• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Dox GOP senators who'd allow witnesses at impeachment trial

Should GOP Senators be doxxed for allowing witnesses at impeachment trial?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • No.

    Votes: 12 80.0%
  • Unsure.

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Don't know.

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • Total voters
    15

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Ah. You didn’t hear. They did.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e26cc8-018d-11ea-8bab-0fc209e065a8_story.html

A Tale of Two Nixons: Executive Branch Officials Must Comply with House Subpoenas

Oh I see. You probably get your lies (you’re calling them “facts”) from sources like Rush Limbaugh or Fox ‘News’. :rolleyes:
No, GOP hasn’t been shut out of impeachment hearings

Well, you obviously get your news from CNN and MSNBC....You know, CNN, which is so incredibly unbiased that it just had to pay an undetermined but probably massive amount of money to a young man it not only smeared in the news unjustly, but whose life they probably ruined?

Right.

The republicans were NOT allowed to call witnesses or challenge any. If the President decided to invoke his fifth amendment rights in that particular star chamber, I sure don't blame him any.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well, you obviously get your news from CNN and MSNBC....You know, CNN, which is so incredibly unbiased that it just had to pay an undetermined but probably massive amount of money to a young man it not only smeared in the news unjustly, but whose life they probably ruined?

Right.

The republicans were NOT allowed to call witnesses or challenge any. If the President decided to invoke his fifth amendment rights in that particular star chamber, I sure don't blame him any.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that witnesses for the defense are allowed in a grand jury. They are not. The House's job was to find if there was enough evidence to indict. There was. The Republicans tried to obstruct that process. Why should that be allowed? In a grand jury the defense does not get to call witnesses. They usually have little power to even question the witnesses.

So what was unfair about the process?
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
The republicans were NOT allowed to call witnesses
They are now. Now they can call any witness they want. But apparently there are no witnesses that could possibly provide any defence of Trump. If there were any such a witnesses certainly they would call them. But they don’t want witnesses now.

And frankly is is disingenuous to suggest they ever did.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
You realize that the house inquiry was fully bipartisan, right?
Also, in the Clinton trial, everybody came to the inquiry, including the POTUS; all of whom answered questions.
You knew that, right? And that Trump obstructed Congress by taking the opposite tact, and prohibiting any of the WH witnesses from attending the Congressional inquiry. Right?
I think this is so important to repeat again and again. The House subpoenaed witness who the White House told not to testify. That in itself is contemptuous.

Of course, there was a reason for that -- the hope that lengthy court battles over whether the subpoenas should be honoured could push the House processes out past the election. And that would be a good thing for WHO exactly? Exactly -- POTUS.

Yet the fact remains, those witnesses didn't testify, and ought to testify if anybody is interested in the truth. Since McConnell says he doesn't want to hear from them, we must assume that he is not interested in the truth. And that is good for WHO exactly? Exactly -- POTUS and the Republican party.

I point out, yet again, that if there was a chance that the testimony that has been refused by the White House would be exculpatory, we would have heard it already, lout and clear. That we have not should be taken as a presumption that the testimony would be quite otherwise.

Finally, it's fascinating that Trump is calling for new witnesses all over the place: Pelosi, Schiff, Biden -- not a single one of whom could provide even remotely germane evidence to the matters in question -- because they didn't participate, weren't there, and had no opportunity to observe. But of course, this is all smoke and mirrors -- and the tragedy is its probably going to work, which tells me more than I care to know about the supposed system of "checks and balances."

America is losing a lot, in my view, and it saddens me.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
But YOU folks have done so. The House impeached Trump. The meetings and the vote were purely partisan.
I think this needs to be discussed. I watched the impeachment hearings on television, and from all I could see, all the committee members -- from both parties -- were present and accounted for, and allowed their equal turns to examine the witnesses, and their equal turn to vote.

Now, the fact that there were more Democrats in the room can be laid squarely at the feet of the electorate, who elected more Democrats to the House, period. This comes under the header of "democracy."

Now, I put it to you, if the vote in committee to impeach was "purely partisan," then is it not possible that some -- from either party -- did not vote upon the evidence put before them, but from some other motive, like party affiliation?

Now, I listened very carefully to the evidence given. I also listened to the questions put by both parties, and I concluded that I could only vote to impeach, because that is what the evidence presented. And I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, nor even an American.

But I can listen.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
They are now. Now they can call any witness they want. But apparently there are no witnesses that could possibly provide any defence of Trump. If there were any such a witnesses certainly they would call them. But they don’t want witnesses now.

And frankly is is disingenuous to suggest they ever did.
Exactly! Thank you! They could indeed call any witnesses they'd like -- even Pelosi, Schiff, and the entire Biden clan (except of course, they have no "relevant evidence" to give). I wonder if the Chief Justice, in presiding, would remember the rules of evidence in such cases.
 

Shad

Veteran Member

You know there was more than one subpoena and more than one person that could be subpoenaed right? You know Congress can go back to the courts getting a court order which law enforcement can enforce right? Your low information point is easy to knock down. Try again. Dems didn't want to follow the court system procedure. Too bad for the Dems and their fabricated obstruction charge.



