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

[Care4all]

The President took an oath, to follow the law, not abuse it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

How are people stupid enough to believe that Rudy is going to testify?

Remember when Trump said he was willing to testify? They're all talk.

Or like when Schiff face said the whistleblower was going to testify?

Did he say that? If so, I never heard it. He's been pretty clear about wanting to protect the whistleblower.

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

You don't know? It's obvious. He's not going to testify.

Like Trump, he's just talking up a big game but he's not stupid enough to put himself into a position where he perjures himself.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How are people stupid enough to believe that Rudy is going to testify?

Remember when Trump said he was willing to testify? They're all talk.

Or like when Schiff face said the whistleblower was going to testify?

Did he say that? If so, I never heard it. He's been pretty clear about wanting to protect the whistleblower.

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

Ray, she's eaten Trumps lunch several times in public and at the White House. You probably saw the famous photograph of her point her finger at him across the table, while all the Republicans on his side were looking down or away and Trump had a visibly shocked look of a kid that was being called down by the teacher. She's got her faults, but she ain't worried about Rudy.

Yea, I remember that photo op. But let me explain something to you:

The Democrats went into Defcon One mode once they learned that Trump may be onto Biden. That's the reason for this lie of an impeachment. The Biden's have something going on there in Ukraine, and the Democrats seemingly will do whatever it takes to stop any peeking into that situation.

Hunter is a drug addict, kicked out of the military; a man with no experience in the energy field, and of all the people in the world to choose from, Hunter gets this lucrative job that paid 80K a month. He didn't know the field, didn't know the country, didn't speak the language, but he mysteriously got this job his father was overseeing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or like when Schiff face said the whistleblower was going to testify?

Did he say that? If so, I never heard it. He's been pretty clear about wanting to protect the whistleblower.

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

You don't know? It's obvious. He's not going to testify.

Like Trump, he's just talking up a big game but he's not stupid enough to put himself into a position where he perjures himself.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

 

[busybee01]

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.

He is making up crap right now. He goes to Ukraine and meets with unsavory characters with links to Russia and will tell him exactly what he wants to hear. The fact that the DOJ was not interested shows how much BS it is. Barr is a Trump toady and he cannot find anything credible in Giuliani's crap. There is no coup and you are a looney tune Trump supporter.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Did he say that? If so, I never heard it. He's been pretty clear about wanting to protect the whistleblower.

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

You don't know? It's obvious. He's not going to testify.

Like Trump, he's just talking up a big game but he's not stupid enough to put himself into a position where he perjures himself.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

That makes no sense.

Once again, Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.

"Will Piglosi feel that way" doesn't connect to that statement whatsoever. Maybe you confused yourself with all the responses you're giving?

 

[Siete]

believe Rudis investigation ?

hell, he didnt need to leave NY to make up anything he wanted to-

RW's must think the rest of the world is as fukn' stupid as they are .......

NOT

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

You don't know? It's obvious. He's not going to testify.

Like Trump, he's just talking up a big game but he's not stupid enough to put himself into a position where he perjures himself.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

That makes no sense.

Once again, Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.

"Will Piglosi feel that way" doesn't connect to that statement whatsoever. Maybe you confused yourself with all the responses you're giving?

You must not understand. When Piglosi forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, it's in the Republican's hands. It's out of her control. Mitch is the boss then.

That means the case can be dismissed, Mitch can hold a vote, and Mitch can call witnesses. He can do virtually anything he wants. And yes, Mitch can call on Rudy to testify and ask what he found in Ukraine.

So now the pressure is on Piglosi. Does she start this process she can't control, or does she not and take the safe road of keeping them indefinitely?

 

[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.

He is making up crap right now. He goes to Ukraine and meets with unsavory characters with links to Russia and will tell him exactly what he wants to hear. The fact that the DOJ was not interested shows how much BS it is. Barr is a Trump toady and he cannot find anything credible in Giuliani's crap. There is no coup and you are a looney tune Trump supporter.

You have no idea what he found, what he gave to Barr, who he talked to, nothing. Like always, you are just making it up as you go along.

 

[White 6]

How are people stupid enough to believe that Rudy is going to testify?

Remember when Trump said he was willing to testify? They're all talk.

Or like when Schiff face said the whistleblower was going to testify?

Did he say that? If so, I never heard it. He's been pretty clear about wanting to protect the whistleblower.

You probably didn't read all the posts in the thread, but I said early on I don't know if Rudy will testify, whether they will let him testify, or if he's simply challenging Piglisi and Schiff. I don't think they will let him run the hearing if they have one though.

It may very well be that Rudy wants to see if he can pressure Piglosi into not forwarding the articles to the Senate in fear of what he might have.

Schiff: Trump-Ukraine whistleblower agrees to testify before Congress

Ray, she's eaten Trumps lunch several times in public and at the White House. You probably saw the famous photograph of her point her finger at him across the table, while all the Republicans on his side were looking down or away and Trump had a visibly shocked look of a kid that was being called down by the teacher. She's got her faults, but she ain't worried about Rudy.

Yea, I remember that photo op. But let me explain something to you:

The Democrats went into Defcon One mode once they learned that Trump may be onto Biden. That's the reason for this lie of an impeachment. The Biden's have something going on there in Ukraine, and the Democrats seemingly will do whatever it takes to stop any peeking into that situation.

Hunter is a drug addict, kicked out of the military; a man with no experience in the energy field, and of all the people in the world to choose from, Hunter gets this lucrative job that paid 80K a month. He didn't know the field, didn't know the country, didn't speak the language, but he mysteriously got this job his father was overseeing.

