• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump impeachment hearings

Should trump allow Rudy, Mulvaney and Bolton to testify?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 81.3%

  • No

    Votes: 3 18.8%
  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
Risky Thicket said:
Taylor's staff member who heard the Sondland/Trump conversation and later asked Sondland about the call is scheduled to testify tomorrow behind closed doors.

The second source also present and also hearing the phone call has been identified as Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Behind closed doors. Yeah...they have to see what they can leak to the public first.

Then they'll continue the show in public hearings.
 
Lutherf said:
If I was Rudy's lawyer I would never recommend that he testify to anything. I's not that I think Rudy did anything wrong but more that he's erratic and prone to opening his yap before he thinks about what he's being asked.
Click to expand...
The advice that DP as a whole would to give Giuliani was STFU.
Iirc, it was a near unanimous consensus that Giuliani's mouth is too familiar with his foot.
 
Republicans support crooks. It's that simple.

They're like gangbanger's moms in Oakland.
 
Mycroft said:
Wrong. And amended statement is not proof of lying. It is common and acceptable.
Click to expand...

No one amends a truthful statement. It is a common practice that is meant to give liars to Congressional committees a chance to amend their previous testimony. Unless you believe that Sondland is just forgetful.
 
Mycroft said:
Don't hold your breath waiting for this "aide" that Taylor mentioned being called before any committee. That's not how the Dems operate. They don't call anyone to verify the 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand hearsay from anyone.
Click to expand...

You really don't care about reality do you. That aide will be testifying in a closed session tomorrow. And today it was learned that there is another witness to that phone call. And just to clarify another error you continue to promote, there is no problem with hearsay evidence in an impeachment process. Impeachment is not a criminal offense, and the trial does not occur in a court, so the 6th Amendment does not apply.
 
rickc said:
I am a bit confused by the republicans defense strategy. They keep using words like hearsay and second hand and third hand. They say the democrats have no witnesses that have actually heard Trump say he wanted the president to publicly announce an investigation of hunter and joe biden in exchange for the release of the military funding.

Now that is a great argument but since Trump is banning all those with first had knowledge from testifying it is kind of a disingenuous argument. Why would an innocent man not want those closest to him to testify. They could clear this right up.

Should trump allow Rudy, Mulvaney and Bolton to testify?
Click to expand...
Woupd you cooperate with people trying to get you fired?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Rudy and Bolton do NOT work for the government. They cannot be prevented by Trump from testifying.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
No. The mission of republicants is to drag out the impeachment process and to preserve the executive privilege concept as much as possible. The more that "obstruction of congress" (actually the House demorats) is relied upon then the better the republicants in the Senate will look when they vote to prevent Trump's removal as POTUS.
Click to expand...

That would be true if obstruction of Congress was all they charged Trump with. But they have much more including violation of federal law on soliciting a foreign person for campaign help, extortion, bribery and the cover up of those crimes. And we do not even know if all the costs of clear obstruction of justice from the second part of the Mueller Report might be included as well.

The House has much much more than just obstruction of Congress.
 
Lutherf said:
If I was Rudy's lawyer I would never recommend that he testify to anything. I's not that I think Rudy did anything wrong but more that he's erratic and prone to opening his yap before he thinks about what he's being asked.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone voluntarily cooperate with people who have an agenda against your best interests?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

Behind closed doors. Yeah...they have to see what they can leak to the public first.

Then they'll continue the show in public hearings.
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought you all wanted private testimony.

Also, it may be news to you but there are Trumpublicans on every committee. If there is harm and foul conducted in private are you going to tell me that the Trumpublicans are, have been, and will be too feckin intimidated to speak up publically?
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

Behind closed doors. Yeah...they have to see what they can leak to the public first.

Then they'll continue the show in public hearings.
Click to expand...
"They shouldn’t be having public hearings. This is a hoax," Trump said as he left the White House for events in Georgia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom