Democrats - Do you REALLY want witnesses in the Senate trial?

[cabse5]

Then start an investigation through legitimate methods. It's called law enforcement agencies who have legal authority to investigate accusations supported by verifiable evidence. Present the evidence to them.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

An investigation of the Ukraine has been initiated by the Trump DOJ. The same DOJ which initiated the investigation into collusion, allegedly, between the Trump campaign and Russians to interfere in the 2016 election. Are you saying the investigation of collusion between Russians and, allegedly, the Trump campaign to interfere in the 2016 election wasn't done via legitimate methods?:roll:

Oh, if one were to take the definition of election interference offered by dems, the Trump campaign could never be guilty of election interference because, for example, the Trump campaign wasn't foreign.:roll:

 

[MrWonka]

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar are all grounded from campaigning during this trial. The other 3 are not.

So, Democrats, are you certain you want a month's long trial controlled entirely by McConnell and the Republicans?

LOL!! Nice Try. This is some full on lunatic **** here. Pretty much everyone has made up their mind at this point. One or two additional campaign events in Iowa aren't radically changing the outcome of a vote that's a week or two away.

Biden isn't testifying because there's no reason for him to. He has know personal knowledge of what crimes Donald Trump committed.

 

[What if...?]

That is what we heard, but did not actually see evidence aside from what others assumed and even then the assumptions have only been just that, assumptions.

When it comes to this whole Ukraine business. I believe Biden should've never opened his mouth about using his position to manipulate the Ukrainian authorities in the first place.

We might not even be in this mess had he not gone on television and bragged about doing something like that.

Its what he asked for in the "perfect call".

No witnesses necessary.

Not gonna touch the server thing, are you.

None of you do.

I frankly can't believe nobody harps on it.

It's pretty insane.

The closest I've seen is ducking the unicorn hunt and leaning on the black ledger.

As if that's what he asked zelenskyy to look into.

 

[Herkamer63]

I'm not opposed to the poll, but what's the need for witnesses when you had the Mueller report that said there was no evidence nor any witnesses to collusion and no evidence nor witnesses to obstruction of justice? The phone call to Ukraine, the transcript is out. There are no witnesses that said Trump wanted a quid pro quo, making the whistle blower's, Eric Ciarmella's, claim irrelevant because he wasn't even in the same room. All these other people that the Democrats want so bad to testify should had already been called during the House hearings. There's no new evidence nor witnesses to this case. The Democrats should had presented ALL of this before the articles of impeachment were sent. The REAL reason they didn't is they DIDN'T have any evidence NOR witnesses to begin with, but they sent the articles over anyway. The why is pretty simple: they thought they could bully the Republicans into pushing impeachment on Trump. Why else would you hear Bug-Eyed Pencil-Neck Schiff say things like "you're guilty if you dismiss these charges" and "you're guilty if you acquit these charges?"

This is the Democrat party in panic mode. They know, at this moment in time, they have NO ONE in the Democrat Primaries that can stop Trump from being reelected. Support for Trump has been trending upwards. If the media wasn't so damn bias, Trump's approval numbers would be well over, dare I say, 60-70%. Instead, they will have his numbers below 50%, and in some polls, below 45% because they load their polls with Leftists. The Democrat party sees this and their gamble with impeachment is out of sheer desperation. It's going to fail, and we're seeing it on full display. They say there is "overwhelming" evidence against Trump but it's no where to be found. The Republicans are simply calling their bluff by rejecting the notion for new witnesses and evidence because the Democrats should have presented all that a long time ago (even though there wasn't any to begin with). They had their chance and it's now time to hear from the other side.

The witnesses the Republicans should call are Creepy Joe and Hunter Biden, Eric Ciarmella (the whistleblower), and Bug-Eyed Pencil-Neck Schiff. Those are the people that should be the people front in center, and I would start with Schiff. I would give this guy 2 options:

-Plead the 5th and have the trial dismissed, which leads to an investigation into him and his co-conspirators

-Testify and go through the trial as normal, letting the Senators to vote properly

Schiff is the ring leader in all this, so it's time he has to fess up as to what's actually going on.

 

[bongsaway]

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar are all grounded from campaigning during this trial. The other 3 are not.

