Create Account

Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums Other Stuff Political Talk *** THE OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT THREAD ***

Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x


The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
*** THE OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT THREAD ***

  • Offline MalabarJag
    Pet Sitter

  • ******
  • Posts: 5,972
    Threads: 46
    Joined: Mar 2001
    Reputation: 112
#578
01-29-2020, 11:54 AM (This post was last modified: 01-29-2020, 11:57 AM by MalabarJag.)

(01-29-2020, 09:51 AM)Gabe Wrote:
(01-28-2020, 06:07 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: Nobody was "blocked by the WH from speaking." Whether or not Trump advised, or even demanded, that they not give testimony, they could have always ignored him and testified. You and I both know that wasn't going to happen. Sondland's testimony was a bit of a surprise, but I'd be willing to bet that's solely because of the texts that were released and what he had previously held back during SCIF interviews. 

Given the government screwing of Flynn and Libby, anyone who testifies before a hostile questioner without a judge requiring it is a fool. If the testimony was so important then Schiff could have taken the matter to court. I've read that WH legal counsel was fighting against this...but I can't confirm one way or the other. Instead the House voted that the evidence they collected without those witnesses was sufficient to impeach. If it was sufficient, why ask for more witnesses in the Senate? Clearly because they want to create a circus similar to what the did with Kavanaugh. Or because new information comes to light and this is a two-part process.... 

and....Trump stated to the press that he'd happily "allow" the sought-after witness testimony when it turned to the Senate, which he and others deemed to be more "fair" - which I can only interpret that to mean, more in his corner (a la GOP majority) or witnesses that have first-hand insight getting a fair shake in a trial. and...GOP reps like Graham absolutely wanted witness testimony during Clinton's impeachment, but have flipped that script now. It's okay to have witnesses in the Senate and no evidence of crimes when it impacts a Dem president who got some oral satisfaction and withheld information from congress, but not now?  

You still didn't answer my question: You eloquently note that Dems screwed the pooch on the potential of requesting any witness testimony after the Kavanaugh situation. If that didn't happen, are you honestly telling me that you'd be fine with allowing witnesses now? I'm panning through your approach here and it seems like that's the logical deduction, but forgive me if I'm skeptical.

For your embedded comments:

1. The point is you claimed that the White House prevented them from testifying. They chose not to testify (rightly IMO based on Flynn and Libby). Don't blame the White House. If the White House offered legal support if it went to court that makes sense because the whole impeachment was a sham and a waste of time. Even if Trump did everything he's accused of (and the phone transcripts and Zelensky statements say otherwise) it's not grounds for impeachment, except in the Mikesez world where spitting on the sidewalk is ground for impeachment.

2. "New information"? Wow, just like what happened to Kavanaugh. My point stands.

Whether or not Trump would "allow" the witness testimony in the Senate is immaterial. That's up to the Senate to decide. During the Clinton hearings we didn't have a Senate with a history of the Kavanaugh debacle. That changed everything. Also, the Clinton impeachment was not about Monica giving Bill a Mugabe, so that part of your comment is at best a red herring.

If the Kavanaugh hearings were above board then there would be no reason to oppose witness testimony, as my previous response implies. But the Kavanaugh debacle did happen. The political Left has moved on from any semblance of decorum, willing to create lie after lie in order to save screw the country, and because of that it would be foolish for the Pub majority to allow witnesses in the Senate trial. Of course enough of them are clueless or gutless so they probably will.



                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply


Messages In This Thread
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 12-28-2019, 01:59 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-16-2020, 08:21 AM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-21-2020, 04:06 PM
RE: homebiscuit - by mikesez - 01-21-2020, 04:18 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-22-2020, 01:29 PM
RE: homebiscuit - by StroudCrowd1 - 01-22-2020, 01:32 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-23-2020, 01:37 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-23-2020, 01:43 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-23-2020, 02:18 PM
RE: homebiscuit - by flsprtsgod - 01-23-2020, 03:42 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-24-2020, 12:58 PM
RE: *** THE OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT THREAD *** - by MalabarJag - 01-29-2020, 11:54 AM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 01-30-2020, 02:47 PM
homebiscuit - by homebiscuit - 12-18-2019, 01:57 PM



Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.

Forum software by © MyBB - Theme © iAndrew 2017

ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!