The Democrats witness dilemma

[Ross Dolan]

You’re guessing/hoping the Biden’s aren’t dirty lol.

At worst, Trump is guilty of a lame attempt at pressuring Zelensky to announce an investigation into a matter that is *worthy of an investigation*. The investigation never happened, the Ukrainians got their money and lethal weapons and etc.

Many reasonable people would say ‘no harm, no foul’ or call it a Silly Burger.

At worst, Hunter Biden was involved in a Ukrainian protection racket, which raises the question of whether Obama was aware of it.

Let’s dump all the worms on the table.

Actually...AT WORST...Trump is guilty of attempting to extort Zelensky using means only available to a president (acting illegally)...for personal political benefit...

...which might lead to an impeachment for abuse of office (which it has)...

...and possible removal from office (which it probably won't.)

So YOUR "at worst" scenario is demonstrably wrong.

 

[Darth Omar]

Actually...AT WORST...Trump is guilty of attempting to extort Zelensky using means only available to a president (acting illegally)...for personal political benefit...

...which might lead to an impeachment for abuse of office (which it has)...

...and possible removal from office (which it probably won't.)

So YOUR "at worst" scenario is demonstrably wrong.

Why did democrats give up on extortion, Frank?

I’ll tell you why lol. It’s not there. They might as well scratch ‘obstructing congress’ off the ticket because that’s a joke. Abuse of power is nebulous and sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents since practically all of them act in ways that can be construed as ‘abuse of power’.

Not that you care about such things, you just want rid of Trump and if that means making it easier for future Houses to impeach future presidents—so be it.

Right, Frank?

 

[Walt]

This isn’t going to be the tightly controlled House investigation, all over again, so there’s no point in deluding yourself with the notion Hunter Biden has nothing to offer in Trump’s defense. If the Biden’s are dirty—or even if they come out looking more suspiciously dirty than they already do, then Trump will be justified in asking [and even pressuring] Zelensky for an investigation. That Trump would benefit politically is irrelevant. IOW, game over.

A Senate trial, with witnesses, will be an opportunity to dump the whole can of worms on the table to see what crawls out.

If Biden's son is called, you have to also call all the witnesses actually involved with the conspiracy. trump does NOT want that. he is doing everything in his power to block that from happening. That would mean months of listening to trump administration officials admit to illegal acts, OR go to jail for refusing to testify.

But I agree, you would get to call Biden's son... Who would then testify to how he cleaned up Burisma to a point they could pass western due diligence processes. You forget that Biden has already had to sign on to testimony about cleaning up Burisma, and so you really are not going to get much more out of him.

 

[Walt]

Burisma Holdings Limited is based in the Ukraine...the investigation should have been done in the country of origin.

Biden is an American, which means giving or accepting bribes are illegal for him, anywhere in the world. Many places allow a level of bribery that is not allowed for US Citizens. If you want to get Biden(and he is guilty of anything), the best place to start is America.

The worst place to start is with a Ukrainian press conference that accomplishes nothing. That is the strategy of a corrupt president just trying to get political points.

 

[Earl]

The Republican Senate can call one witness or no witnesses. Neither the House or JPP leftists or Nervous Nancy control anything in the Senate trial

 

[Rune]

It’s clear that Democrats need witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial since it’s a slam dunk acquittal based on the articles Nancy solemnly/gleefully sent over to the Senate.

Which begs the question if they should have been sent to begin with—but Democrats wanted their Trump impeachment*, so yeah.

At any rate, that means the defense gets to call Hunter Biden, and others, since Democrats insist on the trial being ‘fair’. Do Democrats risk playing ‘dog catches car’ by putting Hunter Biden under oath? What confidence do they have that Hunter is clean besides reassuring themselves, back and forth, that Hunter is clean? The fact is, Hunter Biden is a Black Box—no one knows what’s inside it until it’s opened. And we all know his past is ‘checkered’, to be diplomatic about it.

