The tits and tats of witnesses, this includes Hunter

[Slade3200]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

 

[okfine]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Bring them all on, including Trump. He is the one at the "heart" of it all.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

 

[TNHarley]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

What corruption?

 

[Lakhota]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

What do the Bidens have to do with Trump's corruption and impeachment? Hint: NOTHING.

If calling the Bidens is what it takes to get real and relevant witnesses - so be it.

 

[TNHarley]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

What corruption?

ugh have a good day

 

[colfax_m]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

 

[TNHarley]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

I said it justifies his actions.

 

[colfax_m]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

I said it justifies his actions.

It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?

 

[Slade3200]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

Trump is accused of abusing power by asking Ukraine to investigate Biden for political purposes. If Biden was in fact doing something illegal then it is not political purposes anymore but becomes a matter of law enforcement. That make Hunter very relevant to the Reps and be sure it will be the case they will push.

 

[Slade3200]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

I said it justifies his actions.

It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?

you are correct, however there was an appearance of impropriety and if crimes get uncovered it’s going to be disastrous to the Dems case. Remember this isn’t a legal court, it is a political impeachment. I think it’s obvious that Trump did this for political purposes but it’s very hard to prove and with enough dirt
thrown at Hunter it is going to swallow up the point the Dems are trying to make. This impeachment is going to be a royal disaster. Both parties are pretty much beyond reproach at this point.

 

[TNHarley]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

I said it justifies his actions.

It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?

Thata different than what Trump was wanting investigated.
If there was corruption, it would justify his actions.
Good luck proving a negative.

 

[easyt65]

"What was the President wanting investigated? Something involving Hunter Biden? What was happening that needed investigating?"

Hunter Biden needs to testify as his scandal is at the center of Schiff's manufactured coup....

...and Hunter's testimony / scandal leads to Joe Biden & his videotaped confession of extorting the Ukraine PM...

....and Ukraine leads to Schiff...and his Ukraine & Burisma payments...and the Whistle Blower...and his new employee, the IC IG...




.

 

[easyt65]

It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?

In this case Schiff is the dirty cop who made the stop and planted the bag of pot...


.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

What corruption?

ugh have a good day

You're unable to explain your point?

 

[Slade3200]

"What was the President wanting investigated? Something involving Hunter Biden? What was happening that needed investigating?"

Hunter Biden needs to testify as his scandal is at the center of Schiff's manufactured coup....

...and Hunter's testimony / scandal leads to Joe Biden & his videotaped confession of extorting the Ukraine PM...

....and Ukraine leads to Schiff...and his Ukraine & Burisma payments...and the Whistle Blower...and his new employee, the IC IG...




.

objectivity test... if you’re going to call Schiffs actions a manufactured coup then you’d have to admit that Trumps accusations against Hunter are also a manufactured crime that he was using for political purposes, right?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?

Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.

If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.

Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?

I said it justifies his actions.

No it doesn't. Not in any way.

 

[BlindBoo]

Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated

Hunter has not been charged with a crime in the USA or in The Ukraine.

 

[colfax_m]

It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?

In this case Schiff is the dirty cop who made the stop and planted the bag of pot...
.

Schiff didn’t make Trump do anything. He did it all on his own.