- Dec 30, 2016
- 8,056
- 6,929
- 70
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Does a flat out confession make any difference to those noble Republican senators...?
Yes, the question is rhetorical...
Yes, the question is rhetorical...
They would prefer to have Biden testify. The video of him talking about how he bribed the Ukrainian government is probably not sufficient.
I don't believe anyone said he is. However, he is a material witness (if there are to be witnesses) because he is right in the middle of the corruption in Ukraine that is supposed to be the issue with the House managers.Biden is not on trial here.
.Does a flat out confession make any difference to those noble Republican senators...?
Yes, the question is rhetorical...
I don't believe anyone said he is. However, he is a material witness (if there are to be witnesses) because he is right in the middle of the corruption in Ukraine that is supposed to be the issue with the House managers.
I say "supposed to be" because there no longer is any doubt that the issue is nothing other than trying to prevent the president from winning re-election.
.
Perhaps a link or reference to what you are referring to would be beneficial to the conversation.
You didn't notice what the supposed abuse of power was all about??
I don't believe anyone said he is. However, he is a material witness (if there are to be witnesses) because he is right in the middle of the corruption in Ukraine that is supposed to be the issue with the House managers.
I say "supposed to be" because there no longer is any doubt that the issue is nothing other than trying to prevent the president from winning re-election.
I don't believe anyone said he is. However, he is a material witness (if there are to be witnesses) because he is right in the middle of the corruption in Ukraine that is supposed to be the issue with the House managers.
I say "supposed to be" because there no longer is any doubt that the issue is nothing other than trying to prevent the president from winning re-election.
That said, if it were true...Trump soliciting the interference of the Ukrainian government to publicly announce investigations that would help Trump’s 2020 presidential bid and harm his political opponent’s bid.
Not at all. He has zero first hand evidence about Donald's motives or actions in this case. And as we've heard repeatedly, second hand information is hearsay and inadmissible in any court in the land.I don't believe anyone said he is. However, he is a material witness (if there are to be witnesses) because he is right in the middle of the corruption in Ukraine that is supposed to be the issue with the House managers.
Sure, it was about trading a weapons deal for a press release about investigating one of Donald's political rivals, at a time which coincided with Donald launching an ad campaign against that candidate using similar talking points.You didn't notice what the supposed abuse of power was all about??
But let's assume Biden IS corrupt. I got no problem with investigating him. But that's like saying that the guy who robbed the liquor store is innocent because the owner of the liquor store had a bunch of unpaid parking tickets and a bench warrant for his arrest.
(Do you see the point there?)
That said, if it were true...
you would have a case.
In other words, no crime, no evidence, no abuse of power; just lots of name-calling and "what ifs" coming from Schiff, Nadler, and Company.