation actions.

This might not sound like much, given the government's immense size. But it is. Because the economic impact is much larger than the mere dollar amount in regulations cut. And it's also important because President Trump has set a regulatory budget that limits the number of rules and their costs.

As the Competitive Enterprise Institute noted earlier this year in its "Ten Thousand Commandments" annual report, federal regulations cost a lot more than their stated dollar amount. As of last year, regulation and federal intervention in the economy cost Americans an estimated $1.9 trillion. And that's one of the lowball estimates out there.

How much is that? It's the equivalent of a $15,000-per-household tax levied each year in perpetuity. That's more than the average family spends on food, clothing or transportation. Only housing takes more of the family budget.

If regulation were a nation, and let's be thankful it's not, it would be the eighth-largest economy in the world. Regulation even exceeds the IRS' total take in corporate and individual income tax. That's how big it is.

Last year, Trump began cutting rules in earnest as soon as he entered office. He slashed the total number of pages in the Federal Register, the government's regulatory bible, from 95,894 in 2016 to 61,308 pages in 2017. That's a decline of 36% and the lowest since 1993. This year it will go even lower.

This is a big deal for businesses, which find themselves increasingly burdened by mandates, orders, rules and commands issued by Washington bureaucrats who know nothing about their companies.

The burden on small businesses is especially acute. A National Small Business Association survey found that small business owners spend more than 80 hours a year just dealing with regulations. In the first year alone, a small business will spend on average roughly $83,000 to comply with government rules. That can be the margin between staying open or going bankrupt.

Deregulation's Impact
"The impact of regulatory burden cannot be overstated," the NSBA noted. "More than one-third have held off on business investment due to uncertainty on a pending regulation, and more than half have held off on hiring a new employee due to regulatory burdens."

The record regulatory siege under President Obama goes a long way toward explaining his poor economic performance. With growth averaging below 2%, his was the worst administration for growth in postwar history.

The Trump economy, by contrast, is today growing at just a nick below 3% a year. Median annual household income stands at $62,175 currently, the highest level since 2000. Unemployment in June matched its lowest level in half a century. In short, the economy is operating on an entirely different level than during the Obama years.

It's made a huge difference in Americans' confidence, as shown in recent strong gains in our own IBD/TIPP Economic Optimism Index, which rose to 58.0 in August, its highest level since January of 2004. The economy is again growing robustly and creating jobs, thanks in large part to Trump's deregulation, which acts like a giant tax cut — one you didn't even know you got."
https://www.investors.com/politics/...sident-trump-cuts-regulations-at-record-rate/

 

[Oldstyle]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

 

[DrLove]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

 

[Wapasha]

Are you involved in any kind of business, Biff? If you were...you'd have a good idea how much time and money we waste in this country jumping through hoops set up by government.

Your company, or mine, does not exist in a bubble. Regulatory changes don't have to only be affecting your company. If your suppliers are positively impacted, they may lower their costs. New suppliers may now be available to provide for you. Or your customers might purchase more because they were positively affected, either directly, or indirectly like the examples above.

What I'm trying to make both Faun and Super understand is how much time and money businesses in the US waste every year having to comply with governmental regulations. Trump has addressed that by forcing departments to get rid of two regulations if they want to add another. It's simplistic but effective. It's counters the tendency of government to constantly intrude more and more on the Private Sector.

Before the wails start up about how all this regulation is here to protect us and if we start doing away with them then we're all going to perish...let me state unequivocally...we're not doing away with OSHA or the EPA...but we are doing away with ridiculous regulations. There are literally tens of thousands of regulations...we're drowning in them and it was getting worse with each passing year.

I have read past years regulatory costs, and they approach the $2 trillion mark. Here is a link to a PDF where the annual costs in 2010 were at around $1.75 trillion.

Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms

Regulations, rules and mandates are essentially a government tax. The federal, state or local government forces businesses to pay those regulatory costs, or expenditures of resources to achieve a desired outcome.

 

[Mac-7]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Dems should have called the witnesses to give evidence in the House before voting to impeach

now its too late to demand that the senate do pelosi’s job for her

 

[DrLove]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Dems should have called the witnesses to give evidence in the House before voting to impeach

now its too late to demand that the senate do pelosi’s job for her

What are you babbling about? Dems called TONS of witnesses including the idiots who claimed "absolute immunity" and didn't show up. Waiting for Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo and the rest of them in court after court after court would have taken months if not years.

We have a president who is openly asking foreign governments for dirt on his opponents and who has done NOTHING to stop Putin from meddling again. Ain't got that kind of time.

In case you hadn't heard, another court just ruled that "absolute immunity" doesn't exist. Will Moscow Mitch McTurtle call Bolton or anyone else? Doubtful unless three or more Republicans demand it.

