It is also funny that Chuck Schumer 20 years ago said that no witnesses were necessary in the Senate trial of Bill Clinton trial because there were not going to be enough senators (67)to vote to convict and remove from office. Ahhh .... how things have changed when the person who has been impeached is not of the same party as Chuck. What a sleazy shyster this clown is.
Clinton had a pathetic tryst with an intern. Disappointing, but really not comparable to Trump's attempted shakedown of a foreign government to benefit his political position. Clinton made the nation look silly, but Trump is making us look unhinged.
Bring on the witnesses.
Putting all political bias aside, this is boiling down to one fundamental issue. To what extent can the President limit Congress from checking him? In the context of this case, would the hearing of witness testimony somehow water down or hurt executive power? That is what the WH defense team is claiming. We have precedence here folks - there has been no past impeachment trial without witness testimony... the WH's defense is foolish. Also, the courts would ultimately have sided with the House if it came to down to a legal fight. I understand the WH throwing a fuss about having evidence against them heard, but for Senators to resist is almost treasonous.
C0l0rado wrote:
Clinton had a pathetic tryst with an intern. Disappointing, but really not comparable to Trump's attempted shakedown of a foreign government to benefit his political position. Clinton made the nation look silly, but Trump is making us look unhinged.
Bring on the witnesses.
It's sad we even have to keep making this point...
Question to trumpers - if there was actually any concern about general corruption in the Ukraine, why focus on Biden, his rival, when there are thousands of corrupt oligarchs and rich americans that would be much more relevant? What would Joe and Hunter have to say that would be in any way relevant to the accusations?
Sally Vix wrote:
It would be ludicrous NOT to call Hunter Biden. He is at the epicenter of the Ukrainian corruption. He was being paid millions for a position he was not qualified for and for what he pretty much did nothing for. Adam Schiff was the head of the House Intelligence committee and lied to House members when he described the phone call that Trump made. He had the actual transcript of the phone call but just lied and lied and lied. He also lied about his relationship with the Whistleblower and he lied about working in concert with the Whistleblower. How he has not been disbarred is simply amazing to me. He has not one iota of credibility. I believe if Schiff and Hunter were to be called as witnesses many Democrat Senators would vote to acquit. Just a shame what Schiff has done to this impeachment.
Republicans have the numbers to call them as witnesses without making any deals with Democrats.
Why don't they do it?
Sally Vix wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
This is why the concept of letting the people decide in 2020 is ridiculous. Anyone with a reasonable understanding of the details of the impeachment would know testimony from Hunter, the WB and Schiff has zero to do with Trump's guilt or innocence. "The people deciding" is like a trial where half the jury slept through the whole process.
It would be ludicrous NOT to call Hunter Biden. He is at the epicenter of the Ukrainian corruption. He was being paid millions for a position he was not qualified for and for what he pretty much did nothing for. Adam Schiff was the head of the House Intelligence committee and lied to House members when he described the phone call that Trump made. He had the actual transcript of the phone call but just lied and lied and lied. He also lied about his relationship with the Whistleblower and he lied about working in concert with the Whistleblower. How he has not been disbarred is simply amazing to me. He has not one iota of credibility. I believe if Schiff and Hunter were to be called as witnesses many Democrat Senators would vote to acquit. Just a shame what Schiff has done to this impeachment.
Hunter has nothing to do with the evidence against Trump. He didn't listen to the phone call, meet with Trump or hang out with Giuliani. There is zero evidence that he did anything other than cash in his last name.
Anything between Schiff and the WB also has nothing to with evidence. Schiff did not tell Trump what to say to Zelesky, did not coax Mulvaney to admit to QQP or coach the witness testimony in the House. The Republicans grilling Schiff on the stand would be similar to a defense attorney walking over and punching a prosecutor in the face. Schiff wasn't practicing law so he will not be disbarred.
Trump, and no one else, is the epicenter.
Sally, the law is based on logic and your take is illogical. If Trump was justified in siccing Giuliani on the Bidensn you must also believe the DNC server is in Ukraine and that a rich Ukranian is masquerading as a Russian-American founder of Crowd Strike.
You, m'am, are why the people cannot decide.
L L wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
It would be ludicrous NOT to call Hunter Biden. He is at the epicenter of the Ukrainian corruption. He was being paid millions for a position he was not qualified for and for what he pretty much did nothing for. Adam Schiff was the head of the House Intelligence committee and lied to House members when he described the phone call that Trump made. He had the actual transcript of the phone call but just lied and lied and lied. He also lied about his relationship with the Whistleblower and he lied about working in concert with the Whistleblower. How he has not been disbarred is simply amazing to me. He has not one iota of credibility. I believe if Schiff and Hunter were to be called as witnesses many Democrat Senators would vote to acquit. Just a shame what Schiff has done to this impeachment.
