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

[OldLady]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

 

[Oldstyle]

So you want the accused to provide evidence they are not guilty? Lol hahaha you do have a low IQ

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.

What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

As far as I'm concerned, there has been plenty of evidence presented and I agree that he should be impeached. And removed. However, a lot of lawyers who know about standards in court do not believe it is enough.

When you hold a gun to a man's chest and say "This is not a stickup, just give me all your money," it is still a stickup. Zelensky has several million good reasons to say whatever Trump wants him to say.

Trump stuck a gun to Zelensky's chest and demanded money? What are you babbling about?

Zelensky was requesting aid from the US. Trump granted him that aid. He also asked the President of the Ukraine to look into apparent corruption that had taken place there. He didn't ask him to make up things about Joe Biden like you liberals did to him in the previous election...he simply asked Zelensky to look into apparent corruption. Bottom line? Trump did nothing that ALL President's haven't done! Impeaching him over THIS is laughable!

 

[Meister]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

 

[Meister]

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.

What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

As far as I'm concerned, there has been plenty of evidence presented and I agree that he should be impeached. And removed. However, a lot of lawyers who know about standards in court do not believe it is enough.

When you hold a gun to a man's chest and say "This is not a stickup, just give me all your money," it is still a stickup. Zelensky has several million good reasons to say whatever Trump wants him to say.

Trump stuck a gun to Zelensky's chest and demanded money? What are you babbling about?

Zelensky was requesting aid from the US. Trump granted him that aid. He also asked the President of the Ukraine to look into apparent corruption that had taken place there. He didn't ask him to make up things about Joe Biden like you liberals did to him in the previous election...he simply asked Zelensky to look into apparent corruption. Bottom line? Trump did nothing that ALL President's do and have done! Impeaching him over THIS is laughable!

Even Obama's team players were questioning the legality of what Biden did at worst, and at best the bad optics of it.

 

[OldLady]

Here's the litmus test for the impeachment "evidence"! If it had any credibility whatsoever then Republicans like Susan Collins would be voting against Trump. She's not. Why? Because this whole thing is a total farce. It's such a farce that you haven't managed to pick off even a single Republican...even the ones that cross the aisle all the time on votes like Collins!

Oldstyle, Susan Collins is my senator, so let me correct you there.
Susan Collins is continuing to refuse to comment as she is a jurist. Murkowski, another moderate Republican, has also refused to make a decision PRIOR to the trial.
We are certainly all waiting to hear how our senator will vote, but she has made no announcement and knowing her, she will listen to the whole damned trial before she makes up her mind. She's that good.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Trump withheld federal funding in order to get a foreign leader to announce an investyigation into his politrical rival.

Biden withheld foreign aid in order to get a foreign gov't to fire a prosecutor looking into the corrupt dealings of his son. And that gets a pass by you?

 

[OldLady]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

 

[yidnar]

the dems didnt allow republicans to call forth witnesses during their inquiry ....

The people the Republicans wanted to call had no bearing on Trump's behavior. It has been explained to you over and over. Both Bidens were already investigated and found NOT GUILTY of what the Repubs are accusing them of. Crowdstrike is a bad dream cooked up by the bots and having no stake in reality. Calling the whistleblower and Schumer to browbeat them for bringing forth a complaint against the Orange Lord is nothing but petty revenge.

So who else did they want to call? Sondland was theirs. I heard him. Maybe they should have let him stay home. lol

the fact that Trump inquired about what Biden boasted about on live television when he said if the prosecutor is not fired you,re not getting the money makes him relevant to the trial .... thats the main reason the dems originally held the impeachment inquiry ! so its the senates duty to see if Trump was justified by asking Ukraine to look into it ..notice he said look into it ..he didnt ask them to drum up false accusations to frame him like the dems did with their bullshit dossier .

 

[Jitss617]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

He did nothing wrong,, move on with your life, your party is responsible for the biggest shit holes in America,, change your Disaster us policies before it’s too late

 

[Meister]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

At least you couldn't deny the facts. I'll take that as a win, OldLady.

 

[OldLady]

Here's the litmus test for the impeachment "evidence"! If it had any credibility whatsoever then Republicans like Susan Collins would be voting against Trump. She's not. Why? Because this whole thing is a total farce. It's such a farce that you haven't managed to pick off even a single Republican...even the ones that cross the aisle all the time on votes like Collins!

Oldstyle, Susan Collins is my senator, so let me correct you there.
Susan Collins is continuing to refuse to comment as she is a jurist. Murkowski, another moderate Republican, has also refused to make a decision PRIOR to the trial.
We are certainly all waiting to hear how our senator will vote, but she has made no announcement and knowing her, she will listen to the whole damned trial before she makes up her mind. She's that good.

This is as of yesterday. There was just an article in the local paper about it yesterday.

 

[OldLady]

the dems didnt allow republicans to call forth witnesses during their inquiry ....

