Why the need for Senate impeachment witnesses is invalid.

[colfax_m]

There is no law which says any of this. You're making this up.

The Constitution gives Impeachment Power to THE HOUSE, not to Crazy Nancy, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry. They sent the subpoenas before the House vote, so the the Co-Equal Branch, rejected them. They didn't assert privilege, they didn't have to, and they explained this all to the rather dumb House Leadership at the time.

As for the oft repeated claim that this is the First Senate Trial without additional witnesses, that too is yet another of the lying House Manager's and the Fake News Media's lies.

One more time: circa 1797-1799, Senator Blount was impeached by the House. In the Senate impeachment trial proceedings, there were ZERO witnesses.

Crazed Democrats mounted a concerted effort to make an entirely new system of justice for one person. Trump. And the effort failed.

We are One People, with One Law, applied without Favor​

Congressional committees have standing authority to subpoena information...

And the Administration has standing authority to ignore them, as a co-equal branch. That is, they are not compulsory.

JFK - would not provide names of those in who edited speeches to the a Senate Panel. Also refused to allow General Taylor to tesify before Congress in the Bay of Pigs affair.

LBJ - Three times Administration officials refused to provide Congress with information about Administrative Actions.

Nixon - directed Attorney General to withhold FBI reports from a congressional panel and directed the Secretary of State to withhold information from Congress about military assistance programs

Papa Bush - directed Sec. of Defense to not comply with congressional subpoena for document related to costs and cancellation of Navy aircraft program

Clinton - asserted privilege before the congressional committee over a FBI-DEA drug enforcement memo and before congressional committee over Haiti/political assassinations documents and claimed privilege in response to subpoenas by congressional
committee investigating Armed Forces of National Liberation clemency

Dubya - asserted privilege in response to


Hcongressional subpoenas for documents about regulations for air quality standards and communications about greenhouse gas emissions in California and in response to congressional subpoena for documents related to investigation into revelation of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as CIA operative

Obama - in response to congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious - this claim is still being test in the courts.

Many other times, settlements were reached or the courts ruled against them. Never were they "impeached" over a made up crime of "obstruction of Congress"

... There is no need to pass legislation to grant them that ability....

You can't alter the balance of power with majority by one of the branches, that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which requires the agreement of 75%of the State Legislatures.

... The House does has impeachment power. That occurred when they voted for impeachment.

Indeed, but they didn't issue any subpoenas after that. Said they were in too big of a hurry to do the job right, and then sat on the articles for nearly a month rather than giving them to the Senate.

You’re misreading. The House is given power to impeach. The actual vote on the articles of impeachment was December 18th.

The house has standing authority to subpoena the president. Other branches have given actual legal arguments for defying subpoenas, such as executive privilege. Trump’s arguments are specious. No administration has ever refused every single request and subpoena. That’s the new standard. No administration ever will feel the need to comply with any request or subpoena from Congress without going through a many year legal battle.

Trump is breaking the government.

He has certainly broken mental midget partisan hacks like you.
That's a good thing.

He’s broken nothing in me other than my faith in the Republican Party. Is now driven completely by craven low lives.

 

[Zorro!]

The Constitution gives Impeachment Power to THE HOUSE, not to Crazy Nancy, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry. They sent the subpoenas before the House vote, so the the Co-Equal Branch, rejected them. They didn't assert privilege, they didn't have to, and they explained this all to the rather dumb House Leadership at the time.

As for the oft repeated claim that this is the First Senate Trial without additional witnesses, that too is yet another of the lying House Manager's and the Fake News Media's lies.

One more time: circa 1797-1799, Senator Blount was impeached by the House. In the Senate impeachment trial proceedings, there were ZERO witnesses.

Crazed Democrats mounted a concerted effort to make an entirely new system of justice for one person. Trump. And the effort failed.

We are One People, with One Law, applied without Favor​

Congressional committees have standing authority to subpoena information...

And the Administration has standing authority to ignore them, as a co-equal branch. That is, they are not compulsory.

JFK - would not provide names of those in who edited speeches to the a Senate Panel. Also refused to allow General Taylor to tesify before Congress in the Bay of Pigs affair.

LBJ - Three times Administration officials refused to provide Congress with information about Administrative Actions.

