Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Still had zero to do with the mueller report....zero...
Why, because it was because of national security...maybe you forgot that part?
It's the senate, who owns the senate....remember, elections have consequences....
Funny you talk about lying, there were at least 2 house dems who did not care about any evidence, yet they still got to vote in the impeachment.....if this was regular court....would they be on the jury?
Be honest with your answer....
My answer had zero to do with the Mueller report - NOR does the title of this thread. You can go on about it all you want.
Additional witnesses should absolutely testify since Republicans say they don't have enough evidence. And they should include Pompeo, Mulvaney, and Bolton for starters.
IF we handle this the same way the Clinton impeachment was handled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bertwrench
You can’t be serious? Do you consider the sham that happened in theHouse to be transparency? GOP witness denied and absolutely ZERO first hand witness to supposed crimes and yet democrats vote to impeach. How would you like it if you were convicted based on hearsay?
Which GOP witnesses were denied? GOP had 3 witnesses testify and it's unfortunate their testimony didn't help Trump at all. But they WERE called by the Republicans.
The 'transcript' is not hearsay. Clearly, we hear Trump asking for an investigation of his political rival.
Then, we heard Trump publicly admit it on the WH lawn. Asking for both China AND Ukraine to investigate his political rival.
We also heard Trump's HANDPICKED ambassador testify that "everyone was in the loop".
If Biden does not get the nomination ~ I imagine Trump will be asking another foreign country to investigate who does.
My answer had zero to do with the Mueller report - NOR does the title of this thread. You can go on about it all you want.
Yet who I was responding too, clearly stated the impeachment was because of the muller report....that's why I stated that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
Additional witnesses should absolutely testify since Republicans say they don't have enough evidence. And they should include Pompeo, Mulvaney, and Bolton for starters.
Who says they don't have enough evidence? Link....
Oh, and are you saying that the house impeached just because they could, without enough evidence? We know at a minimum there were to house dems, who did not care about any evidence, period....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
IF we handle this the same way the Clinton impeachment was handled.
Why do you not want them to testify? Their testimony should be the ultimate of importance to all.
Why shouldn't trump testify?
I was not.
Why should someone (anyone) have to testify if there are no real charges against them. Being mad because you lost an election is not an excuse. Lets remember, at least 2 house dems don't give a damn about evidence....they wanted to impeach the MF.....
You can’t be serious? Do you consider the sham that happened in theHouse to be transparency? GOP witness denied and absolutely ZERO first hand witness to supposed crimes and yet democrats vote to impeach. How would you like it if you were convicted based on hearsay?
Would it satisfy Trump supporters if ANYONE the Gop or the Dems wanted to testify could? I'm not so sure that would appease hard core Trump supporters because after all they give him a pass on anything & everything he does.
I say let them ALL testify & have a real trial instead of what we all know to be obvious according to McConnell. Complete accordance with the administration.
Why should someone (anyone) have to testify if there are no real charges against them. Being mad because you lost an election is not an excuse. Lets remember, at least 2 house dems don't give a damn about evidence....they wanted to impeach the MF.....
You may be correct there are extremists on both sides. As an independant I would like to hear the complete testimony as do about 70% of Americans.
Haven't we heard enough evidence from the witnesses that the Dems called on in the House? You know the ones that heard a rumor or had their feelings hurt by something that was said. The same ones that had no first hand knowledge of what was actually said on the phone call but merely reacted and reported what they had heard around the water cooler?
The Dems all voted along party lines with a few that abstained and the Reps all voted along their line as well but the impeached passed due to sheer numbers over actual hard evidence.
The whole thing is a rushed botch of a sham and that is a real shame because the Democrats have reduced the serious nature of an impeachment into a partisan political circus.
We wouldn't be in this mess if 3 years ago the Democrats choose to work with Trump the best they could instead of trying to destroy him and sap his base.
Pelosi is not sending the articles because she knows it is a weak case that should be shut down but she can hold them over Trump and cast a doubt over his reelection and certainly deny his choosing a nominee if RBG should step down from the Supreme Court.
I don't know about McConnel but it is hard to believe how complicit millions of people are in this country when it comes to the dirty politics the Dems are using to destroy Trump.
Above in bold is why we need those witnesses, in addition to Sondland, who have first hand knowledge. After all, it is the citizens of this country who pay their salaries. If they are allowing the president to also spend our money for his personal gain, the taxpayers have a right to know. Don't you think?
Yet, the mueller report has ZERO to do with the impeachment...
And why did nancy not deliver the articles, if impeachment must begin immediately and because of national security.... nahhhh, the heck with that...lets take Christmas break....
Mr. Trump's obstruction of the special counsel probe is relevant to the impeachment trial.
Personally, I do not know why the articles of impeachment have not yet been delivered to the Senate although this does not mean Mr. Trump has not been impeached. The focus on this seems misguided to me.
There is no evidence to support an impeachment. It’s all based on hearsay. A vote is all that’s needed. The senate did its job and we move on to the next liberal whine.
You need to review Sondland's testimony. He had a first had phone call with trump concerning the funding release for a Biden investigation announcement on CNN.
There you and the other trump followers go again, giving up your democracy because you have a crush on trump.
Mr. Trump's obstruction of the special counsel probe is relevant to the impeachment trial.
Yet, not in the articles of impeachment...why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
Personally, I do not know why the articles of impeachment have not yet been delivered to the Senate although this does not mean Mr. Trump has not been impeached. The focus on this seems misguided to me.
The only place I've seen that he is not impeached is here on CD....personally, I don't care....he's impeached...that's what the dems wanted, they got it, be damned the evidence....as at least 2 house dems have stated this...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