The people the Republicans wanted to call had no bearing on Trump's behavior. It has been explained to you over and over. Both Bidens were already investigated and found NOT GUILTY of what the Repubs are accusing them of. Crowdstrike is a bad dream cooked up by the bots and having no stake in reality. Calling the whistleblower and Schumer to browbeat them for bringing forth a complaint against the Orange Lord is nothing but petty revenge.

So who else did they want to call? Sondland was theirs. I heard him. Maybe they should have let him stay home. lol

the fact that Trump inquired about what Biden boasted about on live television when he said if the prosecutor is not fired you,re not getting the money makes him relevant to the trial .... thats the main reason the dems originally held the impeachment inquiry ! so its the senates duty to see if Trump was justified by asking Ukraine to look into it ..notice he said look into it ..he didnt ask them to drum up false accusations to frame him like the dems did with their bullshit dossier .

The Bidens' role has already been investigated and they were not found guilty of anything. Trump knew that; he was just pissed off that some Ukranians backed Hillary in 2016. He wanted it to LOOK like Biden had done something wrong by making The Announcement that Sondland said was so important to Trump. It just needed to look like Biden might have done something--even though Trump knew better.
Biden is his political opponent.
Doesn't need a rocket scientist,here, yidnair.

 

[Oldstyle]

Here's the litmus test for the impeachment "evidence"! If it had any credibility whatsoever then Republicans like Susan Collins would be voting against Trump. She's not. Why? Because this whole thing is a total farce. It's such a farce that you haven't managed to pick off even a single Republican...even the ones that cross the aisle all the time on votes like Collins!

Oldstyle, Susan Collins is my senator, so let me correct you there.
Susan Collins is continuing to refuse to comment as she is a jurist. Murkowski, another moderate Republican, has also refused to make a decision PRIOR to the trial.
We are certainly all waiting to hear how our senator will vote, but she has made no announcement and knowing her, she will listen to the whole damned trial before she makes up her mind. She's that good.

Will you admit that the whole thing was a farce if she doesn't vote to impeach? Fact is, Old Lady...if the evidence presented can't sway a Susan Collins to vote for impeachment then it's obvious that the evidence SUCKED!

 

[OldLady]

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

At least you couldn't deny the facts. I'll take that as a win, OldLady.

As a mod, I expect a little higher standard of behavior from you, Meister.
It does not make you right when a post is too off target to bother with.

 

[Weatherman2020]

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

At least you couldn't deny the facts. I'll take that as a win, OldLady.

As a mod, I expect a little higher standard of behavior from you, Meister.
It does not make you right when a post is too off target to bother with.

If you’d learn the facts you’d be a conservative.

 

[Oldstyle]

the dems didnt allow republicans to call forth witnesses during their inquiry ....

The people the Republicans wanted to call had no bearing on Trump's behavior. It has been explained to you over and over. Both Bidens were already investigated and found NOT GUILTY of what the Repubs are accusing them of. Crowdstrike is a bad dream cooked up by the bots and having no stake in reality. Calling the whistleblower and Schumer to browbeat them for bringing forth a complaint against the Orange Lord is nothing but petty revenge.

So who else did they want to call? Sondland was theirs. I heard him. Maybe they should have let him stay home. lol

the fact that Trump inquired about what Biden boasted about on live television when he said if the prosecutor is not fired you,re not getting the money makes him relevant to the trial .... thats the main reason the dems originally held the impeachment inquiry ! so its the senates duty to see if Trump was justified by asking Ukraine to look into it ..notice he said look into it ..he didnt ask them to drum up false accusations to frame him like the dems did with their bullshit dossier .

The Bidens' role has already been investigated and they were not found guilty of anything. Trump knew that; he was just pissed off that some Ukranians backed Hillary in 2016. He wanted it to LOOK like Biden had done something wrong by making The Announcement that Sondland said was so important to Trump. It just needed to look like Biden might have done something--even though Trump knew better.
Biden is his political opponent.
Doesn't need a rocket scientist,here, yidnair.

I guess it would depend on your definition of "guilt", Old Lady! Are the Biden's guilty of a crime for all of the money that Hunter Biden raked in on that no show job he had no qualifications for? Quite frankly I don't see anything criminal there. Was it sleazy and totally inappropriate? Oh yeah it was! That's why Hunter resigned when it became an issue. Joe Biden knows damn well it wasn't appropriate and shame on him for not putting the kabosh on it. But let's be honest here...Joe Biden has been hooking Hunter up with jobs due to his influence ever since Hunter left college. He has a long history of that. Once again...not illegal. Once again...totally sleazy and inappropriate.

 

[Meister]

This thread didn’t age well.

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

At least you couldn't deny the facts. I'll take that as a win, OldLady.

As a mod, I expect a little higher standard of behavior from you, Meister.
It does not make you right when a post is too off target to bother with.

I really get tired of posters having to resort to the mod thingy that I do, OldLady.
I'm a poster just like you are a poster. Can't handle that, then just **** off.