Nixon - directed Attorney General to withhold FBI reports from a congressional panel and directed the Secretary of State to withhold information from Congress about military assistance programs

Papa Bush - directed Sec. of Defense to not comply with congressional subpoena for document related to costs and cancellation of Navy aircraft program

Clinton - asserted privilege before the congressional committee over a FBI-DEA drug enforcement memo and before congressional committee over Haiti/political assassinations documents and claimed privilege in response to subpoenas by congressional
committee investigating Armed Forces of National Liberation clemency

Dubya - asserted privilege in response to


Hcongressional subpoenas for documents about regulations for air quality standards and communications about greenhouse gas emissions in California and in response to congressional subpoena for documents related to investigation into revelation of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as CIA operative

Obama - in response to congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious - this claim is still being test in the courts.

Many other times, settlements were reached or the courts ruled against them. Never were they "impeached" over a made up crime of "obstruction of Congress"

... There is no need to pass legislation to grant them that ability....

You can't alter the balance of power with majority by one of the branches, that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which requires the agreement of 75%of the State Legislatures.

... The House does has impeachment power. That occurred when they voted for impeachment.

Indeed, but they didn't issue any subpoenas after that. Said they were in too big of a hurry to do the job right, and then sat on the articles for nearly a month rather than giving them to the Senate.

You’re misreading. The House is given power to impeach. The actual vote on the articles of impeachment was December 18th.

The house has standing authority to subpoena the president. Other branches have given actual legal arguments for defying subpoenas, such as executive privilege. Trump’s arguments are specious. No administration has ever refused every single request and subpoena. That’s the new standard. No administration ever will feel the need to comply with any request or subpoena from Congress without going through a many year legal battle.

Trump is breaking the government.

He has certainly broken mental midget partisan hacks like you.
That's a good thing.

He’s broken nothing in me other than my faith in the Republican Party. Is now driven completely by craven low lives.

Calm down, hysterical ninnies.

• No, we are not a monarchy now. No, the constitution is not in shambles. No, the President is not a dictator. No, the confederacy is not complicit in protecting the President.

• Y’all are a bunch of insane clowns is what y’all are. This hysteria is just too much and too insane.

• The GOP needs to be burned down because it refused to toss the guy you didn’t vote for?

• The constitution no longer has any weight, merit, or meaning because you lost a political fight?

• Stop being stupid.

These folks are nothing if not theatrical!​

 

[Zorro!]

There is no law which says any of this. You're making this up.

The Constitution gives Impeachment Power to THE HOUSE, not to Crazy Nancy, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry. They sent the subpoenas before the House vote, so the the Co-Equal Branch, rejected them. They didn't assert privilege, they didn't have to, and they explained this all to the rather dumb House Leadership at the time.

As for the oft repeated claim that this is the First Senate Trial without additional witnesses, that too is yet another of the lying House Manager's and the Fake News Media's lies.

One more time: circa 1797-1799, Senator Blount was impeached by the House. In the Senate impeachment trial proceedings, there were ZERO witnesses.

Crazed Democrats mounted a concerted effort to make an entirely new system of justice for one person. Trump. And the effort failed.

We are One People, with One Law, applied without Favor​

Congressional committees have standing authority to subpoena information...

And the Administration has standing authority to ignore them, as a co-equal branch. That is, they are not compulsory.

JFK - would not provide names of those in who edited speeches to the a Senate Panel. Also refused to allow General Taylor to tesify before Congress in the Bay of Pigs affair.

LBJ - Three times Administration officials refused to provide Congress with information about Administrative Actions.

Nixon - directed Attorney General to withhold FBI reports from a congressional panel and directed the Secretary of State to withhold information from Congress about military assistance programs

Papa Bush - directed Sec. of Defense to not comply with congressional subpoena for document related to costs and cancellation of Navy aircraft program

Clinton - asserted privilege before the congressional committee over a FBI-DEA drug enforcement memo and before congressional committee over Haiti/political assassinations documents and claimed privilege in response to subpoenas by congressional
committee investigating Armed Forces of National Liberation clemency

Dubya - asserted privilege in response to


Hcongressional subpoenas for documents about regulations for air quality standards and communications about greenhouse gas emissions in California and in response to congressional subpoena for documents related to investigation into revelation of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as CIA operative

Obama - in response to congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious - this claim is still being test in the courts.

Many other times, settlements were reached or the courts ruled against them. Never were they "impeached" over a made up crime of "obstruction of Congress"

... There is no need to pass legislation to grant them that ability....

You can't alter the balance of power with majority by one of the branches, that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which requires the agreement of 75%of the State Legislatures.

... The House does has impeachment power. That occurred when they voted for impeachment.

