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.
The prosecution - in this case the House Democrats - said they had all the facts and were ready to go to trial. Subpoenaing all those witnesses would take too much time, they said, and we have to get him removed now.
It would take a lot of time! That's because it's not simple. There are rules to be followed, national security to be discussed and rulings to be made.
And they want the Republicans to do it because it would take a long, long time - like maybe even up to November 20th.
Nah... Democrats said they had a case and they brought it forward.
Let's see it.
They never indicated they had all the facts, subpoenas were issued and ignored for witnesses and documents. This isn't about national security issues, that's a phony excuse as DOD and State Dept employees have already testified. Mulvaney's blocking of the aid isn't a national security issue.
The senate can hear witnesses if it so chooses, people are much to satisfied with avoidance of the facts.
Poor Adam. His lies and second rate theatrics aren't working for the Demorats-----its working against them!
Keep it up California!
Pimple-neck Schiff is "suggesting" this early because he knows they are not going to win the impeachment HOAX, so that when Trump does get re-elected, the Dem's can cry for the next 4 years that it was a "tampered election" blaming a foreign country....They could never accept (including Hillary) that Trump won in 2016 fair and square!
Pimple-neck Schiff is "suggesting" this early because he knows they are not going to win the impeachment HOAX, so that when Trump does get re-elected, the Dem's can cry for the next 4 years that it was a "tampered election" blaming a foreign country....They could never accept (including Hillary) that Trump won in 2016 fair and square!
Not only do they not accept the result of the 2016 election but they are preemptively questioning the results of an election that hasn't happened yet.
I certainly don't accept the results of the Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris count in 2000.
One would have to be far-out to say that was a fair election. The odds of the Pat Bucchan vote were given as one in BILLIONS.
Now, if you want to tell us all that a 1 in billions thing DID HAPPEN and that it was fair, that is your prerogative - but I don't have to buy it. And I don't. Never will.
The impeachment was already on life support but it was absolutely killed dead once Schiff made this statement. What was he thinking?
There result was fixed way before it started. No surprises here. The GOP admitted as such.
I'm not outraged at all - I wouldn't have expected anything else and neither did the Democrats. But if the Boss and his stable of cowards are corrupt there is zero the country can do about it/
It would be like expecting Justice for Epstein from Bill Barr. Wasn't gonna happen. Ever.
There result was fixed way before it started. No surprises here. The GOP admitted as such.
I'm not outraged at all - I wouldn't have expected anything else and neither did the Democrats. But if the Boss and his stable of cowards are corrupt there is zero the country can do about it/
It would be like expecting Justice for Epstein from Bill Barr. Wasn't gonna happen. Ever.
When you flat out say the 2016 election was illegitimate and the 2020 one is Already in doubt, what do you expect? Lol
so is this what Dems plan to say whenever they lose?"
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.