It would not just be the witnesses Schiff wants, but any witnesses Trump wants - meaning all of the Bidens, Schiff, the whistleblower, Nadler, and since the House uses hearsay and speculation, but general attacks against Trump's dealing with foreign policy, in rebuttal Trump's team could call anyone they want to for hearsay, speculation and praise of Trump on Ukraine and his foreign policy.
The trial could last for months - all the way thru the Democratic Primary with the 3 Senators completely grounds and out of the news cycle.

Once Biden had it locked down, and the trial still going, the Senate Republicans could force Biden, his children and his brother all to testify about ALL the countries and ALL the domestic government projects that Biden spearheaded for the tax dollars - as at the same time his kids negotiated getting a cut of those tax dollars. PLUS, of course, Republicans could call hearsay, speculating and condemning witnesses against Biden - basically Benghazi-hearing Biden directly for days and indirectly including thru his kids for weeks.

Thus, the trial ends with Trump exonerated and the Republicans in the Senate having turned the trial into the question of "just HOW CORRUPTION is Joe Biden and how much money tax money has his relatives stolen thru the most well recognized form of graft? The Democratic Senator candidates are taken off the campaign and silenced, while the trial ends up being about Biden, not Trump.

It has been reported that some Democrats in the Senate have said if calling witnesses includes Biden, that won't vote for having witnesses - for obvious reasons. NOR could Democrat sob that the Republicans calling witnesses is unfair after they sobbed to have witnesses.

So, Democrats, are you certain you want a month's long trial controlled entirely by McConnell and the Republicans?

According to your poll, hell yes, bring it on.

Democrats aren't hiding or dodging anything so why not call all the witnesses available who have relevant testimony?

It's only republicans who don't want to see or hear documents and testimony from the folks around trump. The first hand folks.

 

[notquiteright]

I guess bald face lies are all that you have left at this point. Then again, it pretty much works both ways. Showing why your side didn't want Biden's involvement to be investigated. Which is kind of par for the course at this point.

Was any Biden involved with 'crowdstrike'???

Was any Biden involved with some mystery server???

Was any Biden involved with deciding to 'ask for a favor'???

THAT is what is being investigated, If the tRumpers want to investigate Hunter's time in the Ukraine they are free to conduct an different investigation.

As far as bald faced lies The Don's cabal lies until contradicted with text, transcripts, witnesses. Some, like Pompeo denying any knowledge of the phone call-then confronted with sworn testimony he was listening in on he call, lie when being found out is all too easy. :doh

Lying seems to be the MO of Team tRump. But of course the kool aid drinkers try to flip the script as they lack much of anything else... eace

 

[notquiteright]

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar are all grounded from campaigning during this trial. The other 3 are not. It would not just be the witnesses Schiff wants, but any witnesses Trump wants - meaning all of the Bidens, Schiff, the whistleblower, Nadler, and since the House uses hearsay and speculation, but general attacks against Trump's dealing with foreign policy, in rebuttal Trump's team could call anyone they want to for hearsay, speculation and praise of Trump on Ukraine and his foreign policy. The trial could last for months - all the way thru the Democratic Primary with the 3 Senators completely grounds and out of the news cycle. Once Biden had it locked down, and the trial still going, the Senate Republicans could force Biden, his children and his brother all to testify about ALL the countries and ALL the domestic government projects that Biden spearheaded for the tax dollars - as at the same time his kids negotiated getting a cut of those tax dollars. PLUS, of course, Republicans could call hearsay, speculating and condemning witnesses against Biden - basically Benghazi-hearing Biden directly for days and indirectly including thru his kids for weeks. Thus, the trial ends with Trump exonerated and the Republicans in the Senate having turned the trial into the question of "just HOW CORRUPTION is Joe Biden and how much money tax money has his relatives stolen thru the most well recognized form of graft? The Democratic Senator candidates are taken off the campaign and silenced, while the trial ends up being about Biden, not Trump. It has been reported that some Democrats in the Senate have said if calling witnesses includes Biden, that won't vote for having witnesses - for obvious reasons. NOR could Democrat sob that the Republicans calling witnesses is unfair after they sobbed to have witnesses.

So, Democrats, are you certain you want a month's long trial controlled entirely by McConnell and the Republicans?

Typical highly biased right wing 'alternate facts'... :roll:

You left out the only realistic question in your biased poll.

Would you want any and all relevant documents and witnesses presented at the trial with Justice Roberts ruling on whether they are relevant to the impeachment?

The tRumpers would love to throw ignorant poop around to distract from the facts relevant to impeachment, but Roberts is there to keep the trial on track.