Indeed, but they didn't issue any subpoenas after that. Said they were in too big of a hurry to do the job right, and then sat on the articles for nearly a month rather than giving them to the Senate.

You’re misreading. The House is given power to impeach. The actual vote on the articles of impeachment was December 18th.

The house has standing authority to subpoena the president. Other branches have given actual legal arguments for defying subpoenas, such as executive privilege. Trump’s arguments are specious. No administration has ever refused every single request and subpoena. That’s the new standard. No administration ever will feel the need to comply with any request or subpoena from Congress without going through a many year legal battle.

Trump is breaking the government.

He has certainly broken mental midget partisan hacks like you.
That's a good thing.

Yup. Trump is certainly ascendant.

How Alex P. Keaton Predicted The New Conservative Movement.

The first openly Republican or conservative fictional character they can remember is Alex P. Keaton from the NBC sitcom “Family Ties.” The role launched Michael J. Fox’s career, but it did something else, too: in many ways, Alex Keaton predicted the conservative movement that we see emerging today. Energetic and aggressive, Keaton was an unapologetic conservative character at a time conservatism was in many ways an apologetic underdog.​

It is important to note that Alex P. Keaton was born in 1965, the very first year of Generation X. The comic tension he provided was his rejection of the 1960s hippie ethos of his progressive parents. He is arguably the first manifestation of something that is now a staple of our society, the countercultural conservative. Conservatism as counter culture has reached an apex in the age of Trump. But its seeds can be seen in this old NBC sitcom. Keaton might as well have said, “Okay, Boomer.”​

Heh.

 

[colfax_m]

Congressional committees have standing authority to subpoena information...

And the Administration has standing authority to ignore them, as a co-equal branch. That is, they are not compulsory.

JFK - would not provide names of those in who edited speeches to the a Senate Panel. Also refused to allow General Taylor to tesify before Congress in the Bay of Pigs affair.

LBJ - Three times Administration officials refused to provide Congress with information about Administrative Actions.

Nixon - directed Attorney General to withhold FBI reports from a congressional panel and directed the Secretary of State to withhold information from Congress about military assistance programs

Papa Bush - directed Sec. of Defense to not comply with congressional subpoena for document related to costs and cancellation of Navy aircraft program

Clinton - asserted privilege before the congressional committee over a FBI-DEA drug enforcement memo and before congressional committee over Haiti/political assassinations documents and claimed privilege in response to subpoenas by congressional
committee investigating Armed Forces of National Liberation clemency

Dubya - asserted privilege in response to


Hcongressional subpoenas for documents about regulations for air quality standards and communications about greenhouse gas emissions in California and in response to congressional subpoena for documents related to investigation into revelation of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as CIA operative

Obama - in response to congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious - this claim is still being test in the courts.

Many other times, settlements were reached or the courts ruled against them. Never were they "impeached" over a made up crime of "obstruction of Congress"

... There is no need to pass legislation to grant them that ability....

You can't alter the balance of power with majority by one of the branches, that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which requires the agreement of 75%of the State Legislatures.

... The House does has impeachment power. That occurred when they voted for impeachment.

Indeed, but they didn't issue any subpoenas after that. Said they were in too big of a hurry to do the job right, and then sat on the articles for nearly a month rather than giving them to the Senate.

You’re misreading. The House is given power to impeach. The actual vote on the articles of impeachment was December 18th.

The house has standing authority to subpoena the president. Other branches have given actual legal arguments for defying subpoenas, such as executive privilege. Trump’s arguments are specious. No administration has ever refused every single request and subpoena. That’s the new standard. No administration ever will feel the need to comply with any request or subpoena from Congress without going through a many year legal battle.

Trump is breaking the government.

He has certainly broken mental midget partisan hacks like you.
That's a good thing.

He’s broken nothing in me other than my faith in the Republican Party. Is now driven completely by craven low lives.

Calm down, hysterical ninnies.

• No, we are not a monarchy now. No, the constitution is not in shambles. No, the President is not a dictator. No, the confederacy is not complicit in protecting the President.

• Y’all are a bunch of insane clowns is what y’all are. This hysteria is just too much and too insane.

• The GOP needs to be burned down because it refused to toss the guy you didn’t vote for?

• The constitution no longer has any weight, merit, or meaning because you lost a political fight?

• Stop being stupid.

These folks are nothing if not theatrical!​

I think what is the worst and most long lasting effect of this administration is the abandonment of any attempt at being truthful. Trump doesn’t just lie. Everyone’s lied about some things. Trump makes nearly no attempt to be honest about anything and when confronted with incontrovertible evidence of his lies, he still lies.

and his supporters are okay with it. In fact, an alarming number claim he’s never lied.