Republicans have the numbers to call them as witnesses without making any deals with Democrats.
Why don't they do it?
I think they probably will if Bolton and Mulvaney and others are called. Every Dem Senator is adamant about not making a deal to offer up the Bidens in exchange for allowing the testimony of Bolton and Mulvaney. Why are they so worried about having the Bidens testify? If that conspiracy has been thoroughly debunked (which it hasn't) then why are they afraid of it?
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
It would be ludicrous NOT to call Hunter Biden. He is at the epicenter of the Ukrainian corruption. He was being paid millions for a position he was not qualified for and for what he pretty much did nothing for. Adam Schiff was the head of the House Intelligence committee and lied to House members when he described the phone call that Trump made. He had the actual transcript of the phone call but just lied and lied and lied. He also lied about his relationship with the Whistleblower and he lied about working in concert with the Whistleblower. How he has not been disbarred is simply amazing to me. He has not one iota of credibility. I believe if Schiff and Hunter were to be called as witnesses many Democrat Senators would vote to acquit. Just a shame what Schiff has done to this impeachment.
Hunter has nothing to do with the evidence against Trump. He didn't listen to the phone call, meet with Trump or hang out with Giuliani. There is zero evidence that he did anything other than cash in his last name.
Anything between Schiff and the WB also has nothing to with evidence. Schiff did not tell Trump what to say to Zelesky, did not coax Mulvaney to admit to QQP or coach the witness testimony in the House. The Republicans grilling Schiff on the stand would be similar to a defense attorney walking over and punching a prosecutor in the face. Schiff wasn't practicing law so he will not be disbarred.
Trump, and no one else, is the epicenter.
Sally, the law is based on logic and your take is illogical. If Trump was justified in siccing Giuliani on the Bidensn you must also believe the DNC server is in Ukraine and that a rich Ukranian is masquerading as a Russian-American founder of Crowd Strike.
You, m'am, are why the people cannot decide.
I won't be able to address all of your points but will start with just one. Intel head Adam Schiff acknowledged that he made up parts of the Ukraine phone call transcript when he delivered his opening statement at a much-watched TV hearing. He tainted the impeachment proceeding. Let me repeat ... he TAINTED the impeachment proceeding in the House. Many of the House members might have made up their minds just from hearing Schiff lie about the phone call. Again, he lied! He needs to be called before the Senate to address how he lied about the phone call.
Sally Vix wrote:
Republicans have the numbers to call them as witnesses without making any deals with Democrats.
Why don't they do it?
I think they probably will if Bolton and Mulvaney and others are called. Every Dem Senator is adamant about not making a deal to offer up the Bidens in exchange for allowing the testimony of Bolton and Mulvaney. Why are they so worried about having the Bidens testify? If that conspiracy has been thoroughly debunked (which it hasn't) then why are they afraid of it?[/quote]
Everything doesn't have to be a deal. They can take a separate vote on each witness.
L L wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Republicans have the numbers to call them as witnesses without making any deals with Democrats.
Why don't they do it?
I think they probably will if Bolton and Mulvaney and others are called. Every Dem Senator is adamant about not making a deal to offer up the Bidens in exchange for allowing the testimony of Bolton and Mulvaney. Why are they so worried about having the Bidens testify? If that conspiracy has been thoroughly debunked (which it hasn't) then why are they afraid of it?
Everything doesn't have to be a deal. They can take a separate vote on each witness.[/quote]
True. But I just read this ...
Josh Holmes, the former chief of staff to Sen. Mitch McConnell, said on Wednesday that setting terms for including witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial will also create an opportunity for President Trump’s legal team to call any witness of their choosing.
“Adam Schiff is not controlling the process here,” Holmes told “America’s Newsroom,” noting that calling witnesses may not turn out favorably for Democrats in the end.
T“What’s going to happen is if you open that witness Pandora’s Box, Republicans and Trump’s defense team is going to get witnesses, too," Holmes said. "That includes Hunter Biden; that could include the whistleblower; heck, it could even include Adam Schiff, who I think has a fair amount of questions to answer about how this whole thing got started.”
Trump defense team wraps impeachment arguments, impeachment trial moves to question phaseVideo
The question phase of the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump kicks off at 1 p.m. ET Wednesday with senators getting their first chance to weigh in formally on the six days of opening arguments through which they’ve sat silently.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., wants to question Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the lead House impeachment manager, on whether his office coordinated with the whistleblower in filing the complaint while telling the public otherwise.
Hawley also wants to hear from Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, the whistleblower, former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son Hunter Biden.
Democrats have been pressing for former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify under oath, especially given allegations in a draft of his unpublished book manuscript that Trump tied aid to Ukraine to investigations into the Bidens. They also want to hear from acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Mulvaney’s senior adviser Robert Blair, and associate director for national security programs at the Office of Management and Budget Michael Duffey.
