GOP should allow more witnesses!!!

This is a trial. A trial is about finding the facts. ALL the facts. John Bolton may have more relevent info and facts so why not call him to testify???

What are folks afraid of?

They can also call Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, whoever they like.

Again, what's the problem with getting more info???

Seriously guys, this rush to end the trial and not allow any more witnesses looks like a desperate attempt to kill the possibility that incriminating evidence may come forward.

This is an Impeachment of a President. Please take this seriously and allow more witnesses. Its the right thing to do.

 

The Democrats had their chance in the House.

It's the Senate turn and they don't have to have witnesses.

 

Hey I'm in favor. Call all the witnesses, every single one. Let's do as detailed a deep dive on this as possible, no matter how many months it takes.

 

Problem...

Is that the dems have already made their case, and they established their charges.
We know and they know it's not going to fly. We also know why they continue to push it, in that ideally- they want to keep this cloud over Trump until the next election for political advantage. IF they had charges actually worthy of impeachment, they would have already presented them. It's now all about delay and keeping doubt and suspicion in the air as long as possible. One option is to create a do-over, run the entire sham again with new witnesses. If that was done and failed to last long enough, it would happen again.

This is roughly act 26 of a three-ring circus, accompanied by jugglers, clowns, magicians and anyone else they can conjure up to keep it running. I have no doubt that Trumps re-election won't stop it either, the bad faith they are showing the voters seems to be endless.

 

Personally I'd prefer they vote on the current articles of impeachment as they stand, with the evidence collected in the House. Then move on with further investigations and witnesses (on both sides).

It's sort of looking like enough Senators will vote for witnesses and drag this process out, possibly for months.

Susan Collins statement (from her Twitter):



Lisa Murkowski is leaning toward witnesses:



...and Mitt Romney will vote for witnesses, not out of any sense of ethics or integrity, but because he shares the "Hate Trump" grudge with the Democrat leaders.

 

In a trial, if there is new evidence that is relevant to the case, the new evidence is heard.

The Impeachment was like a Grand Jury to decide if there is enough evidence to indict a suspect. Now we have the Trial part, where the jury looks at the evidence and listens to the witnesses. Sometimes new witnesses become relevant in the middle of the trial. In this case the White House ORDERED all current and former White House staff not to cooperate with the House investigation.

So let's see if the White House will again BAN all current and former WH staff from cooperating, this time with the actual trial.

The real question is: what will the White House do if current or former WH staff decide to testify ANYWAYS? will Trump arrest them? Hold them "in contempt of the White House"?

 

Trump forbid them from hearing testimony from many White House staff.

Will he do this again? What if they tell Trump "**** you, Im gonna testify!!"?

 

Impeach him again.

 

Hmm, McConnel says there are enough votes to allow witnesses.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/i...pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

 

The funny thing is the Republicans claim not one single witness has testified that Trump specifically gave an order to hold the aid until Ukraine agreed to investigate Biden and the server. Well, that's cause Trump BANNED them all from testifying!!!!

 

The democrats don't need witnesses, they make them up as they go along.
Believing Schiff or his endless chain of "witnesses" is like buying re-cycled toilet paper. Same Old S***.
Besides... They had their party, and they wound up with nothing. You don't get a do-over when it appears you aren't going to get your way.
Unless you are 5 and throw a tantrum, and your mommy is a dishrag.

 

I'll take Viktor Shokin, President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Eric Cairemella.

You can keep the Bidens and POSchiff because they will plead the 5th or 'can't recall' aka the standard Clinton answer.

The left is going to let their alligator mouth overload their puppy dog ass.

 

all trials have witnesses.

Grand Jury also has witnesses.

and it looks like the Dems have the votes to call witnesses.

so this is happening, get over it.

 

You are aware that the Ukraine government was not even aware of any hold on the aid?
That the Ukraine's top people were never under the impression that the aid was dependent on anything?
Democratic fantasies may be colorful and creative, but it's not evidence of anything other than their animus.

This is on the level of a cop assuming a person on the street was probably thinking of jaywalking, and giving him a ticket.

 

The little trumplings are SCARED TO DEATH at the prospect of Bolton and Shady Mulvaney taking the stand, Ronnie.

They know dirty bones spurs will get BURIED...

 

FALSE. The Ukrainians knew the aid was on hold before Trump's call.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ld-on-aid-earlier-than-reported-idUSKBN1XU2VX

 

Of course, all trials have rules of evidence to- and those rules do not allow hearsay, opinion, and long lectures about what we should assume. That is precisely what the democratic case is made of.
It is also the kind of case that a judge in any normal court would immediately dismiss with a summary judgment as being without substance; or absent a Prima Facie case.

The current "trial" is more of a formality to humor the people the left has suckered into thinking the case actually has merit.

 

IF they did, then Trumps call didn't change anything at all.... except the democrats thinking they could make something nasty about it.
ALL aid is on hold until all the appropriate processes are complete and requirements met. That is hardly what the allegations against Trump refer to.

 

Trump could admit that he did EVERYTHING he was impeached for, and you'd still call for his exoneration.

 

No, not afraid. Trump didn't break any laws. Senate will acquit him, even if they vote to drag this trial out for months with extra witnesses. Republicans are just tired of playing in the Democrats' childrens' sandbox of slander and hurt feelings and want to get back to work making the country great again.

 

We have all the witnesses the house called during their farcical deliberations if that wasn't enough the house shouldn't have brought the case until they did.

 

the General Accounting Office stated that Trump broke the law by withholding the aid.

It violated the Impoundment Control Act, which says President can only withhold Congressionally approved funds if Congress agrees.

 

FALSE!!

The House called many witnesses that were blocked by Trump's blanket Executive Privilege bullshit.

 

True not Trump's fault that the house refused to go to court over the president's use of executive privilege.

 

The GAO accused Obama of breaking federal laws on 7 separate occasions. The GAO plays a legal "opinion" oversight role as advisors to Congress. They've slapped almost every President on the wrist for something.