It’s the abandonment of truth that concerns me the most.

There’s a good book called Nothing is true and everything is possible. It talks about how this happened in Russia.

 

[Zorro!]

And the Administration has standing authority to ignore them, as a co-equal branch. That is, they are not compulsory.

JFK - would not provide names of those in who edited speeches to the a Senate Panel. Also refused to allow General Taylor to tesify before Congress in the Bay of Pigs affair.

LBJ - Three times Administration officials refused to provide Congress with information about Administrative Actions.

Nixon - directed Attorney General to withhold FBI reports from a congressional panel and directed the Secretary of State to withhold information from Congress about military assistance programs

Papa Bush - directed Sec. of Defense to not comply with congressional subpoena for document related to costs and cancellation of Navy aircraft program

Clinton - asserted privilege before the congressional committee over a FBI-DEA drug enforcement memo and before congressional committee over Haiti/political assassinations documents and claimed privilege in response to subpoenas by congressional
committee investigating Armed Forces of National Liberation clemency

Dubya - asserted privilege in response to


Hcongressional subpoenas for documents about regulations for air quality standards and communications about greenhouse gas emissions in California and in response to congressional subpoena for documents related to investigation into revelation of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as CIA operative

Obama - in response to congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious - this claim is still being test in the courts.

Many other times, settlements were reached or the courts ruled against them. Never were they "impeached" over a made up crime of "obstruction of Congress"
You can't alter the balance of power with majority by one of the branches, that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which requires the agreement of 75%of the State Legislatures.
Indeed, but they didn't issue any subpoenas after that. Said they were in too big of a hurry to do the job right, and then sat on the articles for nearly a month rather than giving them to the Senate.

You’re misreading. The House is given power to impeach. The actual vote on the articles of impeachment was December 18th.

The house has standing authority to subpoena the president. Other branches have given actual legal arguments for defying subpoenas, such as executive privilege. Trump’s arguments are specious. No administration has ever refused every single request and subpoena. That’s the new standard. No administration ever will feel the need to comply with any request or subpoena from Congress without going through a many year legal battle.

Trump is breaking the government.

He has certainly broken mental midget partisan hacks like you.
That's a good thing.

He’s broken nothing in me other than my faith in the Republican Party. Is now driven completely by craven low lives.

Calm down, hysterical ninnies.

• No, we are not a monarchy now. No, the constitution is not in shambles. No, the President is not a dictator. No, the confederacy is not complicit in protecting the President.

• Y’all are a bunch of insane clowns is what y’all are. This hysteria is just too much and too insane.

• The GOP needs to be burned down because it refused to toss the guy you didn’t vote for?

• The constitution no longer has any weight, merit, or meaning because you lost a political fight?

• Stop being stupid.

These folks are nothing if not theatrical!​

I think what is the worst and most long lasting effect of this administration is the abandonment of any attempt at being truthful. Trump doesn’t just lie. Everyone’s lied about some things. Trump makes nearly no attempt to be honest about anything and when confronted with incontrovertible evidence of his lies, he still lies.

and his supporters are okay with it. In fact, an alarming number claim he’s never lied.

It’s the abandonment of truth that concerns me the most.

There’s a good book called Nothing is true and everything is possible. It talks about how this happened in Russia.

That's just rich. Democrats, antiTrumpers and the Fake News Media direct a 4 year blizzard of lies at him, they fail, and now they lament that "Truth" is the casualty? No. Your lies are the casualty which is how it should be.

 

[healthmyths]

The House is suppose to present the facts of the impeachment.
Why didn't they call witnesses for Trump in the House?
Simple answer and not many people are given the FACTS which is the fault of the GOP especially.
The Executive branch has a RIGHT to take the House witness requests to SCOTUS.
But the Democrats didn't want to have this go to SCOTUS for one reason. Time.
The Democrats wanted to speed up the impeachment process and since they had the majority in the house
there was no need.
So now the Senate does NOT need any more witnesses.

The evidence in their file sent to the Senate contained all the evidence they needed to find Trump guilty for impeachment. Remember Nancy's "Forever Impeached?" So why now the need to bring forth more witnesses? Are the Dems admitting their case is full of holes?

The Dems were stonewalled by a corrupt POTUS. Even his lawyer admits as much.

