Rudy: not only would I testify, I would love to try the case as well

[Paulie]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

 

[rightwinger]

Oh please Ray.
Mitch has said the following:

My job is to make Obama a one-term President
I will obstruct any Legislation from Democrats and NEVER give Obama a win.
My mind is made up, and I'll work with the WH in the Senate Trial.

Nope, Moscow Mitch is NEVER impartial.

So explain how that's not impartial. If Mitch decides just to take a vote, or throw it out with no witnesses at all, then his mind is already made up from the Schiff show. Everybody knows what a farce that was, and that this is the weakest case for impeachment in history; an impeachment with no crimes committed. The same exact thing that will happen to the next commie President with a Republican majority in the House.

Moscow Mitch takes an OATH under God and signs it, that he will be IMPARTIAL, not have his mind made up, BEFORE hearing all the evidence in the trial, before casting his vote.

Mitchy baby, needs to recuse himself, so does Lindsey Graham, who takes the same oath under God... to be impartial, see and hear all the evidence in the trial, before making their DECISION...

Moscow Mitchy said to everyone viewing FOX, that he would NOT be impartial, is working hand in hand with the defendant's (Trump's) lawyers and would deliver an acquittal FOR Trump.... that ain't impartial.... that is a Mafioso,

THE FIX IS IN, SHAM TRIAL! And this foolish man touting this, leads the whole trial.... sheesh.

Shame on all of you that accept that, and poor Trump... he'll forever be known as the President who was acquitted in a SHAM, FIX IS IN, trial. instead of really being acquitted by a fair trial in the Senate, as Clinton was... is that what you really want?

Wait a minute: what new evidence are you speaking of? We heard all the evidence during the Schiff Show. Mitch is not required to have any more evidence presented. That's his call. If your mind is already made up watching that farce, then it's made up. It's stupid to say that a person should be impartial when his mind is already made up.

It's like saying you could be impartial in the OJ trial, or impartial with the Smollett scam. Mitch is a human being, not a robot. You can't twist your thoughts in an entirely different direction.

Everything that needed to be said was already said. Mitch meeting with White House lawyers is not going to change his mind unless he was on the fence to begin with.

no ya didn't hear all the evidence, Trump illegally prevented it... and YES, as an example: a whole bunch more evidence has been revealed since the indictment... emails that the Trump admin illegally refused congress, got released on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by a non profit group came after he was impeached....

And do you think the Republican Senate will give a damn? Trump did nothing illegal. If the commies think he did, let them file a case with the courts. When DumBama refused documents using executive privilege in Fast and Furious, that's what Republicans did. They didn't impeach him.

Therefore all the evidence is heard. Mitch can make the determination to simply throw it out of the Senate, because nobody should give credibility to witch hunts. The impeachment wars are started thanks to the commies. No foreign leader will discuss anything over the phone any longer thanks to the commies. And for what? Because they disagreed with the American people and how we voted.

Like Mueller explained, Trump cannot be prosecuted while in office

However, with Republicans willing to look the other way when Trump shoots someone on Fifth Avenue, Impeachment is next to impossible

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

They can say a lot of things about Rudy, but so far, never seen him make up crap. He stated on Laura's show a month ago that his findings didn't interest the DOJ. Big surprise there. Seems the coup is alive and well.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So explain how that's not impartial. If Mitch decides just to take a vote, or throw it out with no witnesses at all, then his mind is already made up from the Schiff show. Everybody knows what a farce that was, and that this is the weakest case for impeachment in history; an impeachment with no crimes committed. The same exact thing that will happen to the next commie President with a Republican majority in the House.

Moscow Mitch takes an OATH under God and signs it, that he will be IMPARTIAL, not have his mind made up, BEFORE hearing all the evidence in the trial, before casting his vote.

Mitchy baby, needs to recuse himself, so does Lindsey Graham, who takes the same oath under God... to be impartial, see and hear all the evidence in the trial, before making their DECISION...

Moscow Mitchy said to everyone viewing FOX, that he would NOT be impartial, is working hand in hand with the defendant's (Trump's) lawyers and would deliver an acquittal FOR Trump.... that ain't impartial.... that is a Mafioso,

THE FIX IS IN, SHAM TRIAL! And this foolish man touting this, leads the whole trial.... sheesh.

Shame on all of you that accept that, and poor Trump... he'll forever be known as the President who was acquitted in a SHAM, FIX IS IN, trial. instead of really being acquitted by a fair trial in the Senate, as Clinton was... is that what you really want?

Wait a minute: what new evidence are you speaking of? We heard all the evidence during the Schiff Show. Mitch is not required to have any more evidence presented. That's his call. If your mind is already made up watching that farce, then it's made up. It's stupid to say that a person should be impartial when his mind is already made up.