Moscow Mitch got to set the rules but Roberts runs the trial... eace

 

[Airyaman]

Then blame Comey.

It's not about who to blame, it's that people would rather not support someone under investigation.

 

[redrover]

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar are all grounded from campaigning during this trial. The other 3 are not.

It would not just be the witnesses Schiff wants, but any witnesses Trump wants - meaning all of the Bidens, Schiff, the whistleblower, Nadler, and since the House uses hearsay and speculation, but general attacks against Trump's dealing with foreign policy, in rebuttal Trump's team could call anyone they want to for hearsay, speculation and praise of Trump on Ukraine and his foreign policy.
The trial could last for months - all the way thru the Democratic Primary with the 3 Senators completely grounds and out of the news cycle.

Once Biden had it locked down, and the trial still going, the Senate Republicans could force Biden, his children and his brother all to testify about ALL the countries and ALL the domestic government projects that Biden spearheaded for the tax dollars - as at the same time his kids negotiated getting a cut of those tax dollars. PLUS, of course, Republicans could call hearsay, speculating and condemning witnesses against Biden - basically Benghazi-hearing Biden directly for days and indirectly including thru his kids for weeks.

Thus, the trial ends with Trump exonerated and the Republicans in the Senate having turned the trial into the question of "just HOW CORRUPTION is Joe Biden and how much money tax money has his relatives stolen thru the most well recognized form of graft? The Democratic Senator candidates are taken off the campaign and silenced, while the trial ends up being about Biden, not Trump.

It has been reported that some Democrats in the Senate have said if calling witnesses includes Biden, that won't vote for having witnesses - for obvious reasons. NOR could Democrat sob that the Republicans calling witnesses is unfair after they sobbed to have witnesses.

So, Democrats, are you certain you want a month's long trial controlled entirely by McConnell and the Republicans?

I agree there is probably much to be gained by watching another week of clownish Republican behavior. Anyone with half a brain has already concluded the answer is to defeat them at the polls sending back under the rocks from whence they crawled.

 

[joko104]

joko,
If Biden held up $1 billion in aid to Ukraine unless an investigator was fired, isn't that extortion?
Biden got what he wanted. The investigator was fired and Ukraine got the $1 billion. Wasn't that a quid pro quo?
Isn't Biden guilty of extortion?

Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

And bragged about it politically for his personal political benefit! If he were elected president, he should immediately be "forever impeached."

 

[joko104]

I agree there is probably much to be gained by watching another week of clownish Republican behavior. Anyone with half a brain has already concluded the answer is to defeat them at the polls sending back under the rocks from whence they crawled.

No, not "another week." Another 15 weeks.

 

[joko104]

Typical highly biased right wing 'alternate facts'... :roll:

You left out the only realistic question in your biased poll.

Would you want any and all relevant documents and witnesses presented at the trial with Justice Roberts ruling on whether they are relevant to the impeachment?

The tRumpers would love to throw ignorant poop around to distract from the facts relevant to impeachment, but Roberts is there to keep the trial on track.

Moscow Mitch got to set the rules but Roberts runs the trial... eace

I don't think Roberts would do it since he will not give opinion as the whether the Articles of Impeachment rise to meet Constitutional standards, nor could he even rule without hearing the witness first because there would be no basis for such a ruling. In short, your message is nonsensical.

 

[joko104]

LOL!! Nice Try. This is some full on lunatic **** here. Pretty much everyone has made up their mind at this point. One or two additional campaign events in Iowa aren't radically changing the outcome of a vote that's a week or two away.

Biden isn't testifying because there's no reason for him to. He has know personal knowledge of what crimes Donald Trump committed.

He has knowledge of what he did and whether there is a basis for him to be investigated - which ONLY Ukraine can do and Ukraine law REQUIRES a request from a foreign government.

NO witness is more relevant other than Trump if he testifies that Joe Biden. Erase Joe Biden from the Articles of impeachment and NOTHING is left.

"Trump attempted to victimize my client, Joe Biden, for no reason at all. Take my lawyer's word for it. So all of this is irrelevant." :lamo

 

[joko104]

Democrats say: "The Senators and Americans must hear all Trump-hater's no-personal knowledge speculation, hearsay, explaining why President Trump isn't doing what Obama did, gossip - BUT HELL NO! NOT JOE BIDEN! WE MUST, MUST cover up everything about Biden!"

