The Impeachment Thread

#20,756
#20,756
MontyPython said:
So when Sondland testifies today about the phone conversation between he and Trump on July 26 in which Sondland reassured Trump the Ukrainians would agree to investigate the Bidens...

What say ye then?
Click to expand...

I say you don't know what he will testify because so far none of them have testified what was thought they would. And at the end of the day, I would look at the complete body of testimony, and so far that would make it pretty much all against possibly one. Let's suppose he does indeed testify that. Is it 5 or 7 other witnesses now that have testified he said or implied that nothing illegal or improper under direct questioning. Is one to usurp 5 or 7? Guilt is to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and that is not happening. I would hope any prudent person would look at a complete body of testimony. One day it might be you and you would want that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
#20,760
#20,760
GVF said:
I say you don't know what he will testify because so far none of them have testified what was thought they would. And at the end of the day, I would look at the complete body of testimony, and so far that would make it pretty much all against possibly one. Let's suppose he does indeed testify that. Is it 5 or 7 other witnesses now that have testified he said or implied that nothing illegal or improper under direct questioning. Is one to usurp 5 or 7? Guilt is to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and that is not happening. I would hope any prudent person would look at a complete body of testimony. One day it might be you and you would want that.
Click to expand...
Excellent point. DIMs don't care. They just hate the President and would cut off their on nose to spite of their face.
 
#20,764
#20,764
BigOrangeD said:
Yep, good ol hearsay. I heard from a friend who heard from a friend who heard from a friend testimony. LOL
Click to expand...
??????? He will testify that he heard it directly. That's first hand, not hearsay.
There is also evidently at least one more person who was present and heard it also. That's called corroboration.
 
#20,765
#20,765
BigOrangeD said:
Excellent point. DIMs don't care. They just hate the President and would cut off their on nose to spite of their face.
Click to expand...

Yep. Immediately after losing, there is an endless supply of sound bites of Dems publicly stating "whatever it takes." Which means morals and ethics out the door, we will get him for winning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
#20,766
#20,766
luthervol said:
??????? He will testify that he heard it directly. That's first hand, not hearsay.
There is also evidently at least one more person who was present and heard it also. That's called corroboration.
Click to expand...
Considering about 5 other witnesses say they did not hear it that way is also corroboration. Checkmate.
 
#20,767
#20,767
luthervol said:
??????? He will testify that he heard it directly. That's first hand, not hearsay.
There is also evidently at least one more person who was present and heard it also. That's called corroboration.
Click to expand...


So far the only thing to corroborate is that Trump did nothing wrong or illegal, so if the next testimony is corroboration, Schiff will need a bigger coffin for all the nails. The Dems may think they can also impeach him on bad taste and childishness, but all of that fluff will be thrown out at trial.
 
#20,770
#20,770
BigOrangeD said:
Horrible ratings for CBS on Impeachment Hearing. CBS pulled plug on programming. Viewership on hearing dropped by more than 1 million viewers in one day.
Click to expand...


... from 13 million to 12 million viewers.

Yovanovich was interesting, but yesterday was relatively boring. Loom for a pop in viewers today with Sondland.
 
#20,772
#20,772
GVF said:
I say you don't know what he will testify because so far none of them have testified what was thought they would. And at the end of the day, I would look at the complete body of testimony, and so far that would make it pretty much all against possibly one. Let's suppose he does indeed testify that. Is it 5 or 7 other witnesses now that have testified he said or implied that nothing illegal or improper under direct questioning. Is one to usurp 5 or 7? Guilt is to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and that is not happening. I would hope any prudent person would look at a complete body of testimony. One day it might be you and you would want that.
Click to expand...
Those 5 or 7 didn't hear the phone call that will be discussed today, so they are irrelevant to that particular piece of evidence.
I do completely agree with your last two sentences. I'm just not convinced there are enough senators willing to do that.
 
#20,775
#20,775
I would say a majority of the people don't know what this is about or don't care or see it as simply a partisan thing
The rest of us who watch this every day, I doubt 1 person has had their mind changed.

This whole thing is pointless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top