It's like saying you could be impartial in the OJ trial, or impartial with the Smollett scam. Mitch is a human being, not a robot. You can't twist your thoughts in an entirely different direction.

Everything that needed to be said was already said. Mitch meeting with White House lawyers is not going to change his mind unless he was on the fence to begin with.

no ya didn't hear all the evidence, Trump illegally prevented it... and YES, as an example: a whole bunch more evidence has been revealed since the indictment... emails that the Trump admin illegally refused congress, got released on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by a non profit group came after he was impeached....

And do you think the Republican Senate will give a damn? Trump did nothing illegal. If the commies think he did, let them file a case with the courts. When DumBama refused documents using executive privilege in Fast and Furious, that's what Republicans did. They didn't impeach him.

Therefore all the evidence is heard. Mitch can make the determination to simply throw it out of the Senate, because nobody should give credibility to witch hunts. The impeachment wars are started thanks to the commies. No foreign leader will discuss anything over the phone any longer thanks to the commies. And for what? Because they disagreed with the American people and how we voted.

But the ONLY WAY to address a President's criminal wrong doings or constitutional and/or presidential abuses,

IS through IMPEACHMENT and removal, Ray...

THEN, the justice system can indict him/or her for any of their crimes, and he/she gets their day in court, due process.

Do you think President Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors, and do not want a full trial because you think 66 Senators would vote to remove him if all the evidence was allowed and witnesses heard, by all the Senators??

WHY are you fighting so hard to shut this down, with some kind of phony process that spells in CAPS,

THE FIX IS IN/ SHAM???

Do you think the executive branch should have more power than Congress or something and be able to roughshod them? Instead of them being equal, as our constitution dictates? Congress is the ONLY branch of our govt, that represents us.... represents 'we the people', why would you so willingly, give up your only power in our gvt? THAT is what you would be doing.... by allowing all of his obstruction.

Again, what else needs to be heard? The commies spent weeks listening to hearsay evidence, and impeached Trump on that. Executive privilege needs to be determined by the courts if in question--not the Democrat party.

Furthermore the Senate didn't call witnesses either in the Clinton case. And if there are criminal wrongdoings, why wasn't a crime indicated in the impeachment?

You heard everything, I heard everything, and the Senators heard everything. Seemingly, Mitch thinks that a vote would not stand a chance at passing, and it's up to him how they will proceed from this point on. Personally, I would love to hear from witnesses like Rudy, the informant, and the whistleblower. Besides being the weakest impeachment in history, it's also the most covered up by the commies.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not if he doesn't have anything to hide. It's really not up to him anyway. It's up to the Trump team on what takes place next, if it takes place at all. Nancy might be afraid of what might come next, and sit on the articles indefinitely.

To suggest that anyone close to Trump will testify is laughable

We will see ten years of tax returns first

Yes you will, like we seen the testimony from the whistleblower.

What is the whistleblower going to tell you that is not in his written complaint that has been independently investigated?

Demanding the whistleblower be exposed is just harassment

Not at all. I would like the non-whistleblower to disclose who gave him the information and for what reason? Why didn't the informer approach Schiff himself? Who wrote the complaint? Because anybody that read it clearly stated it was written by a lawyer, and not him or her. Who did he first approach with this information? Did he ever have conversations or meetings with Schiff Face, who claimed not to know who the WB was yet alone conspire with him.

And I'm sure there are other things I didn't think of that should be known.

Someday, he'll probably write a book. There is nothing he can tell the Senate that will weigh on Trumps innocence or guilt as people who sat in on the call could not tell better, but that ain't happening.

It could happen if Mitch wants that testimony. Two things here: first, the whistleblower is not a real whistleblower at all. That's been determined already. Secondly, even if he or she was, there are no protections of anonymity for a whistleblower meaning that Schiff Face cannot stop Mitch from bringing that person to the Senate to testify.

 

[RealDave]

Why did Trump send his personal attorney do do government business? Or was Trump more interested in digging up dirt on his political opponent.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why would he testify to a committee totally biased; a committee that stopped others from talking? I say let him testify to a more fair panel like the Senate.

He was a former prosecutor
In what world does the accused get to pick who can ask him questions.

Either way...I say Rudy is too smart to testify under oath

Not if he doesn't have anything to hide. It's really not up to him anyway. It's up to the Trump team on what takes place next, if it takes place at all. Nancy might be afraid of what might come next, and sit on the articles indefinitely.

To suggest that anyone close to Trump will testify is laughable

We will see ten years of tax returns first

Yes you will, like we seen the testimony from the whistleblower.

The whistleblower's testimony is not needed. Given that Trump has threatened him, he clearly is in danger. He apparently is receiving protection against threats against him.

The only threat here is to Schiff. He doesn't want this person to testify to protect him.