Or how about the WB? For months, Democrats and their media minions have been lying about the WB protection law which *doesn’t* guarantee anonymity. If Democrats want Bolton to appear—so will the WB. Then we’ll get to find out if there was anything resembling a set-up going on between the WB and Adam Schiff.

Shifty may be a House manager but he’s also *a material witness* to how this whole thing started. Do Democrats really want a known liar under oath in a Senate trial? This won’t be the basement of the House where Democrats can tightly control everything.

This can get ugly, quick. But I fully expect Democrats to keep the pedal to the metal.

It is going to get ugly as soon as Bolton testified you backwoods toothless retard.

 

[Rune]

If they voted on the articles as they stand, Trump walks.

Witnesses are a gambit for Democrats. You can admit or not.

Shut up you fucking moron.

 

[Darth Omar]

If Biden's son is called, you have to also call all the witnesses actually involved with the conspiracy. trump does NOT want that. he is doing everything in his power to block that from happening. That would mean months of listening to trump administration officials admit to illegal acts, OR go to jail for refusing to testify.

But I agree, you would get to call Biden's son... Who would then testify to how he cleaned up Burisma to a point they could pass western due diligence processes. You forget that Biden has already had to sign on to testimony about cleaning up Burisma, and so you really are not going to get much more out of him.

You got the cover story down lol.

The fact is nobody really knows anything beyond it. Joe has already told the whopper that he and Hunter never discussed the latter’s job at Burisma. And no offense, but we are to think the Ukrainians ‘need to be instructed’ on how to run a business in a non-corrupt fashion?

What are they, stupid?

 

[Earl]

Let’s be clear, The Democrats know the outcome in the Senate. This is pure politics to affect the outcome in Nov.

This will fail, President Trump will be exonerated and remain president for five more years with a landslide victory.

This failed attempt by the Democrats to remove a sitting president that the American voters elected will be long remembered by Middle America.

 

[Walt]

The Ukrainians are better equipped to investigate corruption in their own country than we are. A seemingly obvious point.

You think an extremely corrupt government is better at investigating their own corruption, even if they do not have the laws to even prosecute them? There is a reason it is illegal in the USA for Americans to be corrupt anywhere else, and that is because we cannot and do not trust failed states to keep our citizens from being corrupt.

Lets say ExonMobile pays a Nigerian politician $100 million for oil rights. Nigeria cannot be trusted to investigate the case. In fact, they might demand a bribe from an innocent person not to be prosecuted. So the USA basically ignores the Nigerian government, and investigates such a case themselves.

Burisma was under investigation.

Yes, Burisma was under investigation for things that happened before Biden was brought on board to clean up the company. Biden complained the investigation was suspended, because it hurt his efforts to clean up the company.

Then Burisma was never investigated again, while Hunter was being paid $50k/month to sit on the board.

Now that part is untrue. Biden was able to get the investigation restarted. Without the investigation, there was no way that Burisma could ever pass western due diligence. Usually, you want to shutdown an investigation, but in this case things had gone too far.

Hunter is a recovering drug addict that got booted from the Navy and managed to get a stripper pregnant.

trump accepted illegal campaign contributions to pay strippers for sex. Part of the paperwork we have seen so far talks about how to handle pregnancies that happened from that.

In other words, maybe Biden did get a stripper pregnant, and maybe not. But he is a private citizen, so that is not a concern of the Senate. trump using illegal campaign contributions to cover up his stripper sex is a concern of the Senate.

 

[Walt]

The Republican Senate can call one witness or no witnesses. Neither the House or JPP leftists or Nervous Nancy control anything in the Senate trial

Sort of.

It would be tough for the Republicans to get past a filibuster, and they would have to make a massive change the rules of the Senate. But even a filibuster would achieve their goal of blocking the witnesses. The problem is that it all has to be done in public. The Republicans will have to take a major burn in their reputations to cover this up.

trump demanded an outright dismissal. Senate Republicans have already stated they do not have the political capital for that. Maybe they can block any witnesses, but only allowing witnesses against Biden would be politically impossible.

