The Trump Impeachment Thread

Quote: Evenbob

So the star witness, Taylor, never
met with Trump, didn't listen in
on the phone call, met with the
president of Ukraine 3 times
after the call and he never mentioned
anything about investigating Biden.
And this is their star witness? He
has nothing, zero, nada, except an
opinion of what he heard someone
else say.

I repeat, is this a joke?

If the defense is "no first hand information", why is the Trump administration blocking those closer to him, Mulvaney and Bolton, who have that info, from testifying? I mean, if it's a "witch hunt" and a "hoax" and you did nothing wrong, why not have them testify? Pretty damn transparent and clear what's going on. Duh.

Quote: Evenbob

So the star witness, Taylor, never
met with Trump, didn't listen in
on the phone call, met with the
president of Ukraine 3 times
after the call and he never mentioned
anything about investigating Biden.
And this is their star witness? He
has nothing, zero, nada, except an
opinion of what he heard someone
else say.

I repeat, is this a joke?

He’s not their star witness.

Bolton or Mulvaney would be the star witnesses, but the White House has forbidden them from testifying (something innocent parties always do!).

Quote: ams288

He’s not their star witness.

Then why were they calling him
that before today.

Quote:

Bolton or Mulvaney would be the star witnesses, but the White House has forbidden them from testifying

Yeah, duh, that's how it works.
Trump gets no due process
here, so his lawyers will withhold
every witness possible to make
the Dems prove their allegations.
Any lawyer will tell you never give
the prosecution anything willingly,
put the burden of proof entirely
on them.

Quote: Evenbob

So the star witness, Taylor, never
met with Trump, didn't listen in
on the phone call, met with the
president of Ukraine 3 times
after the call and he never mentioned
anything about investigating Biden.
And this is their star witness? He
has nothing, zero, nada, except an
opinion of what he heard someone
else say.

I repeat, is this a joke?

Gotta agree with Bob here. "I know someone who heard that a friend thought the President did something bad!" They really presented a witness who had no direct knowledge of ANYTHING? The American people will see this for exactly what it is, a partisan attempt to nullify an election they did not like the results of. It's really quite clear.

Quote: SOOPOO

Gotta agree with Bob here. "I know someone who heard that a friend thought the President did something bad!"

If that’s what you think Taylor testified today, I’d recommend getting your news from somewhere else.

Quote: SOOPOO

They really presented a witness who had no direct knowledge of ANYTHING? .

Even Dems in the House were in
the hallways after the hearing
asking, what was this all about.
People all over the country were
tuning the Gong Show borefest
out in record numbers. Where
were the bombshells, the smoking
guns, the crimes. Now the Senate
says if it ever gets there, no hearsay
testimony allowed. Oops, that's all
they have, there is no real evidence
of anything in the least bit impeachable.

The consensus is, it was a very good
day for Trump and a very bad one
for the Adam Schitt Dhow.

Quote: ams288

If that’s what you think Taylor testified today, I’d recommend getting your news from somewhere else.

Yup
Trump was trading military help for dirt on his political opponents
It was confirmed in the Hearings
If Obama pulled the same crap, Republicans would be outraged and rightfully so

Quote: terapined

Yup
Trump was trading military help for dirt on his political opponents
It was confirmed in the Hearings
If Obama pulled the same crap, Republicans would be outraged and rightfully so

You guys all miss the point. Totally. Feel free to be outraged. That's your right. Impeachment should be done when the House feels it can present evidence to the Senate that it can expect, or at least possibly expect, 2/3 of the Senators to vote to oust. They are NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!!!!! If the Senate does not allow hearsay witnesses, there will be NO ACTUAL evidence presented at trial! If the gobbledygook 'evidence' is presented, it will draw nothing more than a few guffaws. No Republicans will vote to convict, and a few Democrats will have the cajones to break ranks with the pathetic party leadership.

My guess..... 46 guilty, 54 not guilty.

Remmber.... there was clear and simple evidence that Bill Clinton was 'guilty' of the offenses he was charged with, but at least a bunch of Republicans realized that that was NOT what impeachment was for.

Once he is impeached (high likelihood) I will start a poll on number who vote guilty, number not guilty.

By the way, as this is not a criminal trial, what is the standard a Senator is supposed to use?
Reasonable doubt?
Preponderance of evidence?
Gut feeling?

Quote: SOOPOO

Impeachment should be done when the House feels it can present evidence to the Senate that it can expect, or at least possibly expect, 2/3 of the Senators to vote to oust.

Wrong.

Impeachment should be done when the president does something that warrants his removal from office.

Extorting a foreign country to interfere in an election by ginning up an investigation into your opponent is PRECISELY that.

If any Democrat got caught doing what Donny did, every single rightie would be apoplectic. Everyone knows it. Y'all freaked out when Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch talked about golf on an airplane!

This is a crystal clear case of a president abusing his power for political gain. That's why the public supports impeachment. If the Senate doesn't convict, that only illustrates how far the GOP has fallen.

Quote: SOOPOO

You guys all miss the point.

You miss the point
You and some of the senators have already made your decision before all the evidence has been presented
Closed minds make decisions before hearing all the evidence
sad