One of the articles is exactly and singularly about JOE BIDEN!

Wow, are are the Democrats DESPERATE to hide the facts and do a cover up for Joe Biden. THAT is the "cover up!"

 

[vegas giants]

Democrats say: "The Senators and Americans must hear all Trump-hater's no-personal knowledge speculation, hearsay, explaining why President Trump isn't doing what Obama did, gossip - BUT HELL NO! NOT JOE BIDEN! WE MUST, MUST cover up everything about Biden!"

One of the articles is exactly and singularly about JOE BIDEN!

Wow, are are the Democrats DESPERATE to hide the facts and do a cover up for Joe Biden. THAT is the "cover up!"

Have them all testify. Right after Bolton and Mulvaney

 

[mrdeltoid]

You cant force people to testify during a trial to things completely unrelated to that trial, to the charges presented. There would be no legitimate reason for any Biden to actually answer questions unrelated to the charges against President Trump. I have every faith that Chief Justice Roberts would ensure questioning of the witnesses you mentioned didnt actually involve anything you mentioned them being allegedly involved with, since that would be far outside of the scope of what Trump is being accused of, only tangentially related because Trump bringing up investigating anything about the Bidens was an attempt to gain political points, not because he has any evidence of those things.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

The dems contend that Trump wanted Biden investigated because he was a candidate, that may possibly win the democrat primary and be Trumps opponent in the general. Trump's contention is, that he didn't want to release military aid to Ukraine, because he believed Biden was corrupt, and interfered with the investigation into Burisma . Regardless of who we believe is telling the truth, we can't find out if Biden is corrupt, if he's not even investigated/put under oath, along with Burisma, his son, and anybody connected with the investigation. according to "unnamed sources", people in the Obama administration were trying to block any inquiry into it.

 

[roguenuke]

The dems contend that Trump wanted Biden investigated because he was a candidate, that may possibly win the democrat primary and be Trumps opponent in the general. Trump's contention is, that he didn't want to release military aid to Ukraine, because he believed Biden was corrupt, and interfered with the investigation into Burisma . Regardless of who we believe is telling the truth, we can't find out if Biden is corrupt, if he's not even investigated/put under oath, along with Burisma, his son, and anybody connected with the investigation. according to "unnamed sources", people in the Obama administration were trying to block any inquiry into it.

Then if you have any evidence that he was corrupt, open a legitimate investigation, supply your evidence/provable cause to a judge to get a subpoena specifically for Bidens to testify, swear under oath. But it should be done as part of that such investigation. Not as part of a trial for the guy trying to get someone else to proclaim to doing an investigation to smear that person.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[notquiteright]

I don't think Roberts would do it since he will not give opinion as the whether the Articles of Impeachment rise to meet Constitutional standards, nor could he even rule without hearing the witness first because there would be no basis for such a ruling. In short, your message is nonsensical.

I didn't say anything about him deciding what rises, just what is relevant to the conduct of the trial. Trying to drag all manner of distraction 'witnesses' is in his prevue.

In short, your fantasy scenario is highly biased.... eace

 

[Mycroft]

I've said numerous times that witnesses should be called...by both sides. But I also concur with the OP that perhaps the Dem Managers should think about the upside and downside of agreeing to that process.

So...what's the upside for the Dems? They can call Bolton and Mulvaney, I've seen mention. Sure. But what will Bolton and Mulvaney say? Nothing. Every time they are asked a question, they will confer with their lawyer and respond that they cannot answer that question because of executive privilege. Questioning them will be a waste of time.

And...what's the upside for the defense? They can call a slew of witnesses ranging from Joe and Hunter to Atkinson and Schiffty. None of them will be able to claim any kind of privilege...except to plead the Fifth.

Now...the Dems aren't dumb. They'll never go along with the witness process. Unfortunately, they don't have a vote in the matter. It's on the Senate. I don't know how such a vote would turn out, they very well could vote to have witnesses anyway. Just to **** up the Dem Managers.

 

[Jason Warfield]

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar are all grounded from campaigning during this trial. The other 3 are not.

It would not just be the witnesses Schiff wants, but any witnesses Trump wants - meaning all of the Bidens, Schiff, the whistleblower, Nadler, and since the House uses hearsay and speculation, but general attacks against Trump's dealing with foreign policy, in rebuttal Trump's team could call anyone they want to for hearsay, speculation and praise of Trump on Ukraine and his foreign policy.
The trial could last for months - all the way thru the Democratic Primary with the 3 Senators completely grounds and out of the news cycle.