 

[Earl]

Sort of.

It would be tough for the Republicans to get past a filibuster, and they would have to make a massive change the rules of the Senate. But even a filibuster would achieve their goal of blocking the witnesses. The problem is that it all has to be done in public. The Republicans will have to take a major burn in their reputations to cover this up.

trump demanded an outright dismissal. Senate Republicans have already stated they do not have the political capital for that. Maybe they can block any witnesses, but only allowing witnesses against Biden would be politically impossible.

Rule changes can be done with a simple majority...and there will be rule changes.

There will be no filibusters, the times are strictly allotted.

All of a sudden. the Democrats who conducted one of the most unfair and partisan shams in the House, in history are concerned with fairness.

Lol

 

[Walt]

This will fail, President Trump will be exonerated and remain president for five more years with a landslide victory.

You are probably one third right, but definitely two thirds wrong. The Senate will fail to convict trump, that much is almost certainly correct.

Republicans will NOT even try to "exonerate" trump. Bringing forward the witnesses that could either exonerate, or convict trump would just reinforce that he is guilty in the voters minds. And make no mistake about it, trump is quite guilty.

trump will NOT win in a landslide. he might eke out a win, probably not in the popular vote, but maybe in the Electoral College. There is no way he gets a landslide.

This failed attempt by the Democrats to remove a sitting president that the American voters elected will be long remembered by Middle America.

This is going to sound mean, but nobody cares. Not Democrats, not Republicans, nobody. Who cares how long people who will vote for Republicans all the time will remember something. They are going to vote for Republicans whatever the Democrats or Republicans do. They will do that until they die.

What is a concern is what will people in battleground states think. They are overwhelmingly for impeachment, but not necessarily conviction. And there in lies the rub. Republicans have to look like they are taking this seriously, or they will lose all the battleground states. They also must keep this from getting anymore serious than it is, or they will lose all the battleground states.

And then there is the dying thing. Republican voters will be Republican voters until they die... But that is going to happen sooner or later. Republicans are not making good inroads with the younger people.

 

[Walt]

The fact is nobody really knows anything beyond it.

Actually, you are wrong there. Biden's whole job at Burisma was to pass western due diligence. That means his whole job was to create a complete and perfect paper trail that is easily followed by western businesses. Say whatever else you want about Biden, he is good at his job.

And the Senate is not good at this job, in fact they have no experience at this job. Biden and Burisma have been gone over by almost every Western European government regulator and major bank. They found nothing, and admitted Burisma into western business. That is quite an accomplishment. I very much doubt that the Senate Republicans will find problems that so many actual experts in the field missed.

And no offense, but we are to think the Ukrainians ‘need to be instructed’ on how to run a business in a non-corrupt fashion? What are they, stupid?

Rooting out corruption is not an easy task, but proving that you have rooted out corruption is extremely difficult. It requires a huge amount of experience and education. I have literally only touched the sides of minor due diligence investigations, and it was a huge task. For a company along the lines of Burisma, it is a nearly impossible feat.

Biden deserves a lot of credit for getting Burisma through that. Anyone who thinks that is easy is making a huge mistake.

 

[Darth Omar]

You think an extremely corrupt government is better at investigating their own corruption, even if they do not have the laws to even prosecute them? There is a reason it is illegal in the USA for Americans to be corrupt anywhere else, and that is because we cannot and do not trust failed states to keep our citizens from being corrupt.

Lets say ExonMobile pays a Nigerian politician $100 million for oil rights. Nigeria cannot be trusted to investigate the case. In fact, they might demand a bribe from an innocent person not to be prosecuted. So the USA basically ignores the Nigerian government, and investigates such a case themselves.



Yes, Burisma was under investigation for things that happened before Biden was brought on board to clean up the company. Biden complained the investigation was suspended, because it hurt his efforts to clean up the company.



