Which Party Stands To Lose The Most From Impeachment Witnesses Testimonies?

Which Party Stands To Lose The Most From Impeachment Witnesses Testimonies?

Democrats.

They should have had some before they started this snip.

Calling for witness's now after the fact is nothing more than a fishing expedition.

The biggest losers as always is US.

For having to put up with a bunch of treasnous snip hats like Schumer,Pelosi,Schiff,Nadler get religion,found father fever, and drape the entire farce in the red,white, and blue.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: carewemust

McConnell wants to block witnesses, right? I don't think it's because he thinks the Republicans would benefit the most from witnesses.

Hahahaha
As if the dems could EVER get the required 67 votes
Ahahahaha
Aaaaahahahah

originally posted by: Notoneofyou

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: carewemust

If they call witnesses, then this will go in for weeks, perhaps months.

Sanders, Warren, Klubachar, won't be able to campaign.

Biden will be called in to testify and interrupt his campaign.

It would leave the democrat nomination wide open for Buttigig or Hillary.

I'm almost afraid to say it, but, what if that's the plan.

Drag out the whole process for as long as possible, and then blame the impeachment as they couldn't campaign.

the less any of them campaign, the less money they accrue.

And they are rich bastards that want to be richer.

So they want to campaign.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: burdman30ott6

if you voters want blood, look at the Democrats because they own this entire snipshow.

Witnesses, no witnesses, which witnesses, is all up to the Republicans. The Republicans don't need one Democrat's vote to get what they want, whatever they want. This is all on the Republicans.

You do realize this is only occurring because the house got stuck running with their fake whistle blower?
Only leftists with their heads as far up their butts as you, think the democrats look even remotely competent.

a reply to: watchitburn

Hey, it's the Republican's call! They can subpoena the whistle blower if they want. They can subpoena Adam Schiff, if they want.

Any minute now my tribe is going to win; and the other tribe is going to crash and burn in a glorious fireball of revelations... any minute now.

Do Users bother reading the Source?

Is the OP not properly vetting the information?

Where does it day he concedes he doesn't have the vote?

I'll go ahead and tell you, it doesn't.

Infact, this is what we get,

*according to multiple reports.

Not saying it isn't true, however, we've seen this game before.

Furthermore, the "multiple reports" cited by National Review is hyperlinked to its source...from TWITTER.

The Twitter source reveals more than the OP, that "reportedly" McConnell didn't YET have the votes BUT that most Senators are ready for the final vote and ready to move on.

A bit of fear mongering on the OPs part since we don't know for sure on what was exactly said and heard, not to mention the source is a WAPO reporter attached to the WH with extensive ties to CNN, indicating political biases.

To the OPs credit, the thread can be considered a hypotheotical on which party stands to lose from witnesses.

No value in anybody else. They already talked to the people closest to this situation. Nothing. Literally nothing but assumptions and presumptions. Nobody is going down over those kinds of statements in any court in the US over what someone thinks happened. Actually shocked it even got this far so I at least give them a slow clap for that effort but ultimately it's 100% fail. They are going to pay for it long term. The blue wall won't be getting re-built I know that much.

a reply to: underwerks

The walls will really be closing in then!

It will be the beginning of the end!

You got him this time for sure!

Has anyone considered, that Pres. Trump WANTS Bolton to testify?

What better way to get Hunter on the witness stand, than to throw the Democrats a bone to trade?

The Dems are dying to get Bolton on the stand... what if he testifies in support of the President? It would leave a load of crap in their laps... AND, Hunter Biden would have to take the stand, as well.

A "two-fer"... at the Democrat's request...

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
a reply to: underwerks

The walls will really be closing in then!

It will be the beginning of the end!

You got him this time for sure!

Yep, then they can start their next impeachment process.

a reply to: carewemust

After long consideration, I’m going to say that witnesses will hurt the Green Party the most. The DNC implosion will cause the surviving rats to flock there. Sure it will make them the other party but will kill their platform in the process.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: burdman30ott6

if you voters want blood, look at the Democrats because they own this entire snipshow.

Witnesses, no witnesses, which witnesses, is all up to the Republicans. The Republicans don't need one Democrat's vote to get what they want, whatever they want. This is all on the Republicans.

I can see some Republicans, like Mitt Romney, voting YES for Bolton, and NO for Biden.

a reply to: jhn7537

Your point is well taken, but don't you agree that the UPSIDE potential for President Trump/Republicans, is far greater than any potential upside for Democrats?

All the facts are known about what actually occurred with Ukraine Aid. It was delayed, then paid-out before the 9/31/2019 deadline.

But what if Schiff-Ciaramella-Vindman CONSPIRED to create the Whistleblower complaint, and that is revealed during the trial?

Or if Joe Biden can't come up with a good reason why he demanded that the Prosecutor investigating his son's employer be fired, or Ukraine would not get the Billion Dollars in Aid $$$ that Congress had already authorized?

a reply to: carewemust

I would like the Republicans to ask Bolton some questions.

Like... why two days AFTER the judge that was supposed to rule on whether his Deputy's subpoena to testify was legal threw the case out because the Democrats withdrew it, did he basically say ~Sigh~, I guess if you ask me I'll have to testify now..."

The day after his lawyer sent his book to the NSA to be checked for classified info...

When did Bolton start writing this book? Not like he just whipped it out in a few months, not without a lot of help...

Who paid for the book?

How much was the advance?

Why was Bolton spotted in Qatar recently?

In Doha, actually... who hangs out there?

What was the nature of THAT visit?

Things that make you go hhmm....

a reply to: Lumenari

Those are good questions that get directly to Bolton's MOTIVE for wanting to testify.

But I thought the House did NOT subpoena him.

a reply to: operation mindcrime

I suppose it's not wise, from a legal standpoint, to put a cap on the number of witnesses that are allowed for each side?

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Lumenari

Those are good questions that get directly to Bolton's MOTIVE for wanting to testify.

But I thought the House did NOT subpoena him.

They subpoenad his Deputy (Kupperman), it was going to court and then was retracted before the Judge could issue a ruling on it.

Talking Points Memo

Edited my post to reflect that, sorry.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

To Nancy Pelosi's credit, she sobered up enough to think clearly for a few hours today. During that time, she said the new Trump/Kushner Mideast Peace Plan looks encouraging.

originally posted by: Jefferton
Democrats have no chance at the presidency until at least 8 terms from now. When everyone forgets what has happened.

It won't take that long if they can come up with someone smart, sensible, in-touch, empathic, and charismatic.