TGHusker Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 A quick poll -- do you think the Senate will eventually call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Trump? With the Bolton manuscript draft coming to light, there may be more pressure on the Senate to call witnesses. Public opinion may force them to do so. But wt Moscow Mitch, aka The Turtle, at the helm, he may not give a d.... what the public wants or desires. NOTE: KEEP THE DISCUSSION ONLY ABOUT THE ISSUE OF WITNESSES BEING CALLED. USE THE MAIN IMPEACHMENT THREAD FOR THE BROADER DISCUSSION. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 If I vote "no" to #1, the other questions are N/A and I can't save my vote. I still think the Republicans in the Senate are so far up Trump's a$$ that they will not allow witnesses. So, America will need to let them know how they feel about that in the coming elections. 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: If I vote "no" to #1, the other questions are N/A and I can't save my vote. I still think the Republicans in the Senate are so far up Trump's a$$ that they will not allow witnesses. So, America will need to let them know how they feel about that in the coming elections. Ok try now Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 I want to see how today goes before I vote. Pressure is building, not sure Republicans can get away with no witnesses but they very well may still do it. 1 Link to comment
funhusker Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Should they call witnesses?: yes Will they? no 1 Link to comment
commando Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 they should call witnesses, but they won't. the republicans want this over ASAP and witnesses would only prolong the trial. the longer the trial goes the worse the republicans would look. at this point they would rather not call witnesses and have people think they are corrupted rather than have witnesses that would prove the whole party is corrupt. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 I may have been wrong. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 And...here come the attacks. Link to comment
commando Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Just now, BigRedBuster said: And...here come the attacks. only took 15 minutes for the little attack dogs to start barking. Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: And...here come the attacks. That shows how scared they are of testimony. All Mitt said is he wants to hear from Bolton and people are equating that with impeachment. They know Boltons testimony would destroy any Trump defense 2 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said: That shows how scared they are of testimony. All Mitt said is he wants to hear from Bolton and people are equating that with impeachment. They know Boltons testimony would destroy any Trump defense Yep...read all the responses to the tweet I posted. If Bolton would prove Trump was innocent, they should be cheering this attitude. Here, Romney only said he wants to hear what he has to say. I did get a chuckle at this one though. 2 Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 "Strengthen the case for witnesses" "Increasingly likely" to call for witnesses. This is a trial. Trials involve witness testimony. It is a no-brainer that you would call witnesses in this, and every other case, where witness testimony is available. These guys aren't committing to anything. Those words are temporizing. They're desperate to find some way - any way - to not call Bolton or anyone else. Cowards. To wit: 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts