Posted on 01/15/2020 2:29:50 AM PST by knighthawk
I have a better idea:
Dems may call ONLY those witnesses who have testified in the House, with the President’s team having full right to cross-examine them under oath.
The President may then call an UNLIMITED number of witnesses to refute the charges.
Someone else has told me that can only be voted on IF he gets convicted already.
But thank you.
People shouldn’t post such nonsense!
Now Peloser and the msm are talking about “big” new information and she’s saying more articles will be coming??
Have they done ANY work whatsoever this year?? Why are they full time?? Why doesn’t congress meet 8 weeks a year or less at a part time salary?
sorry :)
I’m just sick of all of it.
Only good thing is it’s killing dems’ chances.
No deals with the traitorous Demonicrats!!!
“Now Peloser and the msm are talking about “big” new information and she’s saying more articles will be coming??”
And the reason to wait for the new “evidence” - so it couldn’t be deconstructed before becoming part of the trial - which means it will be deconstructed but they can add another baseless charge to the fiasco.
Not one of them could pass the “test” they put on President Trump w/o turning up multiple felonies, yet, to coin Cruz, they haven’t even come up with a parking ticket on him...
Absolutely and of course the rats will go along with a witness tit for tat. Then this BS drags on for months and the rats get an extension to the witch hunt. Trump gets dragged through the mud all day every day for weeks or even months. If we had a majority leader who was really on our side he would use his clout to shut this crap down instead we have Mitch.
I heard it on Rush (Mark Steyn was filling in). The caller had zero support. Just said there was a "judge" that they did that to. The problem is that there are 1000's of trolls and disrupters waiting to get on the air and spew crap like that. Very hard to screen it out. Steyn brushed it off, but should have pushed back on the caller.
Why is this even an issue? Dems complain that if theiywitnesses aren’t allowed, it is a coverup. Well, if the President can’t call his witnesses, it is a farce.
“if President Trump is removed from office”
Not a good plan.
Stupid idea. Next thing they’ll want is to classify the type of witness, like (a), (b), (c). Then they can argue about who’s gets what classification. These people are nuts. Every damn one of them. They need to dismiss this travesty immediately. Of course that means we need RINO Utah Senator MITT ROMNEY, SUSAN COLLINS AND LISA MURKOWSKI to stay on the team. Not going to happen.That horrible Pierre Delecto is a wack job and will do anything to hurt Trump.
Whether they like him or not, Trump is the driving force behind the 2020 election, and it will be epic. And they know it.
“Likely candidates to be subpoenaed by the GOP include former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and the unidentified whistleblower who reported a July phone call between President Trump and the leader of Ukraine.”
I would call Hillary Clinton, Comey, Strozk, Paige, Brennan, Clapper, Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Mueller, Obama and everyone else who was involved in the coup against Trump.
And I would have the FBI on site ready to arrest anyone of them who lies under oath.
The biggest element of Trump’s defense against the “abuse of power” charge is that his dealings with Ukraine were a normal presidential function. Hunter Biden’s testimony would absolutely be relevant to this, since it would vindicate the President if it is determined that he was a crooked SOB who should have been investigated by the Ukrainian government.
Rudy, the Presidential envoy to Ukraine, possesses and is gathering evidence of American corruption from the sources. That evidence does not exist in America, thus the reason to set up Burisima off shore as the corruption mechanism.
The Ukranians know and are revealing all...... in secret
The rules on impeachment trials are determined by a majority vote.
Actual conviction and removal from office requires a 2/3 majority vote.
3 or 4 Republicans can’t stop him from running in 2020, but they can make it possible to hear from witnesses to the Ukraine events in the White House.
many times I wonder who’s side Ted is on. (other than his own)
I humbly suggest the following:
Every single Patriot who is invested in MAGA and cares about the future of the country much contact Rob Portman TODAY with the following message:
“If you refuse to vote for a summary dismissal, I am prepared to EMPTY MY WALLET in support of your primary opponent”.
What judge would let a case like this go to trail? Don’t answer that.
At least the “electoral college is going to elect Hillary” BS contained a kernel of truth. In theory, an elector can vote for anyone who meets the eligibility requirements for POTUS and there isn’t anything anyone can do about it. The members of the EC could have theoretically taken it upon themselves to vote for Clinton. In practice electors are chosen for party service and loyalty, though, so this scenario is never going to actually occur.
By contrast, the Constitution is crystal clear on what is needed to remove Trump from office and prevent him from seeking re-election— a 2/3 supermajority vote in the Senate. Anything short of 67 Senate votes results in acquittal and Trump is free to run for a second term.
Paul Pelosi
Hunter Biden
Chelsea Clinton
As the thugs flash their shiny object, their children accept bribes.
There is too much riding on the 2020 election, and not even the squishiest GOP senator wants to be in the minority, or have a Democrat in the White House.
How soon we forget Romney and Graham boasted about not voting for POTUS. They certainly wanted a Democrat in the White House in 2016.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.