Now that part is untrue. Biden was able to get the investigation restarted. Without the investigation, there was no way that Burisma could ever pass western due diligence. Usually, you want to shutdown an investigation, but in this case things had gone too far.



trump accepted illegal campaign contributions to pay strippers for sex. Part of the paperwork we have seen so far talks about how to handle pregnancies that happened from that.

In other words, maybe Biden did get a stripper pregnant, and maybe not. But he is a private citizen, so that is not a concern of the Senate. trump using illegal campaign contributions to cover up his stripper sex is a concern of the Senate.

The woman has DNA evidence—and while it has no bearing on the issue it speaks to the kind of individual democrats risk putting under oath in front of the Senate. And I don’t know what, if any, experience you have with individuals with drug problems but putting them in situations where big money is changing hands is a no-go in my experience.

Some of them fully recover but just as many go back and forth with it.

But Joe was VP, so yeah. If this obvious conflict of interest would have been addressed under Obama’s ‘scandal free’ reign none of this would have happened.

 

[Earl]

You are probably one third right, but definitely two thirds wrong. The Senate will fail to convict trump, that much is almost certainly correct.

Republicans will NOT even try to "exonerate" trump. Bringing forward the witnesses that could either exonerate, or convict trump would just reinforce that he is guilty in the voters minds. And make no mistake about it, trump is quite guilty.

trump will NOT win in a landslide. he might eke out a win, probably not in the popular vote, but maybe in the Electoral College. There is no way he gets a landslide.




This is going to sound mean, but nobody cares. Not Democrats, not Republicans, nobody. Who cares how long people who will vote for Republicans all the time will remember something. They are going to vote for Republicans whatever the Democrats or Republicans do. They will do that until they die.

What is a concern is what will people in battleground states think. They are overwhelmingly for impeachment, but not necessarily conviction. And there in lies the rub. Republicans have to look like they are taking this seriously, or they will lose all the battleground states. They also must keep this from getting anymore serious than it is, or they will lose all the battleground states.

And then there is the dying thing. Republican voters will be Republican voters until they die... But that is going to happen sooner or later. Republicans are not making good inroads with the younger people.

Well, no you are completely wrong.

Middle America cares that the far left Democrat Socialists in the House attempted to remove a sitting president that they elected. I care and the elections in Nov. will prove that patriotic Middle Americans care.

The exoneration will be the vote, yes or no, he did or didn't commit an impeachable offense. In America, you are INNOCENT until proven guilty, the bedrock of American jurisprudence. A no vote means he is innocent.

The landslide will be the Electoral vote...no one cares about the popular vote except the loser Democrats.

 

[Walt]

The woman has DNA evidence

Maybe she does, but for some reason she has been delaying putting it in front of a court. Remember the stripper that claimed to have mothered Clinton's child, and then came up with excuse after excuse for why not to complete the DNA test? That went no where.

But for the sake of argument, lets say she does have the DNA evidence. We have already seen the paperwork evidence that trump accepted illegal campaign contributions to coverup his romp with strippers. If one evidence is submitted, then both would have to be made very public. Hunter Biden is not running for any office, but trump is running for reelection. Who do you think gets hurt worse by that?

If this obvious conflict of interest would have been addressed under Obama’s ‘scandal free’ reign none of this would have happened.

trump's campaign manager, his primary political advisor, his campaign foreign policy advisor, his administration foreign policy advisor, and several dozen other such people are either in prison now, or about to go to prison. We are three years in and only one or two members of his original cabinet are left. Half his current cabinet have pictures with Epstein AFTER he left prison.

Bush had a lot of scandals too. But nothing like this. No one has ever seen trump levels of scandals.

And then there was Obama, a quiet scandal free time in the middle. Republicans certainly had a lot of investigations, and reinvestigations, but they never actually got anyone for anything.

