Page 26 of 30 FirstFirst ... 16222324252627282930 LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 437

Thread: The Democrats witness dilemma

  1. #376 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    1,471
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 475 Times in 325 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 290 Times in 276 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Especially the Biden and son crime family.
    If you really believe that Biden and his son are guilty of crimes, why aren't you more angry with trump for refusing a real investigation? Remember, he was only interested in a press conference to tarnish Biden's image, and still has not sanctioned an actual investigation.

    And if you have evidence of a crime, why don't you turn over the evidence to the FBI, so they can start an investigation?

  2. #377 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,568
    Thanks
    8,481
    Thanked 19,656 Times in 13,028 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,005 Times in 961 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,

    I have no problem with both sides calling all the witnesses they can think of. Call Roger Stone. Call Cohen. All of Trump's closest men. Call Hunter Biden. Call Hillary. Question her about Benghazi one more time. You can have them all, as long as we get ours. Deal?



    Aha. Once your bluff is called, now we see what you really want.



    Clinton's impeachment trial had witnesses. And Clinton took the stand in his own defense. He faced up to the American people. Clinton took the oath. He was sworn in, swore that his testimony was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Basically, Clinton manned up.

    But I understand if you don't think Trump can man up like Clinton did.

    After all.

    Clinton was a real President.
    Trump is as real and legitimate as any other president.

    It’s actually not a question of whether I want witnesses or don’t. The constitutional question is whether the Senate should allow them or not. They certainly aren’t required to since *the way it’s supposed to work* is the House does the impeachment inquiry—that means gathering the evidence, interviewing ALL witnesses and/or allowing the courts to settle any issues involving executive privilege and etc.

    Democrats didn’t do this. They were ‘in a hurry’. So now they want to effectively extend an impeachment inquiry into the Senate.

    Why should the Senate allow Democrats to abuse the process? I can’t think of a single reason.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  3. #378 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,568
    Thanks
    8,481
    Thanked 19,656 Times in 13,028 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,005 Times in 961 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    If you really believe that Biden and his son are guilty of crimes, why aren't you more angry with trump for refusing a real investigation? Remember, he was only interested in a press conference to tarnish Biden's image, and still has not sanctioned an actual investigation.

    And if you have evidence of a crime, why don't you turn over the evidence to the FBI, so they can start an investigation?
    I don’t know if the Bidens are guilty or not.

    My point is the Biden’s conflict of interest in Ukraine was suspicious looking enough to constitute probable cause. The narrative is that it was somehow outlandish for Trump to ask Zelensky to look into it.

    An outlandish request would asking Zelensky to look for dirt on Warren or Crazy Joe. It always goes back to Hunter’s relationship with Burisma while Joe was VP and appointed to look after Ukraine. If that situation didn’t exist none of this would have happened.

    Or maybe Democrats would have come up with something else by now anyway.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  4. #379 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,837
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 15,066 Times in 10,435 Posts
    Groans
    179
    Groaned 1,247 Times in 1,182 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    I don’t know if the Bidens are guilty or not.

    My point is the Biden’s conflict of interest in Ukraine was suspicious looking enough to constitute probable cause. The narrative is that it was somehow outlandish for Trump to ask Zelensky to look into it.

    An outlandish request would asking Zelensky to look for dirt on Warren or Crazy Joe. It always goes back to Hunter’s relationship with Burisma while Joe was VP and appointed to look after Ukraine. If that situation didn’t exist none of this would have happened.

    Or maybe Democrats would have come up with something else by now anyway.
    don't forget this sequence ( if I can recall it)

    Shokin is ready to interview Hunter
    Hunter contacts State
    State ( Nuland) contacts Poroshenko
    Uncle Joe calls Poroshenko 3x in one month
    Shokin is fired when Uncle Joe goes to Ukraine
    (by memory from Solomon's docs)
    ~~
    Uncle Joe is upto his ears in it

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Darth Omar (01-19-2020), USFREEDOM911 (01-19-2020)

  6. #380 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,568
    Thanks
    8,481
    Thanked 19,656 Times in 13,028 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,005 Times in 961 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    don't forget this sequence ( if I can recall it)

    Shokin is ready to interview Hunter
    Hunter contacts State
    State ( Nuland) contacts Poroshenko
    Uncle Joe calls Poroshenko 3x in one month
    Shokin is fired when Uncle Joe goes to Ukraine
    (by memory from Solomon's docs)
    ~~
    Uncle Joe is upto his ears in it
    Would hardly be surprising.

    I think the point is it’s never actually been investigated beyond some in house bureaucrat checking the boxes.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Darth Omar For This Post:

    Bigdog (01-19-2020), dukkha (01-19-2020), USFREEDOM911 (01-19-2020)

  8. #381 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    12,887
    Thanks
    6,668
    Thanked 6,650 Times in 4,408 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,024 Times in 2,621 Posts

    Default

    Hello Darth,

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Trump is as real and legitimate as any other president.
    That argument can be made of course, but the fact is Trump is really only being president to his base. He is not even trying to act like President to the whole nation. Obama gave the Republicans a very real opportunity to work with him. That was rejected. Republicans made a pact to block Obama from accomplishing anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    It’s actually not a question of whether I want witnesses or don’t. The constitutional question is whether the Senate should allow them or not. They certainly aren’t required to since *the way it’s supposed to work* is the House does the impeachment inquiry—that means gathering the evidence, interviewing ALL witnesses and/or allowing the courts to settle any issues involving executive privilege and etc.

