Zero due process? There were a dozen or so witnesses called, all with first hand knowledge and Trump refused to let them testify. Likely because they would either have to perjure themselves or else spill the beans on the boss. He had plenty of opportunity to defend himself.
Sondland, had first hand knowledge and what he had to say wasn’t good for Trump. I guess that is why Trump tried to keep him from testifying as well.
Zero due process? There were a dozen or so witnesses called, all with first hand knowledge and Trump refused to let them testify. Likely because they would either have to perjure themselves or else spill the beans on the boss. He had plenty of opportunity to defend himself.
Sondland, had first hand knowledge and what he had to say wasn’t good for Trump. I guess that is why Trump tried to keep him from testifying as well.
Might not need them.I have a feeling that there will be translators for non English speaking democrat congresswomen in the near future.
Not seen Ed posting lately.Since the house just passed a bill to approve around 1.5 trillion more in spending....its no surprise @Ed323232 and @Platinumdrgn and the usual johnny come lately, worried to death about the deficit are, surprise, no where to be found
Exactly how I felt about Trump too.I’ll be honest and admit that I wasn’t a fan of Trump before he became president, nothing harsh I just didn’t really care to hear from him. Now I like the guy, he seems genuine. I don’t know if I had preconceived notions about him or if the democrats have made him look good. Whatever the case I have a lot of respect for Trump and am more likely to believe him than the vast majority in Washington.
False, completely false. You are the complete uneducated lemming the left depends on.Zero due process? There were a dozen or so witnesses called, all with first hand knowledge and Trump refused to let them testify. Likely because they would either have to perjure themselves or else spill the beans on the boss. He had plenty of opportunity to defend himself.
Sondland, had first hand knowledge and what he had to say wasn’t good for Trump. I guess that is why Trump tried to keep him from testifying as well.
There were a dozen or so witnesses called
Trump refused to let them testify.
He had plenty of opportunity to defend himself.
Sondland, had first hand knowledge
Pretty loose definition of lady.
They aren’t impeaching him for a crime. This whole time we heard it was going to be bribery and wire fraud among other high crimes and misdemeanors related to the Ukraine military aid. That they had “evidence” of a quid pro quo. In the end after all of this political theater horseshit they end up with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Neither is a crime. Whole thing is a sham and tiresome.The Dems are doing this as a joke right? I mean they don't even believe this BS right? Ukraine never investigated and got the the aid? It wasn't held up. They got it. So I'm confused as what the crime is. The Dems are a insane group of people. They need professional help.
Could be a coincidence, but it was reported a couple weeks ago that Durham was looking into the Pentagon.
Zero due process? There were a dozen or so witnesses called, all with first hand knowledge and Trump refused to let them testify. Likely because they would either have to perjure themselves or else spill the beans on the boss. He had plenty of opportunity to defend himself.
Sondland, had first hand knowledge and what he had to say wasn’t good for Trump. I guess that is why Trump tried to keep him from testifying as well.
You can’t complain that all the testimony is from 2nd, 3rd hand informants when those with 1st hand info are kept from testifying by those doing the complaining.All by the majority. Trump wasn't allowed counsel to be present to cross examine nor call any witnesses. Also every witness called by the minority was declined.
The Executive is well within its constitutional rights to claim executive privilege. That's following the law, not obstructed it.
Complete and total lie. He wasn't allowed to have counsel present until it moved to the Judiciary and by then it was meaningless because Nadler wasn't allowing fact witnesses so there wasn't anyone for his counsel to cross examine.
Another lie. Sondland was forced to admit it was all his presumption. That literally no one on the planet told him. He was guessing. Matter of fact, what first hand evidence he did have was exculpatory when he admitted Trump specifically said absolutely no quid pro quo.
They aren’t impeaching him for a crime. This whole time we heard it was going to be bribery and wire fraud among other high crimes and misdemeanors related to the Ukraine military aid. That they had “evidence” of a quid pro quo. In the end after all of this political theater horseshit they end up with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Neither is a crime. Whole thing is a sham and tiresome.
You can’t complain that all the testimony is from 2nd, 3rd hand informants when those with 1st hand info are kept from testifying by those doing the complaining.
Trump said “no quid pro quo” AFTER the whistleblower complaint was made public. You damn well know that Trump didn’t even know that term prior to it being brought up. The man speaks with a 3rd grade vocabulary. His hands were caught in the cookie jar.
You can’t complain that all the testimony is from 2nd, 3rd hand informants when those with 1st hand info are kept from testifying by those doing the complaining.
Trump said “no quid pro quo” AFTER the whistleblower complaint was made public.
You can’t complain that all the testimony is from 2nd, 3rd hand informants when those with 1st hand info are kept from testifying by those doing the complaining.
Trump said “no quid pro quo” AFTER the whistleblower complaint was made public. You damn well know that Trump didn’t even know that term prior to it being brought up. The man speaks with a 3rd grade vocabulary. His hands were caught in the cookie jar.
It’s a little used political tactic, only people well versed in political maneuvers such as myself understand the nuances of legal meaning enough to put in layman’s terms.I don't understand where these high crimes and misdemeanors are coming from. Everything has been proven false. I don't understand why each Dem had to get up and use their own kids as pawns in their speeches.
He should have ripped that mic off and shook it at the dirty dems.Collins ready to bust some heads