Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bluesguy, Feb 21, 2020.
Yes they were they played material roles.
What does that have to do with the fact he did not call Bolton, not that it would have done him any good the case was lousy with or without him and should never have been brought.
Why did the House Dems not get these witnesses? They could have.
He doesn’t though. But just like trump profiteering off his office, firing people and the families of those people that dared speak out against him — it is irrelevant.
Democrats prove to be incompetent. The 2016 election proved this.
Incompetent prosecutors get laughed out of court.
This is why Shifty didn't even bother trying to get Bolton's testimony....he knew it wouldn't help prove his wild accusations. His whining at the Senate was an attempted tactic to delay the exoneration vote, and attempt to muddy up the final result.
Man, you nailed it on post #2...
Sounds like Bolton's book (and testimony) would have confirmed Trump was telling people up front that it's Aid for Investigations, but that's not enough to remove him from office..
So Bolton would have been a waste of time (in addition to his regular day job as a waste of time)...
Yes, agreed, now why did Schiff deny a number of GOP witnesses? You keep dodging that question.
Bolton is one of these peculiarly delusional people who have a highly-subjective, custom-tailored idea of how 'government-by-the-people' should be organized, and staffed. In his heart-of-hearts, Bolton probably believes that he (Bolton) should somehow have been placed in charge of all decision-making, and that a president (any president) should merely be a rubber-stamping figurehead for someone like himself.
Goebbels was a man like that, but more likely it was an obsequious, scheming creature like another Nazi big-wig, Martin Bormann, who was like the John Bolton we see today. But at least Bormann had the decency to commit suicide....
All of that might be 100% true, and none of that changes the probability that Trump told him what he claims Trump told him, nor the lock that it doesn't matter to the right wing...
Your problem is your narrative only works if there was no Biden corruption.
That's legitimately funny... thanks....
But, NOT "as Good" as:
Never Being Impeached in the First Place.
Bolton is right about one thing:
His testimony wouldn't have changed the verdict.
Trump could've committed a Capital Felony on Live TV and still have been acquitted by McConnell's Senate.
So yeah, Bolton was right that his testimony wouldn't have mattered.
I didn’t dodge anything, I simply refuse to be barraged by questions when the other poster is bypassing my question.
Why did Schiff deny many GOP witnesses — most of them were because they were not relevant the case, there were a few that were just instances of political hackery though. Both sides did it. I really wanted the Senate to call the relevant witnesses that were refused in the House to see what the truth of the matter was but they had the numbers to just end it without taking this step — as is their constitutional authority.
The house republicans deny that any of their requested witnesses were allowed. Should I believe them or you?
No impeachment hearing in modern history has allowed "new" witness at trial. Some Senators acknowledge he did what he admitted to doing, at that it was improper...none said that he did what Shifty alleged at that was to withhold aid to get dirt on biden for political gain.
Because the senate was always going to go Trumps way
Why don't you read with your own eyes and make your call..
Tell me if you:
A - Know that David Hale, Kurt Volker, and Tim Morrison testified to the House in open session?
B - See those same names on the witness list requested by Nunes?
Then let us know if you think R's can make the claim to deny "ANY" of their requested witnesses were allowed..
Ah, when you mash all the air bubbles out of it, Bolton comes on like a jilted lover, spurned by Trump who probably woke up one morning and finally had the realization that, "If I'm really the 'Hitler' that the libs think I am, then Bolton is my Martin Bormann!"
In my fictional musing, then, Trump might have followed-on by thinking, "Well, I don't NEED a damned 'Martin Bormann'! After all, all Bormann ever did was stir up sh!t and make things even worse than they actually were.... I'm gonna fire his ass today!"
."Think your life's tough? Try eating clam chowder with this thing on your lip!"
You should maybe do your own research.
I will give you a hint: Politicians are liars though.
Geez, and you guys say the Lefties are hung up on Nazi references...
It's just dang interesting that the "day Trump woke up one morning" and removed Bolton was the day after Congress told the WH they were investigating the WB complaint, dontcha think??
Yes they are and so are the journalists who cover them. I'm prepared to see your evidence that these two witnesses were requested by the Republicans if you have some.
OK, I withdraw my comment. I appreciate your taking the time to correct what I said.
I fully expected for the R's to say "we didn't get all our witnesses", which is partly why they made that witness list include people they had zero hope of getting. A common tactic...
And it's also very likely Schiff was going to call those 3 dudes anyway, since they all generally supported the story being fleshed out (with Morrison being closest to being a pro-Trump witness). As I recall, those 3 hadn't been scheduled when the witness list was made public, so we'll never know...
Separate names with a comma.