The Democrats witness dilemma

[Eagle_Eye]

YOU were the one saying Trump has not been impeached.

Just schooling you.

Not an easy thing to do with you.

Nice try Buck Wheat but technically Trump was not impeached until the House leaders announce on the Senate Floor "The president is impeached." Then and only then is he officially impeached.
See what happens when you don't know Civics!

[Phantasmal]

It's a slam dunk acquittal if Jesus testified against Trump.

The Bidens, if called, will testify.

The trade off for Mitch is that he will have to call Bolton and Parnas and Pompeo and Nunes as well if he wants the Bidens.

Yes, let them have the Biden’s, it is well worth having Mulvaney and Bolton testify, Rudy, too!

[jimmymccready]

I believe you are wrong. This impeachment has shown the American people just how partisan the Democrats are, I believe it hurt them and increased Trumps chances. But we will see.

That is coming back to earth, for you. Thanks. However, the American voter clearly knows how partisan is Trump. It will destroy him this year politically, and beginning next year, in the courts.

[jimmymccready]

Nice try Buck Wheat but technically Trump was not impeached until the House leaders announce on the Senate Floor "The president is impeached." Then and only then is he officially impeached.
See what happens when you don't know Civics!

Oh, stop acting the silly. Trump was Impeached the second the vote of Impeachment was concluded. Learn your civics, dude.

[canceled.2021.2]

Oh,tell us all what Biden did. You must have some real solid proof. let's hear it.

We have to investigate to find out

[Frank Apisa]

Nice try Buck Wheat but technically Trump was not impeached until the House leaders announce on the Senate Floor "The president is impeached." Then and only then is he officially impeached.
See what happens when you don't know Civics!

One...the announcement is NOT necessary. Trump was impeached the moment the House passed the first article of impeachment.

Two...the House Managers (not the House Leaders)...DELIVERED (not announced)...the articles of impeachment to the Senate yesterday.

Your comments were made today.

See what happens when you shoot your mouth off and don't know what the hell you are talking about?

[Frank Apisa]

Yes, let them have the Biden’s, it is well worth having Mulvaney and Bolton testify, Rudy, too!

Exactly!!!

In fact, Biden could probably insure his victory in November if he announced he will voluntarily testify at the impeachment.

[Darth Omar]

I do not ignore anything on this issue.

You wrote: "Different than the your rationalization about why Democrats wouldn’t wait on Bolton’s testimony before voting lol?"

I have no idea of what you mean by that. I suspect you do not know what you meant by that either.



Stop paraphrasing me. You are not very good at it. If you have a problem with something I have said...quote what I said and tell me what you object to.



Trump sycophants should not talk about lemmings.



Okay...a valid point.

But I think they should call for witnesses. There have been two previous presidential impeachment trials...and both had witnesses.

The world did not come to an end.



My guess is the next time the Republicans have the majority in the House and there is a Democratic president...there will be talk of impeachment.

Nothing you can do about that.




If the Republican Senators want to develop a bit of integrity...they will ask for more witnesses...and then convict this disgusting abomination now in the White House.

But...I doubt "integrity" is what is on their minds.



There were 600 former federal prosecutors who said that "the evidence the House gathered" is not only compelling...it is MORE than they had when they got convictions.

So???

So lol, why are Democrats needing more witnesses?

If the evidence supporting the articles is so ‘compelling’ why do Democrats insist on more witnesses?

And yes, the next inevitable impeachment of a democrat president by a Republican House CAN be stopped. It can be stopped right in its tracks, by THIS Senate, if they vote strictly on the ‘compelling’ articles sent to the Senate. The clear message will be sent to future Houses that they need to be patient, and allow the courts to adjudicate subpoenas and etc.

No more half-done investigations masquerading as impeachment articles—or send them, and risk dismissal or summary vote with no witnesses. And pay the hefty political price for trying it.

Trump will no longer haunt your dreams at some point, Frank. But the rest of us will have to live with the precedent Democrats are trying to establish for decades to come.

[Truth Detector]

Trump is an American president...AND HE HAS BEEN IMPEACHED. Because of the cowardly Republican senators, he probably will serve out his term.

So did you shrilly cry out how cowardly Democratic Senators were when they refused to convict Clinton for REAL crimes and not the imagined one's against Trump?

Of course you didn't; you're a shrill, uneducated, whiny leftist hack with a severe case of TDS.

Was Jerry Nadler a massive hypocrite or merely a hyper partisan liar when he made this declaration during the Clinton Impeachment?

Jerry Nadler | We're Lowering the Standard of Impeachment

[Bigdog]

Yes, let them have the Biden’s, it is well worth having Mulvaney and Bolton testify, Rudy, too!

Why not call some actual, alleged extortion victims, like President Zelensky, Prosecutor Shokin, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko and ex Pres. Poroshenko?

[Frank Apisa]

So lol, why are Democrats needing more witnesses?

If the evidence supporting the articles is so ‘compelling’ why do Democrats insist on more witnesses?

To make the case even stronger?

or

Why not?

Your choice.

And yes, the next inevitable impeachment of a democrat president by a Republican House CAN be stopped. It can be stopped right in its tracks, by THIS Senate, if they vote strictly on the ‘compelling’ articles sent to the Senate. The clear message will be sent to future Houses that they need to be patient, and allow the courts to adjudicate subpoenas and etc.

Bullshit.

The other two presidential impeachments had witnesses...this one should also.

No more half-done investigations masquerading as impeachment articles—or send them, and risk dismissal or summary vote with no witnesses. And pay the hefty political price for trying it.

Since The Leader is so obviously innocent...why are you people so afraid of hearing from people who can testify?

Why?

Trump will no longer haunt your dreams at some point, Frank. But the rest of us will have to live with the precedent Democrats are trying to establish for decades to come.

Trump does not even enter my dreams...let alone haunt them.

And if "witnesses at a trial" is something we have to live with...

...OKAY WITH ME.

Actually...we often see witnesses at trials.

In fact...I do not know of ANY trial in this country where there were no witnesses.

Get with the program, Darth.

[Frank Apisa]

Why not call some actual, alleged extortion victims, like President Zelensky, Prosecutor Shokin, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko and ex Pres. Poroshenko?

Instead...why not call Bolton or Mulvaney...or...

...Trump.

Good grief, would I ever love to see Trump testify under oath!

[Truth Detector]

However, the American voter clearly knows how partisan is Trump. It will destroy him this year politically, and beginning next year, in the courts.

Shrill and stupid prediction saved.

[Truth Detector]

Good grief, would I ever love to see Trump testify under oath!

You never will; does that make you cry, you shrill, dishonest, partisan hack pissant?

[Into the Night]

This trial is all about Donald Trump and no one else. You are trying so hard to muddy the waters, but it won't work.

No, it isn't.

This trial is about the Bidens. It is about the Democrats. It is about the Schiff's invisible witnesses. It is about all that accuse Trump.