I have read enough from you guys to be pretty sure that Hunter Biden is a dick. Probably a little one, at that, but I have seen nothing that worries me in connection with it about his daddy, Uncle Joe. I definitely haven't seen anything about it that would exonerate Don. It was not anywhere near the time frame to have an effect. It is just broadcast noise for the echo chamber feedback loop. Will not matter a bit.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You don't know? It's obvious. He's not going to testify.

Like Trump, he's just talking up a big game but he's not stupid enough to put himself into a position where he perjures himself.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

That makes no sense.

Once again, Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.

"Will Piglosi feel that way" doesn't connect to that statement whatsoever. Maybe you confused yourself with all the responses you're giving?

You must not understand. When Piglosi forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, it's in the Republican's hands. It's out of her control. Mitch is the boss then.

That means the case can be dismissed, Mitch can hold a vote, and Mitch can call witnesses. He can do virtually anything he wants. And yes, Mitch can call on Rudy to testify and ask what he found in Ukraine.

So now the pressure is on Piglosi. Does she start this process she can't control, or does she not and take the safe road of keeping them indefinitely?

You're confusing me with someone else.

Me: Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.
You: Will Piglosi feel that way?

Doesn't make sense.

 

[busybee01]

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.

We also have something that we did not have. A court ruling that would compel McGrath and Bolton to testify. Bolton says he has pertinent information. There was more than enough information to impeach Trump. There is no doubt that it happened. Obstruction is a crime and abuse of power is a impeachable offense.
Executive Privilege is not in the Constitution but Congress' power to conduct oversight is in the Constitution.

It is hardly the weakest impeachment. It is the most brazen abuse of power in the modern era of politics. Even Lindsay Graham has suggested this may be Russian propaganda. Several of the so-called witnesses that Giuliani talked to have Russian ties. The Republicans do not want to hear from Giuliani. You are the commie as you apparently are okay with spreading Russian propaganda.

 

[Synthaholic]

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’s deranged. Try the case? Is he going to prosecute trump?

 

[g5000]

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.

It seems like Rudy is becoming more and more mentally ill with each passing week.

I'm actually concerned about him. I used to like the guy.

He has become so insane, I am starting to re-evaluate my past opinion of him.

 

[Synthaholic]

View attachment 297738

Your obsession with compensating for your small manhood is sick, and says everything about you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll just tell what he knows. He's been on evil right-wing talk shows telling of the stuff he dug up in Ukraine. Between him, Shokin, and what's going on in this paternity lawsuit, if it smells like garbage, it's probably garbage.

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

That makes no sense.

Once again, Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.

"Will Piglosi feel that way" doesn't connect to that statement whatsoever. Maybe you confused yourself with all the responses you're giving?

You must not understand. When Piglosi forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, it's in the Republican's hands. It's out of her control. Mitch is the boss then.

That means the case can be dismissed, Mitch can hold a vote, and Mitch can call witnesses. He can do virtually anything he wants. And yes, Mitch can call on Rudy to testify and ask what he found in Ukraine.

So now the pressure is on Piglosi. Does she start this process she can't control, or does she not and take the safe road of keeping them indefinitely?

You're confusing me with someone else.

Me: Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.
You: Will Piglosi feel that way?

Doesn't make sense.

Sure it does. Will Nancy pants take the chance that Rudy will not testify under oath?

 

[busybee01]

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.

The whistleblower is a real whistleblower. That is why he is receiving protection. Secondly we also know McConnell is even more corrupt than Trump and he has the lowest approvals of anyone in Washington.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Maybe? lol

He won't testify. He'll spout whatever shit he wants, but he won't do it under oath.

You're welcome to feel that way, but the real question is, will Piglosi feel that way? Hmmmm.

That makes no sense.

Once again, Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.

"Will Piglosi feel that way" doesn't connect to that statement whatsoever. Maybe you confused yourself with all the responses you're giving?

You must not understand. When Piglosi forwards the articles of impeachment to the Senate, it's in the Republican's hands. It's out of her control. Mitch is the boss then.

That means the case can be dismissed, Mitch can hold a vote, and Mitch can call witnesses. He can do virtually anything he wants. And yes, Mitch can call on Rudy to testify and ask what he found in Ukraine.

So now the pressure is on Piglosi. Does she start this process she can't control, or does she not and take the safe road of keeping them indefinitely?

You're confusing me with someone else.

Me: Rudy will spout whatever shit he wants. But he won't do it under oath.
You: Will Piglosi feel that way?

Doesn't make sense.

Sure it does. Will Nancy pants take the chance that Rudy will not testify under oath?

View attachment 297917

So "Will Piglosi feel that way?" is supposed to mean "Will Nancy pants take the chance that Rudy will not testify under oath?"

That wasn't implied.

 

[busybee01]

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.

That is criminal law. Clearly you have no clue what you are talking about. The whistleblower is not a spy. Whistleblower laws do allow a person to make a complaint anonymously.

It is not the weakest impeachment in history. Trump has done everything he can to obstruct this investigation. No one else would be as brazen as to get a foreign country to investigate a political rival.

 

[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.

The whistleblower is a real whistleblower. That is why he is receiving protection. Secondly we also know McConnell is even more corrupt than Trump and he has the lowest approvals of anyone in Washington.

No, he is not a real whistleblower, and no, whistleblowers are not guaranteed any protection.