Once Biden had it locked down, and the trial still going, the Senate Republicans could force Biden, his children and his brother all to testify about ALL the countries and ALL the domestic government projects that Biden spearheaded for the tax dollars - as at the same time his kids negotiated getting a cut of those tax dollars. PLUS, of course, Republicans could call hearsay, speculating and condemning witnesses against Biden - basically Benghazi-hearing Biden directly for days and indirectly including thru his kids for weeks.

Thus, the trial ends with Trump exonerated and the Republicans in the Senate having turned the trial into the question of "just HOW CORRUPTION is Joe Biden and how much money tax money has his relatives stolen thru the most well recognized form of graft? The Democratic Senator candidates are taken off the campaign and silenced, while the trial ends up being about Biden, not Trump.

It has been reported that some Democrats in the Senate have said if calling witnesses includes Biden, that won't vote for having witnesses - for obvious reasons. NOR could Democrat sob that the Republicans calling witnesses is unfair after they sobbed to have witnesses.

So, Democrats, are you certain you want a month's long trial controlled entirely by McConnell and the Republicans?

Yes...because of the point that you are making: you approaching this point in the Trumpian context that "winning"...whatever that means for you...is more important than trying to let democracy and our Constitution allow us to do the right thing.

I'd rather have candidates tied up into this process and have the Senate vote on party lines to show the world how corrupted the GOP has gotten in protecting Trump just so they can "win".

 

[Oborosen]

Its what he asked for in the "perfect call".

No witnesses necessary.

Not gonna touch the server thing, are you.

None of you do.

I frankly can't believe nobody harps on it.

It's pretty insane.

The closest I've seen is ducking the unicorn hunt and leaning on the black ledger.

As if that's what he asked zelenskyy to look into.

If all we have are your assumptions about the phone call, then I don't really care.

 

[Oborosen]

Was any Biden involved with 'crowdstrike'???

Was any Biden involved with some mystery server???

Was any Biden involved with deciding to 'ask for a favor'???

THAT is what is being investigated, If the tRumpers want to investigate Hunter's time in the Ukraine they are free to conduct an different investigation.

As far as bald faced lies The Don's cabal lies until contradicted with text, transcripts, witnesses. Some, like Pompeo denying any knowledge of the phone call-then confronted with sworn testimony he was listening in on he call, lie when being found out is all too easy. :doh

Lying seems to be the MO of Team tRump. But of course the kool aid drinkers try to flip the script as they lack much of anything else... eace

You're forgetting that Biden didn't ask for a favor, he made a demand of a foreign government. For what appears to be very personal reasons, given how close his family was to that very demand.

 

[Oborosen]

It's not about who to blame, it's that people would rather not support someone under investigation.

Given how much support Trump had this whole time, compounded with the negative press. I think that Hillary had some extra lack of character that everyone was latching onto, instead of just the whole e-mail investigation.

 

[notquiteright]

You're forgetting that Biden didn't ask for a favor, he made a demand of a foreign government. For what appears to be very personal reasons, given how close his family was to that very demand.

You're forgetting there is ZERO proof Biden demanding anything for his son... where is the transcript showing that????

You're forgetting the European governments agreed with withholding the aid until some corrupt officials were removed... did any of our allies agree with tRump????

tRump wanted help in a domestic political campaign, Biden didn't.

If you want to talk about Daddy helping a child, let's talk about Ivanka and the patents she got from China...

Let's begin... eace

 

[Oborosen]

You're forgetting there is ZERO proof Biden demanding anything for his son... where is the transcript showing that????

You're forgetting the European governments agreed with withholding the aid until some corrupt officials were removed... did any of our allies agree with tRump????

tRump wanted help in a domestic political campaign, Biden didn't.

If you want to talk about Daddy helping a child, let's talk about Ivanka and the patents she got from China...

Let's begin... eace

As it sits, we have nothing to show that you're correct about the first claim.

It's doesn't matter who agreed because a consensus of any sort doesn't mean that they're in any way correct.

You have nothing to even begin to prove that Trump did that for such a reason, beyond misplaced assumptions.

I never said anything about Biden getting his son that position, we all know that is how Hunter got that position in the first place. Biden's actions bordered on being an act of corruption, that could keep his son out of trouble. There is a distinct difference.