Now we hear that getting an investigation against Burisma restarted might have caused a possible appearance of a conflict of interest, but not an actual appearance of conflict of interest, much less an actual conflict of interest? That is a tough sell as a scandal. Both Hunter Biden and the US Government wanted Burisma investigated and cleaned up. There was no conflict of interest there.

 

[Earl]

Is Stormy included in the Articles?

 

[Ross Dolan]

Why did democrats give up on extortion, Frank?

I think they have not given up on it...and well that they shouldn't. Trump obviously attempted to extort President Zelensky. Tough charge to prove, though...so best to go with something easier. Too bad the charge could not be lack of class or stupidity. That would be a cinch.

I’ll tell you why lol. It’s not there.

You use "lol" so often, I cannot help but wonder if you are a high schooler. Are you?

They might as well scratch ‘obstructing congress’ off the ticket because that’s a joke.

I don't see Trump laughing at the joke.

Abuse of power is nebulous and sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents since practically all of them act in ways that can be construed as ‘abuse of power’.

Yeah. I guess Stalin and Hitler felt that way, too.

Not that you care about such things, you just want rid of Trump and if that means making it easier for future Houses to impeach future presidents—so be it.

Right, Frank?

I do think that the most important thing any reasonable American should be doing at this point...is efforting toward getting Trump out of office. To paraphrase John Dean, Trump is a cancer on the Republic.

Thanks for asking, Darth.

 

[Walt]

Middle America cares that the far left Democrat Socialists in the House attempted to remove a sitting president that they elected.

You missed my point. The majority of America, and both political parties do not care what "Middle America" thinks. They hate Democrats, so will vote Republican until they die. Democrats can do nothing to change that, and so will not even bother. And Republicans can do nothing to change that, so do not even care.

Tell me that battleground states will never forgive the Democrats, and I will become worried. Tell me that the red state fanatics will never forgive Democrats, and I will not care. It has been true for decades.

I might as well tell you that blacks will never forgive Republicans for how they treated Obama. Who cares?

I care and the elections in Nov. will prove that patriotic Middle Americans care.

Spoiler alert. Red states will vote for trump, and blue states will vote against trump. The impeachment will not change that one bit. Red states can whine they will never vote against trump, but that was true before the impeachment.

The real question is how battleground states will vote. And even more importantly who will vote in battleground states. If Republicans who are not wild about voting for trump in the beginning are even more ashamed of him after impeachment, not just trump will lose, Republicans in general will lose.

The exoneration will be the vote

You want Republicans to change the rules to vote on exoneration? That would require Republicans to go on record as not just saying that the evidence does not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but that trump is exonerated. That would do possibly mortal damage to the Republican Party.

I support it.

In America, you are INNOCENT until proven guilty

Actually, it is not.

It is PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty. That means you are treaty as innocent by the courts until proven guilty. The courts have avoided exoneration in all but the most extreme cases, because that opens up a whole can of worms.

Remember with the Clinton Impeachment when Spector voted "not proven". That was his attempt to make clear that "not guilty" was definitely not exonerated. He counted on Scottish law to come up with a "different" type of verdict. A piece of legal advise from me(admittedly I am not a lawyer), NEVER COUNT ON SCOTTISH LAW!!!

A no vote means he is innocent.

OJ Simpson wishes you were right. He had a unanimous verdict of not guilty in a criminal trial, followed by a unanimous verdict of guilty in a civil trial. If he was already found innocent in the criminal trial, the civil trial would have been impossible(double jeopardy). Not guilty just means that they are not to be treated as guilty in that particular court. It is not a statement of innocences.

The landslide will be the Electoral vote

It is impossible for trump to get an electoral landslide. Red states will not be voting for him. This is not 1984, and trump is not Reagan.

Worse yet for him, he is doing much worse in battleground states than he was before. He has some time to pull off a narrow victory, but even if he does win, it will be a narrow victory.

A victory for trump would look like last time. He will definitely lose the popular vote, but might be able to win the Electoral College by the skin of his teeth.