Graham: Impeachment 'dead on arrival' in Senate if House bars 'whistleblower' testimony

Senator Graham is correct, why should the Senate even entertain unless the House Democrats can show this isn't just another Kavanagh smear job? Trump released the transcript of his conversation with the Ukrainian President. The Ukrainian President didn't even know the funds were on hold.



Biden admitted to it on video tape, so of course it deserves further investigation to determine if he was BSing or he really did it. The guy wants to be President. We could ask Biden if he broke the law but he'll likely just say it wasn't true and he was bragging. So we have to ask the other side which is what Trump did. Judging by the reaction from the left, I'm thinkin he did it or they wouldn't care because there would be nothing there.

Withholding funds is NOT Biden's call and using it to blackmail with would be Abuse of Power.....you can frame it anyway you'd like it's a crime. That's why Trump asked the Ukrainian President to coordinate with the U.S. AG.

 

Ah, whataboutism, impeachment style.

 

Trump has a Constitutional right to face his accuser.

 

In a criminal trial, correct? If someone is testifying against him, correct?

So when is the criminal trial?

 

Our CONGRESS passed a whistleblower bill guaranteeing anonymity and job security to whistleblowers.

 

Wrong! It prevents retaliation in the workplace for blowing the whistle.

 

Then suck lemons when the Senate tells you to **** off

 

Operatives aren't whistleblowers

 

Okay

 

Another juicy little tidbit-Mitch McConnell determines when any senate vote would occur, and ALL senators must be there during proceedings.

This means several democrat clow car presidential candidates would not be able to campaign-perhaps at critical times like super tuesday, etc.

 

Let's see how many people are against transparency.

This is a common sense position, unless you are a lockstep Leftist.

 

Good, settled.

 

^^^ This is DailyKos Fake News spread by the MSN / CNN types to "Useful Idiots" to believe and repeat.

Eric Ciaramella is this operative's name. He is not anonymous. He has been mentioned by his own lawyer by name in documents that are public.

Go ahead, share with everyone that verbiage in the CIA Whistleblower law. We'll wait.

 

Wrong.

The statute protects him from losing his job. It does not guarantee anonymity.

 

This thing is dead in the Senate no matter what. Senate Republicans will vote along party lines as loyalty to party trumps loyalty to country. Same applied to the democrats.

 

Exactly.

So Lindsay's Tantrum is completely unworthy of being taken seriously (and is about as relevant as a Hummingbird Fart in a Hurricane).

 

Dude hasn't been fired, what are whining about? Anonymity applies for the purpose of avoiding professional reprisals, it is not a pardon for attempting to overthrow lawfully elected presidents. In the end, we the people are the jury. If this is a clown show, Dems will lose the House. So far this is a clown show, no reason whatsoever for the American people to buy into it, especially if the accuser doesn't publicly testify...

 

Sorry but not sorry, loyalty to party is loyalty to country in this case.

 

Are you under some impression anybody takes this guy seriously anymore??

 

Absolutely.

That was the NAZI Slogan during the Third Reich.

Cool.

Once again, LIndsay's Tantrum is completely irrelevant (and changes nothing).

 

Yea? How are you going to make sure of it?

 

Impeachment is ALREADY DOA in the Senate (regardless of who testifies in The House).

So, Who Cares?

 

And consequently undermined the credibility of those who arent willing to put their name on their claim.

House 'rules' do not negate the expectations of the public for a cross-examination by representatives of the accused.

Part of what makes whistleblowing so heroic and credible is the risk associated with the act. Im sure you've heard the saying 'no guts, no glory'? The WB and Impeachment Committee are throwing both of those in the garbage.

The perception is and will continue to be that the WB doesn't have the credibility to stand up to a face-to-face cross examination by the opposition. Which is another way of saying he's likely full of Schiff.

He either testifies and and is cross examined as a witness, or in the public eye, he's hiding something.

 

.[1] The right only applies to criminal prosecutions, not civil cases or other proceedings.
This is not a criminal prosecution

 

It will be in the Senate.