Alan Dershowitz called Trump corrupt in 2016 and said he could be corrupt as President - CNNPolitics

Right "stonewalled" by the Constitution!
So asking the Constitutionally based 3rd branch (Judicial) as an non-political...i.e. no party affiliation associated with SCOTUS justices,
to rule on the constitutionality of the subpoenas while time-consuming was NOT accepted by the House impeachment leadership.

“House Democrats will forgo using the federal courts to try to compel testimony from recalcitrant witnesses in their impeachment inquiry.”
Democrats Retreat From Subpoenas To Schedule Impeachment Vote

 

[BlindBoo]

Trump has not claimed executive privilege on anything regarding the impeachment inquiry yet, even for the people that were subpoenaed. The Trump administration could drag this out in court for years. Once this Congress ends next Jan, the subpoena's disappear.

Trump's lawyers are alleging that the court case could be settled by then, but Trump's other lawyers are in court delaying these rulings to the greatest degree possible.

This is not a way for a country to be run.

Part of the problem lies in the fact that Pelosi never actually held a vote on wether to begin impeachment proceedings before they actually began.

What is that a problem? Standing House committees have subpoena power. Subpoenas were ignored even after the vote was held.

Funny how laws actually get in the way. There was supposed to be a vote before the impeachment process takes place.
Anyone can ignore a subpoena from the house especially if proper procedure is not followed. There is that damn law in the way again.

If the House was really serious they could actually follow the law. The problem is you don't follow the law expect to lose.

There is no law which says any of this. You're making this up.

The Constitution gives Impeachment Power to THE HOUSE, not to Crazy Nancy, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry. They sent the subpoenas before the House vote, so the Co-Equal Branch, rejected them. They didn't assert privilege, they didn't have to, and they explained this all to the rather dumb House Leadership at the time.

As for the oft repeated claim that this is the First Senate Trial without additional witnesses, that too is yet another of the lying House Manager's and the Fake News Media's lies.

One more time: circa 1797-1799, Senator Blount was impeached by the House. In the Senate impeachment trial proceedings, there were ZERO witnesses.

Crazed Democrats mounted a concerted effort to make an entirely new system of justice for one person. Trump. And the effort failed.

We are One People, with One Law, applied without Favor​

Congress has Subpoena power without naming an Impeachment inquiry. Trumpublicans are trying to usher in the era of the Unitary Executive. Until they lose of course, then they will demand accountability.

 

[Crepitus]

The House is suppose to present the facts of the impeachment.
Why didn't they call witnesses for Trump in the House?
Simple answer and not many people are given the FACTS which is the fault of the GOP especially.
The Executive branch has a RIGHT to take the House witness requests to SCOTUS.
But the Democrats didn't want to have this go to SCOTUS for one reason. Time.
The Democrats wanted to speed up the impeachment process and since they had the majority in the house
there was no need.
So now the Senate does NOT need any more witnesses.

It's doesn't matter how many stupid, contrived, bulkshit, justifications you come up with they are still just stupid, contrived, bullshit, justifications.

Nothing more.

 

[healthmyths]

The House is suppose to present the facts of the impeachment.
Why didn't they call witnesses for Trump in the House?
Simple answer and not many people are given the FACTS which is the fault of the GOP especially.
The Executive branch has a RIGHT to take the House witness requests to SCOTUS.
But the Democrats didn't want to have this go to SCOTUS for one reason. Time.
The Democrats wanted to speed up the impeachment process and since they had the majority in the house
there was no need.
So now the Senate does NOT need any more witnesses.

It's doesn't matter how many stupid, contrived, bulkshit, justifications you come up with they are still just stupid, contrived, bullshit, justifications.

Nothing more.

And so dumb stupid sheep like you is what the Constitution was designed to protect, i.e. if the House of Representatives takes more power than
assigned by the constitution, MOST if not all Democrats/GOP intelligent people recognize that SCOTUS as an independent 3rd party of the 3 branches and that is what the idiot House Managers ignored! Just because you are dumb regarding the Constitution stating the 3 branches are co-equal.

Supreme Court decisions are often referred to as “settled law”, but the judicial branch neither makes nor determines law.
Their job is to look at the facts at hand and decide BASED on the Constitution and the law whose side is right.
Do We Have Three Co-Equal Branches of Government?

But Schiff, et.al. didn't want SCOTUS to be involved... took too much time!

 

[Zorro!]