Oh I see. You probably get your lies (you’re calling them “facts”) from sources like Rush Limbaugh or Fox ‘News’. :rolleyes:

Nope. I just used google longer than 5 seconds finding information you didn't know as you found your confirmation bias and stopped doing research. Try again
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
Witnesses, shmitnesses....the rules for the Senate trial should be precisely the same as the rules for the Clinton trial in the Democrat controlled congress.

I fail to see why that is a problem. The House did its very partisan thing. It does NOT get to dictate to the Senate how to run the trial. If the House wanted 'fairness,' it should have BEEN fair. If it wanted bipartisanism, it should have BEEN bipartisan. If it wanted 'witnesses' in the Senate, it should have allowed Republican witnesses in the House, and Republican participation.

Swallow your own pills, guys.
So you've swallowed the Fox narrative, i see.


Your serial adulterer hero would not allow anyone to testify.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Fox News talk show host and conservative political commentator Sean Hannity has vowed to publicize the personal phone numbers of any Republican Senator who'd vote for allowing witnesses to be called to testify during this Senate's impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump. If any Republican Senator were wanting to avoid being bombarded and harassed with phone calls from angry constituents who'd dislike anybody being able to potentially bear false witness at the Senate's Impeachment trial of President Trump., then she/he would best not vote to allow witnesses to testify against our P.O.T.U.S. at the Senate's Impeachment trial.

president-trump-hannity-interview.png
Makes sense. How can you have witnesses to a phone call? 1 or -3? Teleconference?

Or have the socialist Democrats expanded it now as being something even bigger that they invented?
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Witnesses, shmitnesses....the rules for the Senate trial should be precisely the same as the rules for the Clinton trial in the Democrat controlled congress.

I fail to see why that is a problem. The House did its very partisan thing. It does NOT get to dictate to the Senate how to run the trial. If the House wanted 'fairness,' it should have BEEN fair. If it wanted bipartisanism, it should have BEEN bipartisan. If it wanted 'witnesses' in the Senate, it should have allowed Republican witnesses in the House, and Republican participation.

Swallow your own pills, guys.
They did allow Republican participation.
They did allow Republican witnesses. Three of them.
Why do people keep repeating these falsehoods?
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Why not? And remember; Obama wasn't impeached.



What ARE you talking about? Unlike this last go-round, idiotic calls for Obama's impeachment from the weird (birther, anybody?) were shouted down BY REPUBLICANS. Nothing was ever done by the House, and CERTAINLY the Republicans never pulled what Pelosi has.

They certainly had no chance, and no wish, to 'change the rules' regarding impeachment or Senate trials.

But YOU folks have done so. The House impeached Trump. The meetings and the vote were purely partisan. The Republicans weren't allowed to participate in most of the secret sessions, never mind call any witnesses. Now the House wants to dictate to the Senate how to run the trial?

I don't think so. If it turns out that the Senate does this exactly according to the rules used during the Clinton trial, and does what was done then....that is, vote right down partisan lines, you people have only yourselves to blame.

And you HAVE ensured Trump's win in 2020. I mean, really. I voted for Trump last time holding my nose. It was a vote against Hillary more than a vote for Trump, but if I'm around to vote this coming fall, well, it'll still be a vote against whoever is running against him more than it is a vote for him, but he's not done a bad job as president at all so far.

In spite of all the chicken littles on the left.
The Republicans were involved in every single "secret" session. And they called THREE witnesses.
Where are you getting this bogus information from? Please tell me it's not from Trump's mouth.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
They did allow Republican participation.
They did allow Republican witnesses. Three of them.
Why do people keep repeating these falsehoods?
It was their typical closed doors talk in secret with a few 'select' Republicans to the exclusion of others that miffed a lot of people.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
It was their typical closed doors talk in secret with a few 'select' Republicans to the exclusion of others that miffed a lot of people.
That's your take on it.

The fact of the matter is that Republicans were there.
Republicans were allowed to ask questions, and did.
And Republicans called three witnesses during the public hearings.
Also they published several of the transcripts from those "secret" meetings and held public hearings with the same witnesses, so there goes the "secret" claim as well.

I'm tired of seeing people distort these most basic of facts.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That's your take on it.

The fact of the matter is that Republicans were there.
Republicans were allowed to ask questions, and did.
And Republicans called three witnesses during the public hearings.
Also they published several of the transcripts from those "secret" meetings and held public hearings with the same witnesses, so there goes the "secret" claim as well.

I'm tired of seeing people distort these most basic of facts.
It's not distorted when the information is not let out to the public.

The socialist Democrats tried to make a slick deal that they didn't want anybody else to hear.

But I guess once the transcripts are made 'available' to the public, we will know.

I hear rumors some socialist Democrats are in OfficeMax right now buying black markers.
 

Woberts

The Perfumed Seneschal
Yeah, sure. Dox the entirety of the GOP while they're at it. Even better, dox those who voted for them as well.
 
Top