• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.

Jim Jordan destroys Sondland’s claim of Quid Pro Quo

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by hislegacy, Nov 22, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hislegacy

    hislegacy This is me.

    +7,511
    United States
    Charismatic
    Married
    US-Others
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. hislegacy

    hislegacy This is me.

    +7,511
    United States
    Charismatic
    Married
    US-Others
    This is a good follow up also

     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  3. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    +4,593
    Atheist
    Of course, the aid was only released after the whistleblower brought this to light and this was under investigation. Zelinsky still didn't get the meeting in the White House.

    Jim Jordan reframing of the facts doesn't change them.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  4. JohnAshton

    JohnAshton Well-Known Member

    +1,147
    United States
    Anglican
    Married
    To the contrary, Sondland and the other witnesses destroyed Jordan and Stewart's grandstanding.
     
  5. S.ilvio

    S.ilvio Newbie

    +3,339
    Ireland
    Catholic
    Single
    US-Republican
    Jim Jordan has been a hero over the last 5 days...
     
  6. BBAS 64

    BBAS 64 Contributor Supporter

    +838
    Christian
    Married
    Good Day,

    Jordan and Stefanik did a very effective of laying the ground work that the Senate will need to expand the narrative. I think that is the last we will hear from many of the people that testified. The Senate Intel has had some hearings on the issue, and surly will find those hearings more relevant and weighty to the legal questions of Justice and factual evidence. It will be a very interesting trial there the house proceedings IMHO have very little direct evidence that will stand the legal requirement of what constitutes evidence. The Senate will have to decide that as well. Trumps witness list will be quite long and interesting including Schiff, the whistle-blower, and Hunter Biden. I am sure there will be others that the Senate judicial committee will recommended.. Chairman Graham has already requested some documentation from the sate department.

    Remember the weight falls on the house to prove it's case by the legal standard of the Justice system. If they can not do that the Senate may dismiss that "case out of hand".



    No doubt this will be historic...

    In Him,

    Bill
     
  7. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    +4,593
    Atheist
    Of course, this ignores that fact that Trump has prevented all of those with first hand evidence from testifying. That's an obstruction of justice.
     
  8. BBAS 64

    BBAS 64 Contributor Supporter

    +838
    Christian
    Married
    Good Day,whatbogsends

    I am sure that will be an article of the impeachment put forth by the house. There is some historical discussions with in the Judicial committee if that is obstruction of Justice, or historical preference given to the POTUS... The Senate is more than able to determine and rule on the validity of that article and if the raise to a level of impeachment... You may see it one way subjectively , but never the less the Senate gets to decide it's reality.

    In Him,

    Bill
     
  9. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    +4,593
    Atheist
    Good day, Bill.

    I have no expectation and very little hope that the Senate will remove Trump from office. Just like Congress, they wear their bias on their sleeves. They put party and their political interests ahead of the country and Constitution every single time. This goes for politicians on both sides of the aisle, not just Republicans. However, in this case, the evidence is clear that Trump abused his position for political gain, and the Democrats happen to find themselves on the side of justice. I understand that the Senate has the Constitutional authority to make the decision as they see fit, but the decisions made by either the House or Senate don't actually change the facts, although they will surely color many people's interpretation of them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  10. Bobber

    Bobber Well-Known Member

    +733
    Non-Denom
    But hold on now. John Bolton said he would but wanted to refer to the Courts to get their take on what I gather to be the legal position of the President's Executive Privilege. So isn't the bigger question being why did the Dems withdraw the subpoena? Here you have someone (Bolton) with a direct link into the White House which none of the other witnesses had and his lawyers said he had knowledge of the issue in question and even more things which might settle the issue whether yeah or nay if the President did anything wrong.....and yet the Dems backed away from it? Why?
     
  11. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    +4,593
    Atheist
    My understanding is that it would be a legal battle which would cause delays in the process. Trump continues to damage our democracy every day he is in office.
     
  12. Bobber

    Bobber Well-Known Member

    +733
    Non-Denom
    And of course you probably would at least admit that others will say that's what you're doing too? Coloring people's interpretation of things which have taken place?
     
  13. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    +4,593
    Atheist
    People can say what they want about what i'm doing. It doesn't change the facts.
     
  14. durangodawood

    durangodawood Dis Member

    +3,851
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    Because Bolton wouldnt testify without going through other legal hurdles. Its a clock management matter, like in football.

    Aside from that, D's totally wanted him there.

    Re all the big names who ignore subpoenas, Im guessing they all have something to hide.
     
  15. Bobber

    Bobber Well-Known Member

    +733
    Non-Denom
    Well it probably would create a brief delay in the process? So what? Hasn't Trump been President for 3 years? What's one more month to get things right? Again I repeat Bolton's lawyers said he had direct knowledge of the issue that is whether the President did anything wrong and the Dems turn away from exploring DIRECT KNOWLEDGE? So isn't it really a crime against the American people to not make sure they have the most substantive evidence in which they make their case? I'd contend the optics of them not ensuring they have such won't look good for the Dems.
     
  16. Bobber

    Bobber Well-Known Member

    +733
    Non-Denom
    Perhaps. Perhaps not. Some might be moved by principle that if they feel it's not a truly open and fair process why dignify the process by being a participant.
     
  17. JohnAshton

    JohnAshton Well-Known Member

    +1,147
    United States
    Anglican
    Married
    Above we see some posters who don't understand how the trial will be conducted.

    Only the House prosecutors will be allowed to manage the indictment and presentation of it before the Senate. The Senators merely vote at the end of the trial. No grandstanding will be permitted by the presiding judicial officer, Chief Justice Roberts.

    IOW, my dear friends, the GOP Senate will not be able to present "other" narratives or evidence.
     
  18. BBAS 64

    BBAS 64 Contributor Supporter

    +838
    Christian
    Married
    Good Day, JohnAshton

    On general that is correct... The Senate leaders will draft the rules. The Chief Justice will ensure the rules are followed as he understands him I think you would agree no one understands Senate rules better than the Senate President no disrespect to the CJ. .The Senators will listen to the case during the trial. The defense will cross examine witnesses, and call their own. The Senate has had some meetings on the Ukraine issue in the Intel committee where they interviewed some people that where not called by the house. That information will be well known by the Senate, the Senate can not call witnesses during the trial. To be sure there are people that some Senators will encourage the Defense to call.

    The narrative has already started in the daily briefing by the Senate to the media, and in some cases mimic the members of the impeachment committee (Radcliff and Jordan). Graham's warning to the Democrats in the house "don't waste your time" was surely parroted by members in the hearings.

    Now I would expect the Senate to expand the narrative before the trial begins. I am sure some will say they are looking forward to the testimony of the Whistle-blower, Biden and Schiff that is a narrative that works very well.

    In Him,

    Bill
     
  19. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +10,344
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    They did not withdraw a subpoena for Bolton, they never subpoenaed Bolton at all because his attorney said they would go to court.
    They withdrew a subpoena for a Bolton aide who did file a lawsuit.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  20. JohnAshton

    JohnAshton Well-Known Member

    +1,147
    United States
    Anglican
    Married
    The House prosecution team will keep in mind that the 2016 election was a fluke in which Trump prevailed only because of a successful Russian hacking and disinformation campaign, with a last-minute intervention on Trump’s behalf by the very national-security state Trump defenders supposedly loathe.

    The prosecution will push the narrative that Trump and his advisers sought to rig the 2020 election by forcing Ukraine to implicate the then-Democratic front-runner in a crime that did not take place. If the American people could not be trusted to choose Trump on their own, Trump would use his official powers to make the choice for them.

    This trial will be fascinating.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...