Bill Hemmer Has To Ask Val Demings Three Times Why The House Didn’t Subpoena John Bolton

Congresswoman Val Demings of Florida was asked 3 times by a Fox News show about why the House didn't call John Bolton to testify.

Bolton is the hot topic that Democrats seem to like one minute and hate the next 😆

They can't make up their minds because they've been "forced" to like Bolton !! 🥳

Demings put on a typical Democrat deflection show and I doubt she even understands the entire mess 😆

Val is one of the House "Managers" that presented a weak case for impeachment 😆😆

So far no comment from another House "Manager" Hakeem Jeffries !! 👁️

Bill Hemmer Has To Ask Val Demings Three Times Why The House Didn’t Subpoena John Bolton

Fox News host Bill Hemmer had to ask House Impeachment Manager Val Demings three times why the House had not subpoenaed former National Security Adviser John Bolton — and even then, she did not give an answer.

Hemmer spoke to Demings during a break Monday in the Senate’s impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.

Hemmer jumped right in with the question about Bolton, saying, “We’ve got a couple of minutes here, let’s get right to it. Why not subpoena John Bolton before this case moved to the Senate, Congresswoman?”

👁️👁️👁️👁️

a reply to: xuenchen
perhaps she will get the opportunity to answer that same question today?
on the senate record no less.....
as she has had time to prepare now, perhaps she will have an actual answer.......
then again it is the house dems so probably not as they all seem poorly prepared and less than average intelligence

Because the whole WORLD knows that Bolton is a conservative war-hawk, a long-long-years republican and therefore why would you ask someone with this attitude to testify CONTRA republicans?

Who would think that this would work out? Who would have thought that Bolton is hurt deep enough in his little soul that he takes the time to (ghost-)write about about being hurt?

I do not like Bolton, and I was always weary of his type of aggressive posture against anything he deemed "anti-american" or "not-american-enough". But he was, and I am willing giving that to him, strong in his conviction.

For someone like him to "betray" a republican president can only mean two things (three, if you count a lot of money, too): (a) it hurt him like hell to be dismissed not on his terms or (b) the Impeached Idiot is not a republican president to him.

a reply to: ManFromEurope
none of your rambling addressed the actual question
why did the house dems not call bolton to testify when forming the articles of impeachment?

because the impeachment exercise is no more than farce?
because bolton has no actual evidence to give them?

lol

the funny part is you still do not understand there will not be 67 votes to remove trump
and he will be re elected

lol

a reply to: xuenchen

Talk about watching someone who's completely full of sh*t... When you don't have a answer, you start speaking nonsense that's off-topic, apparently, the left has mastered this area of talking, but not really saying anything...

There is a simple answer why they didn't. Getting Bolton in the House would have taken months. They don't have time for that process and that's just one person. There would have been more.

They knew the Senate wasn't going to remove Trump anyway. The goal was to just get him impeached and then beat him over the head with it for 8 months to include the Senate. Not any harder than that.

They are going to run with this because frankly, there is nothing else to hit him with.

*** Update ***

Some of the dems in the Senate are now coming out saying they want to vote to acquit Trump. They want this over with now. No witnesses. Just get the hell out of this situation. They achieved what they wanted like Nancy said. He's impeached. Moving on....

a reply to: ManFromEurope

therefore why would you ask someone with this attitude to testify CONTRA republicans?

What , it takes 40 years for US news to reach you ?
Dang...

What a great setup this is becoming! Now MSM is saying Bolton has dirt on Barr, that will only be revealed if he can testify.

Call their bluff. Vote on it. Several Dems are saying they don't want him testifying.

Republicans expect to win the vote to wrap up
things up, Mitch says he expects they have enough
votes. Then it is off to a vote to acquit.

Adam Schiffs eyes might pop out of his head.

originally posted by: Stupidsecrets
Call their bluff. Vote on it. Several Dems are saying they don't want him testifying.

I will bet bernie votes against it he has major reasons to get this over with. In fact im beginning to think he may be realizing they are stacking the deck against him again.

Several of his supporters are all ready making the claim that this was done to hurt his chances.

The most probable answer is the Dems couldn't guarantee control over what he would say on the witness stand, unlike 100% of their other sham witnesses.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
The most probable answer is the Dems couldn't guarantee control over what he would say on the witness stand, unlike 100% of their other sham witnesses.

Right, so they choose not to call him, but use him as
a tool out of their dirty tricks game.

It is all calculated....

a reply to: xuenchen

Do you recall any time in the past century that so many people have put out so many books about working in the White House? Nevermind the absurd number of leaks that have publicly shared privileged information. Assange and Snowden are both heroes and they're demonized.... meanwhile we have scumbags leaking real-time information and nobody is in jail.

They won't call Bolton because he's full of s×÷t and he won't go on record to stand by his horse s×÷t fantasy that he wrote about. Doesn't the timing of this just stink of corruption? The deep state has the left and the right in their fist. I never liked that war hawk Bolton. I can only hope Trump has a bigger plan and all these pieces of s+×t are going to get what they deserve.

Wow, what a tool.

I am guessing she was chosen for optics and not her intelligence.

a reply to: xuenchen

reminds me of that governor in little whore house in texas ohh we got to dance a little side step

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: ManFromEurope
none of your rambling addressed the actual question
why did the house dems not call bolton to testify when forming the articles of impeachment?

because the impeachment exercise is no more than farce?
because bolton has no actual evidence to give them?

lol

the funny part is you still do not understand there will not be 67 votes to remove trump
and he will be re elected

lol

Lol, the world KNOWS that the Impeached Idiot won't be removed, but not because he is innocent.

I wrote exactly why the democrats had no idea that Bolton would be so very, very direct in his attack against the Idiot.

Learn to read.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Lol, the world KNOWS that the Impeached Idiot won't be removed, but not because he is innocent.

It's because the redneck american people are stupid. And naturally they want an idiot to represent them. Did I just read your mind ??? Feels like it.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Because the whole WORLD knows that Bolton is a conservative war-hawk, a long-long-years republican and therefore why would you ask someone with this attitude to testify CONTRA republicans?

Wow, you finally admit that

• the whole impeachment is a partisan exercise, and
  
• the whole point of the House investigations was to deny Trump any ability to defend himself against charges.

We're making progress!

For someone like him to "betray" a republican president can only mean two things (three, if you count a lot of money, too): (a) it hurt him like hell to be dismissed not on his terms or (b) the Impeached Idiot is not a republican president to him.

Oooh, another nugget of realization. I never considered Trump a "normal Republican" either... that's why I like him!

Well, that and he knows how to put Angela Merkel in her place...

TheRedneck