Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 1 2020 07:07pm)

That is a much better position than you were advocating before.

The transcript wasn't the "holy grail" your'e portraying it as. Sonder's testimony was the thing that really sealed it in most people's mind, at least on this forum.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 1 2020 06:07pm)

That is a much better position than you were advocating before.

The transcript wasn't the "holy grail" your'e portraying it as. Sonder's testimony was the thing that really sealed it in most people's mind, at least on this forum.

Quote (GLYC123 @ Feb 1 2020 07:13pm)

You mean, Sondland? The guy that presumed.

"Here’s the truth: Sondland confirms he presumed quid pro quo was the president’s intent. Sondland assumed Trump wanted aid withheld in return for Ukraine stating publicly its government was kicking off an investigation into Team Biden, circa 2016.

But impeachment is not a matter for assumption and presumption."

Quote (Ghot @ Feb 1 2020 06:10pm)

A little more fiction for PaRD. :/

Sonder's testimony didn't seal anything. Neither did any of the other witnesses the House DID call. I actually listened to every word from every witness... LIVE.
NOT the soundbites the Dems tossed around afterward.

Quote (GLYC123 @ Feb 1 2020 06:25pm)

I watched that one too, I remember seeing Trump's team also honing in on the language Sondland used by focusing on the matter of 'presume', which severely hampers the weight of what he says.

You can't really hold a lot of value with a person when they're speaking under oath in regards to that since it's solely an idea that they may have that they are also not claiming is factual.

Quote (Ghot @ Feb 1 2020 07:15pm)

It sure seems to be for the party that lost the 2016 election.


Minsc: A den of stinking evil. Cover your nose Boo. We will leave no crevice untouched. <---- Obviously a Republican. :D


/e https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsc



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/09/Minsc.jpg/200px-Minsc.jpg

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 1 2020 07:28pm)

So then we definitely should have people like Bolton coming forward to testify, and Trump shouldn't be blocking their testimony.

Quote (Skinned @ Feb 1 2020 07:30pm)

Minsc was chaotic good, and the GOP is lawful evil. You don't seem to know the character at all. He was a ranger...he would be an environmentalist, not a corporate shill.

Quote (Ghot @ Feb 1 2020 07:39pm)

Bolton could have come forward during the House hearings. He was fired long before those hearings. But if he did, then we would've found just more hearsay, and the Dems wouldn't be able to keep dragging this out.





The Dems are pure evil, and they force Minsc into a berserk state. I worry for Boo.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 2 2020 10:30am)

None of those are relevant though.

Why should Schiff testify? He has no knowledge of what Trump did. Everything he could testify to would be known from other sources. If you want Schiff to testify to leaking or something that's a separate issue that should be brought up in its own trial.

The whistleblower is third party evidence that was sufficient to start an investigation, but cannot speak to the validity of any of the charges. See my previous post. If Tony tells me that Jeff admitted he killed somebody, then I tell the police, I'm the "whistleblower", but I'm not somebody who can contribute to the case. Tony could, but I can't.

Same with the Bidens. It really doesn't matter if the Bidens had a secret gay love affair spanning 20 years with Putin and the Ukrainian prime minister and they've been getting political favors from it the whole time. If Trump didn't have reason to think it was going on, then he doesn't get the defense of his actions AFTER learning that was a possibility. If I shoot a random person on the street, and it turns out he was a pedophile with a sex dungeon I had no knowledge of, that doesn't mean I don't get charged with murder.