 

[Paulie]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

They can say a lot of things about Rudy, but so far, never seen him make up crap. He stated on Laura's show a month ago that his findings didn't interest the DOJ. Big surprise there. Seems the coup is alive and well.

Didn’t interest them WHEN? can you link me to him saying this?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

They can say a lot of things about Rudy, but so far, never seen him make up crap. He stated on Laura's show a month ago that his findings didn't interest the DOJ. Big surprise there. Seems the coup is alive and well.

Didn’t interest them WHEN? can you link me to him saying this?

Not really because I don't have the exact date. Makes it hard to Google when you don't have that. If it was last night or the night before, that makes it much easier.

 

[White 6]

To suggest that anyone close to Trump will testify is laughable

We will see ten years of tax returns first

Yes you will, like we seen the testimony from the whistleblower.

What is the whistleblower going to tell you that is not in his written complaint that has been independently investigated?

Demanding the whistleblower be exposed is just harassment

Not at all. I would like the non-whistleblower to disclose who gave him the information and for what reason? Why didn't the informer approach Schiff himself? Who wrote the complaint? Because anybody that read it clearly stated it was written by a lawyer, and not him or her. Who did he first approach with this information? Did he ever have conversations or meetings with Schiff Face, who claimed not to know who the WB was yet alone conspire with him.

And I'm sure there are other things I didn't think of that should be known.

Someday, he'll probably write a book. There is nothing he can tell the Senate that will weigh on Trumps innocence or guilt as people who sat in on the call could not tell better, but that ain't happening.

It could happen if Mitch wants that testimony. Two things here: first, the whistleblower is not a real whistleblower at all. That's been determined already. Secondly, even if he or she was, there are no protections of anonymity for a whistleblower meaning that Schiff Face cannot stop Mitch from bringing that person to the Senate to testify.

I agree that they probably could call "the whistle blower", but it would be a pointless wasted of time, no longer relevant or effective, like trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube before sitting down in the dentist's chair.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes you will, like we seen the testimony from the whistleblower.

What is the whistleblower going to tell you that is not in his written complaint that has been independently investigated?

Demanding the whistleblower be exposed is just harassment

Not at all. I would like the non-whistleblower to disclose who gave him the information and for what reason? Why didn't the informer approach Schiff himself? Who wrote the complaint? Because anybody that read it clearly stated it was written by a lawyer, and not him or her. Who did he first approach with this information? Did he ever have conversations or meetings with Schiff Face, who claimed not to know who the WB was yet alone conspire with him.

And I'm sure there are other things I didn't think of that should be known.

Someday, he'll probably write a book. There is nothing he can tell the Senate that will weigh on Trumps innocence or guilt as people who sat in on the call could not tell better, but that ain't happening.

It could happen if Mitch wants that testimony. Two things here: first, the whistleblower is not a real whistleblower at all. That's been determined already. Secondly, even if he or she was, there are no protections of anonymity for a whistleblower meaning that Schiff Face cannot stop Mitch from bringing that person to the Senate to testify.

I agree that they probably could call "the whistle blower", but it would be a pointless wasted of time, no longer relevant or effective, like trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube before sitting down in the dentist's chair.

I know we are dealing with Democrats, but we used to live by the code of the accused being able to face his accuser. This is part of the cabal that's been going on since DumBama was in the White House. They are all in cahoots with each other. The person that gave the so-called whistleblower this information is a spy for the Democrats, and it needs to be learned who that is and why they did it. Same for the person they claim to be the whistleblower.

So what we have here is not only the weakest case for impeachment in history; one without a crime, but also the only impeachment where the accuser remained anonymous the entire time. Such a serious event should have all cards face up on the table, not this clandestine operation to undermine a sitting US President.

If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd see liberals protesting and possible riots in every city.

 

[Care4all]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

The GOVERNMENT has to have probable cause to investigate Biden's and a Judge has to approve....And the presidents impeachment trial

IS NOT ABOUT THE BIDEN'S or anything they did....And YOU can NOT go after them in TRUMPs impeachment trial, impeachment is NOT a criminal trial, it would be unconstitutional.

If the Biden's committed all f these crimes that you falsely claim, then the DOJ goes after them, giving them their constitutional rights, they will be prosecuted in a court of law, with their own defense team of lawyers to defend them.


YOU KNOW THAT...

Biden's can't help Trump get out of the charges against him, unless he has witnesses and evidence for his own defense.... accusing someone else of a different crime in his own impeachment is not a defense for his own crimes.

It's completely lawless and another abuse of govt power.

 

[rightwinger]

I would love to see Rudy present some of his crazy conspiracy theories to Congress under oath

 

[White 6]

What is the whistleblower going to tell you that is not in his written complaint that has been independently investigated?