 

[Oldstyle]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Items were redacted from the transcript as they almost always ARE when sensitive topics are being discussed between nations and leaders. What's telling about the transcript is that it contradicts what Adam Schiff was claiming took place during the phone call and backs up both President Trump and the Ukrainian President's claims that no quid pro quo took place! Schiff was shown once again to be a liar...something he's been caught at repeatedly...yet HE was the chosen to run the House investigation?

 

[Oldstyle]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Dems should have called the witnesses to give evidence in the House before voting to impeach

now its too late to demand that the senate do pelosi’s job for her

What are you babbling about? Dems called TONS of witnesses including the idiots who claimed "absolute immunity" and didn't show up. Waiting for Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo and the rest of them in court after court after court would have taken months if not years.

We have a president who is openly asking foreign governments for dirt on his opponents and who has done NOTHING to stop Putin from meddling again. Ain't got that kind of time.

In case you hadn't heard, another court just ruled that "absolute immunity" doesn't exist. Will Moscow Mitch McTurtle call Bolton or anyone else? Doubtful unless three or more Republicans demand it.

Oh, so it's now a pressing issue again? You liberals can't keep your stories straight! You claim we need to impeach Trump immediately because he's a danger to national security...then Pelosi and the Democrats go on a three week vacation without sending the articles of impeachment over to the Senate? What happened to the emergency?

Now you want to claim it's about Russian meddling in our elections? AGAIN? Funny how Russian meddling in our elections wasn't something Barack Obama did anything about (other than use it as a ruse to spy on the Trump campaign of course!) leading up to the 2016 elections but now it's a matter of life and death?

 

[DrLove]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Dems should have called the witnesses to give evidence in the House before voting to impeach

now its too late to demand that the senate do pelosi’s job for her

What are you babbling about? Dems called TONS of witnesses including the idiots who claimed "absolute immunity" and didn't show up. Waiting for Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo and the rest of them in court after court after court would have taken months if not years.

We have a president who is openly asking foreign governments for dirt on his opponents and who has done NOTHING to stop Putin from meddling again. Ain't got that kind of time.

In case you hadn't heard, another court just ruled that "absolute immunity" doesn't exist. Will Moscow Mitch McTurtle call Bolton or anyone else? Doubtful unless three or more Republicans demand it.

Oh, so it's now a pressing issue again? You liberals can't keep your stories straight! You claim we need to impeach Trump immediately because he's a danger to national security...then Pelosi and the Democrats go on a three week vacation without sending the articles of impeachment over to the Senate? What happened to the emergency?

Now you want to claim it's about Russian meddling in our elections? AGAIN? Funny how Russian meddling in our elections wasn't something Barack Obama did anything about (other than use it as a ruse to spy on the Trump campaign of course!) leading up to the 2016 elections but now it's a matter of life and death?

A trial wouldn't have happened until this month anyway. The clowns were doing what they do best - take vacations. What Pelosi did was brilliant strategy. Let Moscow Mitch and the Mango Menace stew a bit. Let more information come out. Let another favorable court decision on the phony claim of "absolute immunity" come through. Let Republican Senators hear from their constituents while on recess.

Tribune Editorial: Sen. Mitt Romney’s mission: Trial first. Verdict afterwards.

Yep, brilliant.

 

[DrLove]

Q: What do you call a trial with no witnesses and no documents where the judges are colluding with the defense and have already admitted that they wouldn't honor their oath to be fair and impartial?

A: A FAKE Trial

What do you call a trial where none of the witnesses called by the prosecution had first hand knowledge of what happened? The only people who did are Trump...who released the transcript of the call...and the President of the Ukraine who has steadfastly denied there was any quid pro quo in play!

Answer? A trial that the judge would throw out for lack of evidence before it even went to trial!

Where do you Trumpublicans (I'd call ya conservatives but ya ain't) get your news anyway? There were SEVERAL witnesses who were on these calls and smack-dab in the middle of Rudy and Donald's "drug deal".

It should also be noted that Donnie didn't release a "transcript" - We got the Billy Barr SUMMARY which stated right up top that it wasn't a verbatim transcript. It was full of ellipses (dot dot dot) ... meaning paragraphs were cut short. The "transcript" got worm-holed away on a super-secret server.

Learn something .. at SOME point - PLEASE

Items were redacted from the transcript as they almost always ARE when sensitive topics are being discussed between nations and leaders. What's telling about the transcript is that it contradicts what Adam Schiff was claiming took place during the phone call and backs up both President Trump and the Ukrainian President's claims that no quid pro quo took place! Schiff was shown once again to be a liar...something he's been caught at repeatedly...yet HE was the chosen to run the House investigation?

You're not to be taken seriously. Trump, Rudy, and Mulvaney all admitted it was a quid pro quo in broad daylight. Sondland admitted that it was a quid pro quo. Trump has openly said he'd illegally take dirt from a foreign government in a heartbeat. He even asked China to investigate the Bidens.

Sensitive my ass. Only in the sense that it exposed this president's criminality. And again, THERE WAS NO "TRANSCRIPT".