Can you be more specific? What would you like him to testify about? What kind of question would you ask him that would trick him or force him to lie under oath? - Mr. President, did you use your office for personal gain?- No- Mr. President, did you use Ukraine aid to harm your political opponent?- No
It won't make a damned bit of difference, Bernard. The House will impeach him, with or without his testimony,
the Senate will refuse to convict him,
and he'll be reelected next year in December -- if he chooses to run.
If not, another Republican will be elected. There's not a single sane candidate on the left. You can argue about Trump's sanity. You even can claim he hasn't improved the economy beyond anyone's expectations. But if you do that, the facts will demonstrate that you're either ignorant or a liar -- or possibly both.
... we all know...
... Why on earth would anyone want to reelect Trump? Especially as a Republican?...
Can you be more specific? What would you like him to testify about? What kind of question would you ask him that would trick him or force him to lie under oath? - Mr. President, did you use your office for personal gain?- No- Mr. President, did you use Ukraine aid to harm your political opponent?- NoThen what?I am sure that you et al would consider such answers “lying under oath,” but that’s not how these things work. You can’t prove that those are lies, as yes or no answers to the above questions are simply opposing political opinions, not facts.
1. Abuse of power: this corresponds to the previous claims of bribery/extortion/illegal quid pro quo. I am not sure what's not clear. Instead of boring us with several examples, they have grouped them into a single category encompassing the previously discussed deeds,2. Obstruction: this is quite obviously the case since we have ample evidence that Trump prevented key witnesses to testify (we all know they would have confirmed the accusations). This is clearly not supportive of the on-going investigation and therefore not supportive of the intent of the founders of the US. As far as I know, the Supreme court was a lot tougher on Nixon.Cheers,Bernard
There is no bribery charge, no extortion charge, and no quid pro quo charge. The Dems lost and, more or less, admitted defeat when they dropped these three charges that they insisted on so stringently Trump was guilty of committing, even as of two days ago. Barbara Tuchman once said, "satire is a wrapping of exaggeration around a core of reality." So I'll leave this topic with a appropriately mordacious article illustrating the aggregate effect of the last two months. Trump's Popularity Surges After Nation Learns He May Have Obstructed Congress
During a summer 2019 hunting trip, Donald Trump Jr. killed a rare argali sheep. The Mongolian government issued him a hunting permit retroactively and he met with the country’s president....“What are the chances the Mongolian government would’ve done any of that to someone who wasn’t the son of the United States’ president?” asked Kathleen Clark, a professor specializing in legal ethics at Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. She said that though Trump Jr. is not a government employee, he’s nonetheless politically influential, incentivizing foreign officials such as the Mongolian leader to treat him favorably out of a “desire on the part of a foreign government to curry favor with the president’s family.”
Did he kill it because the said sheep was going to testify in the impeachment hearing? After all, that bleating wouldn’t be much different from what we heard so far.
Something with a little more veracity, Newsweek. DONALD TRUMP BEATS EVERY DEMOCRAT FRONTRUNNER IN THREE KEY BATTLEGROUND STATES AMID IMPEACHMENT: POLL
The Democrats wil have a closed convention after no one wins the nomination out right They will pick the candidate ro run against Trump not the voters.
Let me guess... Hillary?