    Democrats didn’t do this. They were ‘in a hurry’. So now they want to effectively extend an impeachment inquiry into the Senate.

    Why should the Senate allow Democrats to abuse the process? I can’t think of a single reason.
    Only if they want to do the right thing by the American people and get to the truth that Trump is hiding.

    It would be a miscarriage of justice for Trump to get off on a technicality.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  9. The Following User Groans At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    USFREEDOM911 (01-19-2020)

  10. #382 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    49,653
    Thanks
    36,233
    Thanked 23,831 Times in 17,040 Posts
    Groans
    3,698
    Groaned 2,358 Times in 2,249 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdog View Post
    His cover story for investigating corruption is ... investigating corruption.

    Joe Biden got caught getting his son a top job in the most corrupt country in the world, while he was Obama's pointman in Ukraine. Then got caught, in Jan 2018, bragging about threatening a Ukraine prosecutor, who was investigating his son, by withholding a Billion in Aid. Prosecutor Shokin should be called as a witness at the impeachment trial.

    And yes I doubt you. Yours is nothing but a fantasy lib fill-in-the-blanks scenario. Never is it Connect the Dots in libtard lalaland. Always full of holes. There is Zero evidence Zelensky was ever threatened. Call him as a witness, too.

    The Aid was approved on May 23, ... two days before Poroshenko was to leave office.
    Poroshenko was corrupt and trump had no problem delivering money to him without demanding an investigation into the Bidens. He could have made the same demand of Poroshenko that he made of Zelensky but he didn't, and we all know why. Use your head for once.
    #Not My President





    "christiefan" stands for Agatha, not Chris

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Cypress (01-19-2020), Frank Apisa (01-19-2020)

  12. #383 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,837
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 15,066 Times in 10,435 Posts
    Groans
    179
    Groaned 1,247 Times in 1,182 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Poroshenko was corrupt and trump had no problem delivering money to him without demanding an investigation into the Bidens. He could have made the same demand of Poroshenko that he made of Zelensky but he didn't, and we all know why. Use your head for once.
    the point is the money was approved under Poroshenko adm. ( which is never mentioned).
    a new administration afterwards is certainly enough for Trump to at least ask about looking for corruption.
    If you read the transcript -Trump even mentions to Zelensky to stay away from the Poro crowd ( going by memory)

    Just because Trump did not hold back aid for Poroshenko, doesn't mean he wouldn't ask about corruption to Zel

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Bigdog (01-19-2020)

  14. #384 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    49,653
    Thanks
    36,233
    Thanked 23,831 Times in 17,040 Posts
    Groans
    3,698
    Groaned 2,358 Times in 2,249 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    the point is the money was approved under Poroshenko adm. ( which is never mentioned).
    a new administration afterwards is certainly enough for Trump to at least ask about looking for corruption.
    If you read the transcript -Trump even mentions to Zelensky to stay away from the Poro crowd ( going by memory)

    Just because Trump did not hold back aid for Poroshenko, doesn't mean he wouldn't ask about corruption to Zel
    My point is that trump didn't care about investigating corruption under Poroshenko. He only "cared" after Biden threw his hat in the ring.
    #Not My President





    "christiefan" stands for Agatha, not Chris

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Cypress (01-19-2020), PoliTalker (01-19-2020)

  16. #385 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,837
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 15,066 Times in 10,435 Posts
    Groans
    179
    Groaned 1,247 Times in 1,182 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    My point is that trump didn't care about investigating corruption under Poroshenko. He only "cared" after Biden threw his hat in the ring.
    i answered this. Not doing one thing doesn't mean the other isn't legit.
    and the fact there was a change in the adm, is a real reason to at least ask about corruption

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Bigdog (01-19-2020)

  18. #386 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    13,952
    Thanks
    7,126
    Thanked 6,661 Times in 4,264 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 616 Times in 591 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Trump is as real and legitimate as any other president.

    It’s actually not a question of whether I want witnesses or don’t. The constitutional question is whether the Senate should allow them or not. They certainly aren’t required to since *the way it’s supposed to work* is the House does the impeachment inquiry—that means gathering the evidence, interviewing ALL witnesses and/or allowing the courts to settle any issues involving executive privilege and etc.

    Democrats didn’t do this. They were ‘in a hurry’. So now they want to effectively extend an impeachment inquiry into the Senate.

    Why should the Senate allow Democrats to abuse the process? I can’t think of a single reason.
    Ummmm...what about the oaths to do "impartial justice?"

    "Justice"...whether impartial or not...requires considering ALL the evidence that can be obtained...not just the evidence they want.

    The Republicans constantly complain about "hearsay" evidence. Well, in effect, all the evidence they get from the House is "hearsay." They should get some "first hand" evidence too. And that would require witnesses.

    Look...they are going to acquit Trump. ANY Republican voting to convict Trump will not only be committing political suicide, he/she will be insuring that the posh jobs that come with retirement will no longer be available. And putting themselves into that kind of position is just in not in the political DNA.

    Trump

    So...hear from the witnesses...and then acquit.

    Most people out here in the public know where things are on this issue. Listening to more witnesses and then acquitting Trump is not going to make them look any less craven.
    Trump…more than just an ignorant, classless boor. He also is the worst president in American history.

  19. #387 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    13,952
    Thanks
    7,126
    Thanked 6,661 Times in 4,264 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 616 Times in 591 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    I don’t know if the Bidens are guilty or not.

    My point is the Biden’s conflict of interest in Ukraine was suspicious looking enough to constitute probable cause. The narrative is that it was somehow outlandish for Trump to ask Zelensky to look into it.

    An outlandish request would asking Zelensky to look for dirt on Warren or Crazy Joe. It always goes back to Hunter’s relationship with Burisma while Joe was VP and appointed to look after Ukraine. If that situation didn’t exist none of this would have happened.

    Or maybe Democrats would have come up with something else by now anyway.
    Jesus H. Christ, Darth...if charges could be brought against Hillary Clinton or Hunter Biden...THEY WOULD ALREADY HAVE BEEN BROUGHT.

    Hillary has been investigated by the Republicans for a decade...and hard-core, fucking bat-shit-crazy Republicans have been in charge of the DOJ for the last three years. They would have prosecuted her if there was ANYTHING.

    Same thing goes for Hunter Biden...although he has not been investigated for a decade. If the DOJ had anything on him...his ass would be grass by now.

    What are you people unable or unwilling to understand about that?
    Trump…more than just an ignorant, classless boor. He also is the worst president in American history.

  20. #388 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74,508
    Thanks
    14,610
    Thanked 14,263 Times in 11,910 Posts
    Groans
    18,321
    Groaned 1,687 Times in 1,635 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,



    I would be good with any witnesses Trump wants to call. You can have them all, as long as the Democrats get the same freedom.

    Your witnesses against ours.

    You're totally on.

    I would take that deal in a heartbeat.

    Trump would be gone and I don't care who else might go down at the same time.

    That would be totally worth it.

    You can have Hunter Biden.

    He is worth nothing to me.

    Then after the dust is settled we will elect any of the remaining Dem candidates in 2020 and finally put this country back on track.

    We have to get rid of Trump to save the world from climate change.

    We don't have 4 more years. It's now or doom.

    We are down to the wire.

    Please don't destroy Earth. It's a nice place to live.

    And there is no planet B.
    Like the Republicans did in the Congressional Impeachment hearing??

    The rest is just you melting down, into a whine puddle.

    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  21. #389 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74,508
    Thanks
    14,610
    Thanked 14,263 Times in 11,910 Posts
    Groans
    18,321
    Groaned 1,687 Times in 1,635 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,

    I have no problem with both sides calling all the witnesses they can think of. Call Roger Stone. Call Cohen. All of Trump's closest men. Call Hunter Biden. Call Hillary. Question her about Benghazi one more time. You can have them all, as long as we get ours. Deal?



    Aha. Once your bluff is called, now we see what you really want.



    Clinton's impeachment trial had witnesses. And Clinton took the stand in his own defense. He faced up to the American people. Clinton took the oath. He was sworn in, swore that his testimony was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Basically, Clinton manned up.

    But I understand if you don't think Trump can man up like Clinton did.

    After all.

    Clinton was a real President.
    Like the Republicans were allowed in the Congressional Impeachment hearings??

    Don't you understand, that the Congressional liberals have no control over how the Senate runs this!!

    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  22. #390 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    37,710
    Thanks
    8,118
    Thanked 9,642 Times in 7,268 Posts
    Groans
    40
    Groaned 4,028 Times in 3,375 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    don't forget this sequence ( if I can recall it)

    Shokin is ready to interview Hunter
    Hunter contacts State
    State ( Nuland) contacts Poroshenko
    Uncle Joe calls Poroshenko 3x in one month
    Shokin is fired when Uncle Joe goes to Ukraine
    (by memory from Solomon's docs)
    ~~
    Uncle Joe is upto his ears in it
    You forgot WHY Joe went to Ukraine. At the behest of the US, NATO, EU and the IMF to remove an incompetent prosecutor.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to domer76 For This Post:

    Frank Apisa (01-19-2020)

Similar Threads

  1. Trump’s job approval shows the Democrats’ dilemma in 2018
    By Havana Moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: 01-15-2018, 06:39 PM
  2. When is a dilemma not a dilemma,
    By archives in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-15-2018, 04:37 PM
  3. Witness bombshell - Muller tried to use intimidation to help DEMOCRATS
    By Русский агент in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-30-2017, 01:37 PM
  4. I have a dilemma
    By Sun Devil in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 03-15-2014, 07:21 PM
  5. My Dilemma
    By klaatu in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 06-11-2008, 01:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •