Trump says he strongly considering impeachment testimony

a reply to: Night Star
Sorry, the dems would not NEED to twist his words. He would just do that himself. It is hard for him to get out coherent sentences now let alone a cogent message without detouring down paths of rambling mind slop. His handlers, if there are any left around him who have managed to hold onto their own sanity, will dangle a shiny object in front of him that he can swat at instead.

All that even if the statement that he is giving consideration to appearing is anything more than just an aberrant statement that flitted it's way thought his brain on it's way to the ''I never said that'' collection in his mental trash bin.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Make sure witness tampering via tweet gets in there.

The Whistle Blower was willing to testify, until Trump threatened him publicly. Then his attorney offered his testimony and Q&A in writing, but that wasn't good enough for the Republicans. Now, Trump is willing to testify and do Q&A in writing.

Too untrustworthy a witness..

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I believe if given the opportunity he will lie.

I believe, if given the opportunity, you still could not tell the truth.

a reply to: dashen

That would be the bestest Christmas present ever .... Please Santa make it happen.

I'm sure some people got all pissy about the Nixon and Clinton impeachment proceedings also. I'm sure some people were insistent that said hearings were a farce or a witch hunt. They were wrong.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheRedneck

Make sure witness tampering via tweet gets in there.

The Whistle Blower was willing to testify, until Trump threatened him publicly.

I can't find that threat. Got a link to it?

originally posted by: carewemust


I can't find that threat. Got a link to it?

https: //webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pM7ywUtqTXkJ:www.latimes.com... -whistle-blower-the-information-because-thats-almost-a-spy+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Close the gap at the beginning of the url once you paste it in the search bar.

Here's a video of it...but don't worry, the whistleblower is not mentioned specifically in the threat, while the threat is veiled in rhetoric, and is also unspecific.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I hope he doesn't... he has already given testimony in writing in a tweet made during Yovanovitch's hearing. He explained his reasoning for firing her, and apparently explaining such a reason is now "witness tampering."

So what is the new term for actually testifying before Congress? "High treason against humanity"?

No, the best thing to do here is let Shiff hang himself. Everyone on the Republican party needs to shut up and let Shiff run his circus, grow a pair enough to introduce Articles of Impeachment, let the House impeach Trump, and then the Senate can call Shiff as a witness on the record along with his whistleblowing buddy and destroy every hint that he ever even had a political career.

All it would take is 15 minutes being questioned by Guiliani and he would be curled up in a fetal position whimpering.

While we're there, we can also get Pelosi and Biden on the stand to expose their actual crimes. Then we can investigate them to within an inch of their lives and if they so much as mention innocence we can then convict them of abuse of power. Who knows? Maybe we can call in Obama and Hillary too. If we're gong to play this game, let's get to playing.

TheRedneck

Indeed.

If the House impeach Trump, the Republicans need to play hardball.

The ENTIRE period of time between 2014 and 2017 where the Democrats were engaged with Ukraine and where all the accusations have come from need to be investigated fully. It's directly relevant to determine why Trump asked for the investigation into Biden and the Ukraine.

That means calling Obama, Biden, Chalupa, Podestas, Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, Clinton and her campaign cabal. Put them all on the stand to dig deep into what went on in order to show that Trump requesting an investigation is legitimate AND what Schiff, Pelosi, and Nadler knew, when they knew it, who they talked to, PLUS what Clinton and co did with Ukraine during the election cycle. Indict any of them for lying and give them the same treatment as people like Roger Stone. Up to 50 years.

The main focus should not be Schiffty, though. They should go after Obama and Biden under oath with extensive and detailed questions, subpeona's for documents. Let's get the rather obvious corruption in Ukraine fully out in the open.

Way past time to fight fire with fire.

The Republicans should also play by the same rules as the House. Refuse any Democrat witnesses and select the testimony and public hearings they want released. Shut down Democrat questions. Make the whole thing about WHY the President ordered the investigations.

originally posted by: UKTruth

Way past time to fight fire with fire.

Wouldn't the best thing be to re-open the Benghazi hearings so Republicans can finally get to the bottom of it?

a reply to: smurfy

lol That again?

That wasn't a threat.... Not even close.

"I'm going to kill you" is a threat.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: UKTruth

Way past time to fight fire with fire.

Wouldn't the best thing be to re-open the Benghazi hearings so Republicans can finally get to the bottom of it?

well with all the hubbub about ambassadors perhaps we could get that one to testify.........
or not

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: UKTruth

Way past time to fight fire with fire.

Wouldn't the best thing be to re-open the Benghazi hearings so Republicans can finally get to the bottom of it?

well with all the hubbub about ambassadors perhaps we could get that one to testify.........
or not

I mean, all the relevant ambassadors at the time of the Benghazi incident testified, so It would be easy just to look those testimonies up again if you wanted the answer quick.

That being said, I think it far more worthwhile/valuable if the old Benghazi hearing was just forgotten and we started over fresh from the beginning again.

a reply to: Wayfarer
Oh I would submit the most important one did not.....

Perhaps you are mistaken?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
Oh I would submit the most important one did not.....

Perhaps you are mistaken?

Its possible. Benghazi hearings were forever ago now. Praytell which ambassador are you referring to?

Trump says he strongly considering impeachment testimony

He shouldn't.

It's a trap.

With their 'rules' there's no way he'd even get a fair chance.

Like in a REAL court of law with a jury of HIS PEERS.

Schiff an Company are NOT a jury of his peers.

Schiff has flat out lied on multiple occasions.

Pelosi says Trump has to 'prove his innocences'.

Trump should just give them the middle finger and go play golf.

originally posted by: neo96
Trump says he strongly considering impeachment testimony

He shouldn't.

It's a trap.

With their 'rules' there's no way he'd even get a fair chance.

Like in a REAL court of law with a jury of HIS PEERS.

Schiff an Company are NOT a jury of his peers.

Schiff has flat out lied on multiple occasions.
Pelosi says Trump has to 'prove his innocences'.
Trump should just give them the middle finger and go play golf.

Do you mean get his cake and eat it? Ever been in a real court of your, 'peers'?

a reply to: carewemust

In this new enlightened society, the words "I'm innocent" from a Republican are a threat and deserve hard time.

A Democrat saying "I'm going to kill you" is just a "joke" and should be dismissed out of hand.

TheRedneck

a reply to: UKTruth

The Republicans should also play by the same rules as the House.

I disagree with that. They should play legal hardball and throw the book at every undotted 'i' and uncrossed 't' though.

Any lie, no matter how insignificant, coming under oath should carry the maximum penalty. That right there will take care of Obama, Clinton, and a whole range of underlings... including both Bidens. It is interesting to note that the President cannot be jailed for such an act. Per the Constitution he can only be removed form office. An ex-President, ex-Secretary of State, and ex-Vice President can be jailed though.

TheRedneck

a reply to: dashen

With the House wasting taxpayer time on ridiculous personal beefs and BS and the infirmitous RBG once again missing court time and putting the SCOTUS in a bot of flux we really need one branch of government to actually stay focused on the country, the Constitution, and common sense. To that end, the President has better things to do than play grabass with a bunch of horsecrap peddlers and their rogue gallery of Kept Voters. He should decline this, using his middle finger and a crotch grabbing gesture if he wishes while delivering the rejection.