With due respect, Callinectes, testifying would not be covering up a crime, the which he had no legal obligation to report, but instead would be revealing it.
What crime?
With due respect, Callinectes, testifying would not be covering up a crime, the which he had no legal obligation to report, but instead would be revealing it.
The ignorance of the “Trumpees”, blows my mind. Might as well put a rope on their nose rings. Left alone these people would not know their mouth holes from their ass holes. Wow!!! The level of stupidity requires a new range of measure.
Hello Flash,
There you go. His only concern is for himself. Dedication to nation, truth or others is of no consequence. He feels no obligation to act as a leader, nor to explain himself to the concerns of the people.
He is not made of the same cloth as Bill Clinton, a man who spoke to the nation under oath when accused.
The ignorance of the “Trumpees”, blows my mind. Might as well put a rope on their nose rings. Left alone these people would not know their mouth holes from their ass holes. Wow!!! The level of stupidity requires a new range of measure.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What has Bolton got to do with trump testifying?You mean after Clinton stood up and lied to the American public and his staff? He only became a "leader" after he got caught.
Clinton is a perfect example of why the defendant shouldn't testify. He lied, got caught, and was impeached for perjury before the grand jury, suspended his law license for five years in Arkansas, and paid a $25,000 fine in the Lewinsky case in return for not being prosecuted for perjury. He also paid a $90,000 fine for contempt for lying in the Paula Jones case.
If your spouse or child was accused of a crime and a good defense attorney recommended they not testify at the trial, would you ignore that advice and tell them to testify?
I saw a trial where the defendant took the stand and did a very good job of throwing a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury--until cross-examination.
But I don't think you want the best defense for the accused--you want anything you think will hurt Trump; instead, you are trying to make some kind of moral argument about taking the stand.
I thought the topic was Bolton?I see that you are wisely concerned about TRE45ON testifying under oath.
Or better yet you could be banned.reagansghost
is banned from my threads illegally
the mod who is doing this needs to be fired and banned
Why? What rule has she broken?Or better yet you could be banned.
What has Bolton got to do with trump testifying?
But Trump did nothing wrong, therefore Bolton can clear him so what is Trump afraid of? NO QUID PRO QUO!!!
One must wonder what new distraction the orange douche is contemplating now. A war with N. Korea? Will they take out one of Kim's generals? Stay tuned for the next episode of the IMPEACHED ONE's reality show...The White House Episodes.
Logic is not having the accused testify at the trial.
Hello Flash,
This is not a criminal trial. This is our leader who needs to explain himself under oath.
Citizens in criminal trials did not take an oath to hold allegiance to the Constitution, and they are not accused of abusing the most powerful position in the world. Citizens in criminal trials are not leaders that we look up to explain what happened in national and world news.
Bad comparison, yours.
And all that other dirt about Clinton, multiply that by a thousand and you've got Trump.
You do not have to be convicted of a crime to be impeached and convicted. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4820049/user-clip-lindsey-graham-crime-required-impeachment A crime is not necessary. But Trump is a fucking crook.
What trial? Trump hasn't been impeached yet!
I thought the topic was Bolton?
You do not have to be convicted of a crime to be impeached and convicted. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4820049/user-clip-lindsey-graham-crime-required-impeachment A crime is not necessary. But Trump is a fucking crook.