- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I'll quote Moscow Mitch: "I will do everything I can so Obama will be a 1-term president." ......Geez mack, take your blinders off!
And no, the Ukrainians do not have to testify. It is plainly to establish whether Mr T tried to engage a foreign power to help with his political campaign. Whether the Ukrainians did or not, does not matter. Trying to rob a bank is a crime even if it fails.
FYI, impeachment in the House is a political process, not a criminal trial.
The trial will come in the Senate.
The Republicans had no issues which such a process when they impeached Clinton or investigated Hillary for that matter. You can watch some of the hearings from Clinton's impeachment and you will realize that it was in no way different.
The majority in the House is driving the process in the direction they want. It is how the framers of the constitution thought it would be, that is why you have a trial in the Senate where you will need a 2/3 majority.
If this is a kangaroo court, what was Hillary's countless Benghazi investigations or Clinton's impeachment in your view? BTW, just for FYI. The Republican majority cut the funding for embassies years before Benghazi happened and then tried to blame Hillary and Obama for not doing enough.
I never did watch those benghazi hearings, but however the way they were handled, she was runnng for the presidency not long afterwards. I won't say what I think about hillary's or obama's moral compass, let's just say it doesn't point in the direction of 'peace', despite the msm lauding them both as do-gooders.
Well the journalist, kimberley strassel, who is on the wsj editorial board, and comes across as an intelligent lady, went on national prime tv and clearly stated this process is different to the clinton one. I think she said she was there or covered it at the time, and went through the differences. unfortunately the interview is not on youtube but imbedded on twitter.
There was lots more investigating and witnesses called, not just ones the republicans wanted, which is what is happening here. I believe Schiff is determining who the witnesses will be, no one from the other
(republican) side get a say or opportunity to call someone to testify, On that basis how would the senate ever be comfortable delivering a guilty verdict, or do they do the whole investigation over again with new witnesses?
This is why it's a sham, and just about influencing the imminent presidential election, something they accuse trump of being underhand about, and they're effectively doing the same...trump wanted to damage biden as the theory goes, and in return schiff and co want to damage trump.
I'm not sure it's sensible to create further division in society this way, the bill clinton one damaged republicans for similar reasons, it looks petty and partisan. Schiff looked decidedly under stress on the bits I saw, I don't think he's really comfortable in the spotlight like this, one good question or poor answer and it could start to unravel...