Demanding the whistleblower be exposed is just harassment

Not at all. I would like the non-whistleblower to disclose who gave him the information and for what reason? Why didn't the informer approach Schiff himself? Who wrote the complaint? Because anybody that read it clearly stated it was written by a lawyer, and not him or her. Who did he first approach with this information? Did he ever have conversations or meetings with Schiff Face, who claimed not to know who the WB was yet alone conspire with him.

And I'm sure there are other things I didn't think of that should be known.

Someday, he'll probably write a book. There is nothing he can tell the Senate that will weigh on Trumps innocence or guilt as people who sat in on the call could not tell better, but that ain't happening.

It could happen if Mitch wants that testimony. Two things here: first, the whistleblower is not a real whistleblower at all. That's been determined already. Secondly, even if he or she was, there are no protections of anonymity for a whistleblower meaning that Schiff Face cannot stop Mitch from bringing that person to the Senate to testify.

I agree that they probably could call "the whistle blower", but it would be a pointless wasted of time, no longer relevant or effective, like trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube before sitting down in the dentist's chair.

I know we are dealing with Democrats, but we used to live by the code of the accused being able to face his accuser. This is part of the cabal that's been going on since DumBama was in the White House. They are all in cahoots with each other. The person that gave the so-called whistleblower this information is a spy for the Democrats, and it needs to be learned who that is and why they did it. Same for the person they claim to be the whistleblower.

So what we have here is not only the weakest case for impeachment in history; one without a crime, but also the only impeachment where the accuser remained anonymous the entire time. Such a serious event should have all cards face up on the table, not this clandestine operation to undermine a sitting US President.

If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd see liberals protesting and possible riots in every city.

You are confusing "whistle blower" with accuser. He only blew the whistle, so others could know something was up. He lost significance very shortly after he put through the paperwork properly through chain of responsibility, making sure it got to people who would be empowered to look into it, without sweeping it under the rug.

 

[Paulie]

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, said he would be willing to testify in a Senate impeachment trial if asked and would "love to try the case" if given the opportunity.

"I would testify. I would do demonstrations. I'd give lectures. I'd give summations," Giuliani said Tuesday night when asked about the possibility during a New Year's Eve celebration at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

"Or, I'd do what I do best: I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case," he said. "I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway."

The former prosecutor said it had been 30 years since he tried such a case, "but let's see if I can still do it."

Trump impeachment: Rudy Giuliani willing to testify in Senate trial

Sounds like a pretty confident guy. Is he bluffing? Is he calling ass on Piglosi to go ahead and send the articles to the Senate and see what happens?

Without a doubt, nobody would let Rudy try the case, but his statement suggests he would be working very closely with Trump's defense. In light of Hunter's problems involving the paternity suit, criminal investigations of money laundering that include Burisma, and his tax lien,it certainly is looking like team Trump may have something on the Biden's.

He has every bit of information against the dems in Ukraine. ALL OF IT. And it’s extremely damning. The dems are done whether Rudy tries the case or not.

The GOVERNMENT has to have probable cause to investigate Biden's and a Judge has to approve....And the presidents impeachment trial

IS NOT ABOUT THE BIDEN'S or anything they did....And YOU can NOT go after them in TRUMPs impeachment trial, impeachment is NOT a criminal trial, it would be unconstitutional.

If the Biden's committed all f these crimes that you falsely claim, then the DOJ goes after them, giving them their constitutional rights, they will be prosecuted in a court of law, with their own defense team of lawyers to defend them.


YOU KNOW THAT...

Biden's can't help Trump get out of the charges against him, unless he has witnesses and evidence for his own defense.... accusing someone else of a different crime in his own impeachment is not a defense for his own crimes.

It's completely lawless and another abuse of govt power.

You have absolutely no clue how the legal process works in this country, which is something that seems common among the left. When you’re accused of a crime you have the absolute right to face your accuser and provide whatever evidence you need to defend your position. If that means calling Biden to testify, so be it. Dems say trump investigated Biden for nothing more than to damage his reputation politically. Trump says he did it to investigate corruption. If trump can prove corruption then the case is closed. How else does the defendant prove their case other than subpoenaing witnesses and evidence?

How is it possible that you people are this clueless to the process of justice in this country?

 

[Care4all]

The whole reason for any and all trials against someone in court, is to discern the TRUTH.

The American people deserves to know the truth.

 

[Paulie]

The burden of proof isn’t even on the defendant it’s on the accuser. All trump has to do is show corruption and the case is closed. If the dems have the proof all they need to do is proceed to the senate and provide the proof.

What are you democrats so afraid of?

 

[Paulie]

The whole reason for any and all trials against someone in court, is to discern the TRUTH.

The American people deserves to know the truth.

Exactly. So there should be no problem with the defense calling witnesses.

 

[Care4all]

The whole reason for any and all trials against someone in court, is to discern the TRUTH.

The American people deserves to know the truth.

 

[Paulie]

Now you’re going to repeat yourself