Why is Mitch McConnell refusing to subpoena any documents and witnesses?

No! They must hold a trial. Read the Constitution!

And answer the question on the OP. Nobody has. And I don't expect you to be the first.

 

So your answer is that McConnell refuses to listen to the evidence because placing partisanship and personal electoral interest before the interest of their country is how this Senate "works"?

Not a very patriotic answer, but at least it's honest.

 

Actually, I believe many informed citizens watched the House proceedings and witnessed the inquiry. It truly was nothing but a political show. The House voted to impeach, so now the Senate gets to play ball in their court. As in the 2016 election, Dems are far too quick to underestimate the critical thinking of the right. They will once again pay a price for that mistake in the 2020 election.

 

Bingo! And to determine the validity, they need to look at the facts that the investigation uncovered. Why does Mitch McConnell refuse to do that? That's the question.

 

The Constitution does not by its express terms direct the Senate to try an impeachment. In fact, it confers on the Senate "the sole power to try,” which is a conferral of exclusive constitutional authority and not a procedural command. The Senate can dismiss.

 

Exactly! And their investigation shows that, for example, a complete transcript of all the calls that Trump locked up in the super-secret server show that Trump is guilty. So the question is: why does Mitch McConnell refuse to bring that evidence to the trial.

You keep making the Democrats' case, and don't even realize it.

If there is no case, those documents and the witnesses will show it. So, again: why doesn't McConnell want to subpoena them?

 

Criminal or not, it's still a trial. Repeating in an irrelevant context what I said in a relevant context is not an argument.

False! They presented the witnesses the wanted and were relevant. If Democrats wanted to call Stormy Daniels to the Senate trial and interrogate her under oath about her "adventures" with Trump, I would agree with Republicans if they rejected it for not being relevant to the charges.

The job of the House during Impeachment was... to impeach. They did what was necessary to accomplish that, and they did. No more, no less.

Now, why do you think the house refused to go to court to compel witnesses during the Impeachment phase?

 

Strange that they could not do that when testifying to the House.

 

So your idea of a "trial" is guilty until proven innocent... Got ou.

 

Same remark you made about the impeachment. Not relevant then, not relevant now.

They claimed "they couldn't wait". Now they are waiting.

Then why are they wanting the senate to investigate further? Any job worth doing, is worth doing right the first time.

 

This is very simple. The House voted for articles of impeachment based on testimony and documents plus threats by Pelosi to primary any Democrat who didn't vote for the articles. That evidence is and has always been the starting point for impeachment trials. Trump released the transcript to the inquiry. They ignored the transcript because it didn't say what they wanted it to say.

In any case, there was no high crime or misdemeanor in the testimony ,,, or Pelosi wouldn't be stalling. And no, I did not support your conspiracy theory.

 

For a guy who takes a long time to research, your answer should be easy to find.

 

Their obligation was to impeach. They impeached!

And they found the evidence. It's in the Super Secret Server. It's in the testimony of witnesses that have been mentioned.

The question is: why does Mitch McConnell refuse to listen to it?

Can you answer? Yes or no?

Yes they are! It's called "Oath of office". They also take an oath to be impartial during the Impeachment. But,, mostly, the obligation is called patriotism! If they put their country before partisan politics, they must hear all the relevant evidence.

They are in no obligation if these witnesses or documents weren't relevant. This is where Democrats say the definite evidence lies. Therefore they are relevant. If Democrats are wrong, they are relevant to show that.

So the question on the OP is: Why does Mitch McConnell refuse to see them?

Can you or can you not answer that question?

No. I can thank unpatriotic Americans who refuse to put their country before their partisanship. I can thank them, not only for not removing Trump if he is guilty. Or I can thank them for not showing that the charges have no substance if he's not.

It's hard to come up with scum more unpatriotic than that, isn't it?

The old GOP has been taken over by the unpatriotic vermin now in power. Will their base remember their priorities?

 

Common'. Does anyone really wonder why McConnell is blocking evidence? To ask the question is to answer it. It's because he knows the evidence would destroy his case and his president. This has become the most farcical circle jerk ever to play out in Washington and that goes some. I have to wonder what Chief Justice Roberts thinks about all this? If ever there were a man that loves the Constitution and the law, it is the Chief Justice.

After this all passes into the history books only a few key players will get to honorable mention - Trump, McConnell, Schiff, and Bolton.

 

Blocking evidence? It is Pelosi that is blocking evidence by not turning it over to the Senate for trial. Remember, this was a 'slam dunk'.

 

They read the transcripts and go to C-SPAN footage if they're unsure about anything.

 

"A clear and present danger" -- until it was voted on.

 

Why is Mitch McConnell refusing to subpoena any documents and witnesses?

Simple, because Trump is guilty as charged.

 

DUH. Trump wouldn't let them testify for the House. The House knew they would end up in the Supreme Court to get them to testify and felt they didn't have to wait that long because they felt they already had enough evidence to convict. Tough keeping up huh?

 

What evidence?

Fiona Hills opinion?
Solands presumptions?

 

As I suggested, keeping up is difficult for some of us.

 

You mean the party that MANY republicans were also invited to partake in, refused, and then claimed it was a partisan effort? Those closed doors?

 

"Express terms"? What nonsense!

You re not answering the question. Why does Mitch McConnell refuse to see the evidence?

Why can't anybody on the right answer the question?

I saw one response:

Does the right understand that that's the only possible answer and simply refuses to deal with reality?

 

My idea of a trial is look at the evidence. Follow wherever it leads.

Why is Mitch McConnell refusing to? Answer!

 

The house gathered the evidence...The senate rules on the articles the house provides....the house is supposed to put forward the articles based on the evidence they gathered.