The House is suppose to present the facts of the impeachment.
Why didn't they call witnesses for Trump in the House?
Simple answer and not many people are given the FACTS which is the fault of the GOP especially.
The Executive branch has a RIGHT to take the House witness requests to SCOTUS.
But the Democrats didn't want to have this go to SCOTUS for one reason. Time.
The Democrats wanted to speed up the impeachment process and since they had the majority in the house
there was no need.
So now the Senate does NOT need any more witnesses.

The evidence in their file sent to the Senate contained all the evidence they needed to find Trump guilty for impeachment. Remember Nancy's "Forever Impeached?" So why now the need to bring forth more witnesses? Are the Dems admitting their case is full of holes?

The Dems were stonewalled by a corrupt POTUS. Even his lawyer admits as much.

Alan Dershowitz called Trump corrupt in 2016 and said he could be corrupt as President - CNNPolitics

Right "stonewalled" by the Constitution!
So asking the Constitutionally based 3rd branch (Judicial) as an non-political...i.e. no party affiliation associated with SCOTUS justices,
to rule on the constitutionality of the subpoenas while time-consuming was NOT accepted by the House impeachment leadership.

“House Democrats will forgo using the federal courts to try to compel testimony from recalcitrant witnesses in their impeachment inquiry.”
Democrats Retreat From Subpoenas To Schedule Impeachment Vote

Yup. They dishonored the pooch. They knew they didn't have a case, and rather than dropping it pushed forward with a loser, screaming that it was everyone else's fault that they were losing.

House Democrats choose certain failure. There was no reason to expect Senate Republicans to take over prosecuting the case when the House managers failed to make their case, particularly in calling witnesses not subpoenaed by the House. Democrats had opposed any witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Clinton and voted as a bloc for a summary acquittal. There was no reason to expect Republicans to adopt an entirely different approach.

The House submitted an incomplete record that did not prove their claims, and based on the articles on events not worthy of removal and failed to subpoena witnesses like Bolton, then demanded that the Senate do what the House had never even tried, making it very easy for the Senate to say "NO!"

None of the explanations offered by House Democrats make any logical sense. That, however, does not matter. As Fake News Todd said of supporters of the president, people “want to be lied to sometimes” and “do not always love being told hard truths.” The hard truth is that House Democrats lost this case the minute they rushed an impeachment vote, without sufficient grounds. That is the hard truth.

Turley: How The House Lost The Witnesses Along With The Impeachment

 

[surada]

And yet Zelinsky claimed not to know or feel any pressure from the phone call.
We hear everyday from the left that the world hates Trump and wants nothing to do with him. So was he covering for Trump? Basicly lieing which means that he can't be trusted and must be corrupt. That must mean the left is lieing about everyone hating Trump.
Or was Zelinsky telling the truth and there was no shakedown which means that the left is trying to make a mountain out of nothing.

Considering the track record of the whole Russia and Mueller, Stormy Daniels and the numerous we got him now things that keep getting shot down I would say that Zelinsky did not lie and did not feel like there was a quid pro quo. Or for you that don't understand a shakedown.

Read Trump's phone conversation with Volodymyr Zelensky | CNN Politics

President Donald Trump repeatedly pushed for Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter, during a July 25 phone call, according to a transcript of the conversation released by the White House.

www.cnn.com

 

[BluesLegend]

The vote to call witnesses was voted on and tabled.

Mitch can leave it tabled for an eternity.

The Senate already said no to witnesses.

It's incredible that with the bribes and corruption surrounding Biden, the verified 20+ shell corporations, $20 million changing hands, numerous whistle blowers and direct witnesses, most of it with foreign adversaries or recipients of US foreign aid...that an impeachment is being slowed down and slow walked and avoided like the plague.

Biden must have dirt on some top level people and threatening to take others down with him.

 

[Billiejeens]

It's incredible that with the bribes and corruption surrounding Biden, the verified 20+ shell corporations, $20 million changing hands, numerous whistle blowers and direct witnesses, most of it with foreign adversaries or recipients of US foreign aid...that an impeachment is being slowed down and slow walked and avoided like the plague.

Biden must have dirt on some top level people and threatening to take others down with him.

They don't have the votes.

Also, it's not a winning strategy.

 

[BluesLegend]

They don't have the votes.

Also, it's not a winning strategy.

You agree though that in a just world Biden would be locked up.

 

[Billiejeens]

You agree though that in a just world Biden would be locked up.

Years ago.

 

[jc456]

Read Trump's phone conversation with Volodymyr Zelensky | CNN Politics

President Donald Trump repeatedly pushed for Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter, during a July 25 phone call, according to a transcript of the conversation released by the White House.

www.cnn.com

So?