It has been nothing but bullshit from your tribe regarding Trump since he became president.
They have lied and made up crap to try and take him down. Investigations after investigations and they
can't do it because he hasn't broken any laws. Now, the truths are starting to see the light and your tribe is knee deep
in a rising tide and that won't bode well for your people.

PS....when I type in red, you know that I'm modding....but not until then.
Good grief......get a thicker skin, darling.

 

[OldLady]

Here's the litmus test for the impeachment "evidence"! If it had any credibility whatsoever then Republicans like Susan Collins would be voting against Trump. She's not. Why? Because this whole thing is a total farce. It's such a farce that you haven't managed to pick off even a single Republican...even the ones that cross the aisle all the time on votes like Collins!

Oldstyle, Susan Collins is my senator, so let me correct you there.
Susan Collins is continuing to refuse to comment as she is a jurist. Murkowski, another moderate Republican, has also refused to make a decision PRIOR to the trial.
We are certainly all waiting to hear how our senator will vote, but she has made no announcement and knowing her, she will listen to the whole damned trial before she makes up her mind. She's that good.

Will you admit that the whole thing was a farce if she doesn't vote to impeach? Fact is, Old Lady...if the evidence presented can't sway a Susan Collins to vote for impeachment then it's obvious that the evidence SUCKED!

LOL In Maine, we don't need our senators to make up our minds for us. I've always respected Susan Collins and I always will, but I disagree with her fairly regularly. I've already told you that I've heard plenty already. But I'm not a trial judge bound by laws of criminal evidence. I've just got some common sense.

 

[airplanemechanic]

the dems didnt allow republicans to call forth witnesses during their inquiry ....

The people the Republicans wanted to call had no bearing on Trump's behavior. It has been explained to you over and over. Both Bidens were already investigated and found NOT GUILTY of what the Repubs are accusing them of. Crowdstrike is a bad dream cooked up by the bots and having no stake in reality. Calling the whistleblower and Schumer to browbeat them for bringing forth a complaint against the Orange Lord is nothing but petty revenge.

So who else did they want to call? Sondland was theirs. I heard him. Maybe they should have let him stay home. lol

the fact that Trump inquired about what Biden boasted about on live television when he said if the prosecutor is not fired you,re not getting the money makes him relevant to the trial .... thats the main reason the dems originally held the impeachment inquiry ! so its the senates duty to see if Trump was justified by asking Ukraine to look into it ..notice he said look into it ..he didnt ask them to drum up false accusations to frame him like the dems did with their bullshit dossier .

The Bidens' role has already been investigated and they were not found guilty of anything. Trump knew that; he was just pissed off that some Ukranians backed Hillary in 2016. He wanted it to LOOK like Biden had done something wrong by making The Announcement that Sondland said was so important to Trump. It just needed to look like Biden might have done something--even though Trump knew better.
Biden is his political opponent.
Doesn't need a rocket scientist,here, yidnair.

Found not guilty? So he was tried in a court of law? Or "found not guilty" by reason of firing the prosecutor? That does help the ol' "not guilty" thing when the person in charge of charging you with a crime is fired.

 

[OldLady]

What's the sense in Congress doing anything if people are just going to blow them off left and right?
It's not really Biden's place to determine strategy. There will be lawyers present for the impeachment team and they can object to questioning that is off track or inappropriate. This is just nuts. BOTH of them.

What is nuts is that because Trump won the 2016 election the democrats have been non stop with the
impeachment war drums from day one of his tenure as president. That is nuts.

Keep telling yourself that if it consoles you, Meister.

At least you couldn't deny the facts. I'll take that as a win, OldLady.

As a mod, I expect a little higher standard of behavior from you, Meister.
It does not make you right when a post is too off target to bother with.

I really get tired of posters having to resort to the mod thingy that I do, OldLady.
I'm a poster just like you are a poster. Can't handle that, then just **** off.

It has been nothing but bullshit from your tribe regarding Trump since he became president.
They have lied and made up crap to try and take him down. Investigations after investigations and they
can't do it because he hasn't broken any laws. Now, the truths are starting to see the light and your tribe is knee deep
in a rising tide and that won't bode well for your people.

PS....when I type in red, you know that I'm modding....but not until then.
Good grief......get a thicker skin, darling.

Okay, so my opinion of you as fair has been modified. There's absolutely nothing wrong with my skin; there is something wrong with saying "Oh ho--I didn't get a reply so I must have been right" That's third grade tactics.
Nuh uh. I have been telling you MY opinion. I did not start yammering for his impeachment on day one and I waited until the Mueller report and I accepted its findings. I challenge you to find one thread or post that contradicts that. I figured we were in it for four years and I crossed all my fingers and toes that we would get through it in one piece. Period.
So I see nothing "thin skinned" in reminding posters that they are talking to ME not some boogey man of a political enemy because I take a liberal view of things.
The tribal talk says more about where you're at than me.
Now do you want to start this over, Mr. Ordinary Poster, or will you continue with the rightwinger public service announcements that have little to do with me?