Posted on 01/29/2020 11:47:04 AM PST by Hostage
The preference for having witnesses or no witnesses at the Senate hoax trial is a difficult one for many to decide.
What is your preference and why are you making that preference?
Witness predictions:
Dems call:
Bolton, he rambles on and discredits himself.
McGahn, he refuses testimony on basis of executive privilege invoked by Trump.
Giuliani, he becomes the Dems worst nightmare, eating them alive
Lev Parnas, totally discredited
Vindman twins, these two will make Americans think the Dems are nuts for calling them; bring them!
Fiona whatever, pasty, uppity, self-important snob who will turn off Americans, bring her!
Yovanob*tch (excuse my Ukrainian), she may plead the 5th because of prior perjury but taking 5th is good optics.
Repubs call: Schiff, he refuses to appear which makes him look guilty
Intel AG Atkinson, blows up Schiff and the impeachment hoax!
Hunter Biden, he pleads the 5th, not much to squeeze out of him but his appearance can add negatives.
Feel free to add to the list.
There should be witnesses for the defense only and they should have carte blanche in their choices. Any prosecution witnesses should have been called in the House. The only exception is if any new crime or clarification of a crime is needed. No crimes, so no Dim witnesses.
2-The Dems will NEVER agree to the GOP witness list testifying FIRST.
Since it’s obvious now with hindsight watching the defenses opening arguments and the injection that highlighted the mostly the Biden’s corruption with also a brief mention of Kerry’s stepson, there was never not going to be additional witnesses otherwise the senate would have to take the defenses statements at their word.
This has to have been the plan all along.
Wreck the process.
Repeat in large font for emphasis.
They want Bolton to testify? The should have called him before the House. When they could have.
I’d love witnesses, but I want conservative judges confirmed in a timely manner.
We can’t have both :-(
Witnesses or not, none of this will hurt Trump.
Prolonging the process will only keep a few dems from campaigning since they have to sit through it.
I can’t see any harm either way.
I’d like to see the whistle-leaker under oath testifying to his association with Schitt, Windman, and others.
So if the RINOs force the Senate to call witnesses, will the Democrats agree to calling Shiff, Nadler, the “Whistle blower”, Michael Atkinson whose testimony Shiff refuses to release, etc?
Wreck the process.
___________________________
Hasn’t the process already been wrecked? What with Mittens bringing in his chocolate milk?
Oh. The. Horror.
I say no witnesses.
More witnesses just obscures the arguments on both sides.
Proving Biden corruption doesn’t exonerate Trump any more than the excellent presentation that Bondi did that showed there were many many people, news agencies, government agencies concerned about corruption. There was ample reason to ask about the corruption.
And whatever Bolton claims, it won’t alter the facts already presented, which do exonerate Trump.
President Trump should be allowed to call any witness he wants and go down any rabbit trail they lead to.
The House wants fishing expeditions? Let's go fishing.
Don’t prolong the sham any more than necessary. Regardless of what we do, the Left is going to cry foul. Get it over with quickly.
I’m still stuck at - If the Democrats charge no crime in the articles of impeachment, what is there to be witness to?
Also, isn’t it strange the Democrat’s managers seem to be awful ready to answer questions, almost like they already knew what the questions would ask?
No witnesses.
As Philbin explains, it turns the impeachment precess upside down. It puts the senate into the role of primary investigator.
Thre won’t be any witnesses. Romney will vote with the DEMs, but I bet a few DEMs go the opposite direction.
Voters will measure their senators on this, and it is not a “fair trial” issue, it is a “due process, in the right place” issue. The way the House is going encourages punishment by process, using BOTH sides of Congress. Bad enough the House plays punishment by process.
No witnesses. Dragging this on hurts the country and Trump.
The defense should call IG Michael Atkinson and lawyer Mark Zaid, and then just call additional witnesses as their testimony opens more doors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.