Its understood that both short or long proceedings have merits. I'm not sure which is better.
I don't see how dragging Biden in is relevant particularly. Yeah we all know Biden is corrupt now but he isn't being impeached... yet.
Senate "Motion to Dismiss"
- Thread starter Snarkhund
- Start date
I don't see how dragging Biden in is relevant particularly. Yeah we all know Biden is corrupt now but he isn't being impeached... yet.
Actually I covered that in an earlier post this morning.
Lots of ways to go to have Hunter and Joe appear inside and outside the trial.
Also, I said that the calling of Hunter and Joe would depend on what rules they adopted and what rights they gave Trump. If the rules allow the defendant to call witnesses- ie. Trump- then whether the Bidens appear or not may not be up to him. If they do allow him his own witnesses, well then.
This is too nuanced for you. As we know whenever there is more than one factor and message in a post, it is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy beyond your binary mind.
Indeed.
As I said in earlier posts, I am okay with a short hit and run and get rid of the case, or, in the alternative, a long bloodbath. I am okay with either one.
I would not however, allow the dems a tidy little trial where they just get to come in and dump some witnesses to smear Trump more, and then there is an unspoken agreement that it will all be over before the primaries in feb. Nope. You start down the long road, you don't get to control how long and bloody it is going to be.
If Biden(s) were dragged in, Idiot Dems would consider that to be interference with a future election and then woild start another faux impeachment. --However, it's certainly ok for Joe Biden to recommend and encourage impeachment which, of course, does not interfere with a future election.
And/or okay for Joe to demand the firing of a prosecutor who is getting uncomfortably close to Hunter's gravy train.
We still need to have hearings on Ukraine corruption with Joe and Hunter in before the oversight committee to "offer their valuable insights."
As part of the trial or outside the trial in an oversight committee. I am a flexible kind of guy. But just walking away from it? No. The amount of aid they are getting demands oversight. Not my problem that someone's favorite people are involved. Trump has not escaped oversight/review on it either. Not by a long shot. So why should I be worrying about it being uncomfortable for the Bidens.
Another aspect, though external to impeachment, is Barr. I hope the DOJ starts doing its job and arrests/indictments are imminent. Justice is needed pretty badly. When the coup plotters experience some actual consequences the country will calm down a bit.
Not going to happen is not too nuanced for anyone, except you.
I am always up for indictments and the dems will continually point out that the number is small and will probably be small. Mostly because Barr and Durham will only go after real related crimes and not start doing Mueller stuff- such as going after FBI employees tax issues etc.
But even without indictments, all of these Horowitz reports have absolutely confirmed the Trump political narrative. ie. The FBI was corrupt, it did spy on him, and it started spying so ungodly early that we still have not found the beginning, and that much of the effort was dem funded, and that frauds were foisted upon the FISA court. That has been established with more to come. Much more.
The dems have sought to destroy that narrative that Trump has been using out on the trail. But it has gone against them bigtime and has only gotten worse and more material is coming in. The dems will argue that the low number of indictments gives them clear sailing and exoneration. Really? We will see whether the voters believe that.
Ugh, such a dolt.
Its too bad we can't just have peaceful lives and make money. You folks are determined to destroy the country. What a waste of opportunity and prosperity.