What are they afraid of? That's a silly question. They are afraid that calling the Bidens to the witness stand would create a huge distraction for the Republicans to hide behind while offering nothing relevant to the matters of impeachment. Hunter was a poor choice for the board of an energy company. That's really all there is to say about that. It has nothing to do with Trump's abuses of power or stonewalling Congress.
Sally Vix wrote:
Many of the House members might have made up their minds just from hearing Schiff lie about the phone call.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one!
LOLer wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Many of the House members might have made up their minds just from hearing Schiff lie about the phone call.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one!
Thanks! I am appearing here every Thursday and Saturday.
C0l0rado wrote:
What are they afraid of? That's a silly question. They are afraid that calling the Bidens to the witness stand would create a huge distraction for the Republicans to hide behind while offering nothing relevant to the matters of impeachment. Hunter was a poor choice for the board of an energy company. That's really all there is to say about that. It has nothing to do with Trump's abuses of power or stonewalling Congress.
You are forgetting one key point. Hunter's dad is on video BRAGGING about how he got the special prosecutor who was prosecuting Hunter FIRED. Is that not something that needs to be addressed in the Senate trial? Joe Biden is bragging about having the special prosecutor of his son FIRED!
Sally Vix wrote:
C0l0rado wrote:
What are they afraid of? That's a silly question. They are afraid that calling the Bidens to the witness stand would create a huge distraction for the Republicans to hide behind while offering nothing relevant to the matters of impeachment. Hunter was a poor choice for the board of an energy company. That's really all there is to say about that. It has nothing to do with Trump's abuses of power or stonewalling Congress.
You are forgetting one key point. Hunter's dad is on video BRAGGING about how he got the special prosecutor who was prosecuting Hunter FIRED. Is that not something that needs to be addressed in the Senate trial? Joe Biden is bragging about having the special prosecutor of his son FIRED!
Trump bragging about threatening Mexico with Tarrifs to get them to place soldiers on the Border, is the exact same thing. Trump threatening to withhold aid in exchange for an investigation into a political rival is not. And, Sally, at absolutely no time was there an investigation into Hunter, personally.
Sally, you know your baseball, but on this thread you are clueless.
Then open Pandora's box.
Threatening to call the Bidens and Schiff as witnesses seems like a bluff.
The Republicans really don't want to do that.
They've had the power to call and deny Bolton this whole time, but they know that is a stupid thing to do.
You just want to be outraged at Biden and not have the public hear Bolton speaking under oath.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
You are forgetting one key point. Hunter's dad is on video BRAGGING about how he got the special prosecutor who was prosecuting Hunter FIRED. Is that not something that needs to be addressed in the Senate trial? Joe Biden is bragging about having the special prosecutor of his son FIRED!
Trump bragging about threatening Mexico with Tarrifs to get them to place soldiers on the Border, is the exact same thing. Trump threatening to withhold aid in exchange for an investigation into a political rival is not. And, Sally, at absolutely no time was there an investigation into Hunter, personally.
Sally, you know your baseball, but on this thread you are clueless.
Aztec, I know that there was never an investigation into Hunter! I know that. But everyone here, and every liberal in the media and every liberal in Congress has been saying for the last couple of years that Hunter has been looked at and the conspiracy has been DEBUNKED. But the problem is that it has NEVER been debunked. Hunter and Joe will both do down if they are looked at. That is why Dem Senators REFUSE to allow witness for witness trading. They DO NOT want Hunter or Joe to testify. If they do it is LIGHTS OUT for Joe Biden's campaign chances. Bernie will ride to the nomination and eventually will go down in the dust against Trump. Do you really think that moderates in Michigan and Iowa and Penn and Ohio want this zany, nutty and socialist nut job as their president? Not in 100 years. Not in a 1000 years!
L L wrote:
Then open Pandora's box.
Threatening to call the Bidens and Schiff as witnesses seems like a bluff.
The Republicans really don't want to do that.
They've had the power to call and deny Bolton this whole time, but they know that is a stupid thing to do.
You just want to be outraged at Biden and not have the public hear Bolton speaking under oath.
Calling the Bidens or Schiff is a no-lose situation for the Repubs. Just a no-lose situation.
Sally Vix wrote:
Calling the Bidens or Schiff is a no-lose situation for the Repubs. Just a no-lose situation.
Then why don't they do it?
Who's stopping them?
L L wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Calling the Bidens or Schiff is a no-lose situation for the Repubs. Just a no-lose situation.
Then why don't they do it?
Who's stopping them?
No idea. This politics stuff is really getting tiresome. Just everything is politics, politics and politics. Nothing about what is good for the country. All about your party.