Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and his brother fired and escorted out of White House.

[Quetzal]

Impeachment witness Alexander Vindman and his twin brother were abruptly fired and escorted from the White House as part of Trump's payback

This is particularly sad when you think about Vindman’s testimony to Congress where he praised America as a country where you could speak the truth without fear of reprisal. Apparently Trump’s America is not the country Vindman though it was.

History will remember Lt. Col.Vindman as a hero.

There are claims that this is illegal. Even if it is, it doesn't matter since he has a hall pass via the Senate.

 

[dianaiad]

Do you have a valid source for this? I do know that Republicans tried to get bogus witnesses. Those do not count.

I see. So...any witnesses that the Republicans wanted to call didn't count because they were called by Republicans and therefore not to be allowed....but you are claiming that Republicans were welcome to call witnesses?

Thank you. Honesty is a refreshing thing.

 

[Lyndon]

The republicans were wanting to call witnesses that had nothing to do with the case and the charges that were being filed, any judge would throw that out of court.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see. So...any witnesses that the Republicans wanted to call didn't count because they were called by Republicans and therefore not to be allowed....but you are claiming that Republicans were welcome to call witnesses?

Thank you. Honesty is a refreshing thing.

Not what I said or implied. If the Republicans had witnesses that could give evidence that Trump did not commit the crimes that he was accused of committing then they would be welcome. The problem is that Republicans did not want to find out the truth. They wanted to obstruct. I am far more reasonable than the false Republicans of today. Show me valid evidence and I will change my mind.

 

[SoyLeche]

I see. So...any witnesses that the Republicans wanted to call didn't count because they were called by Republicans and therefore not to be allowed....but you are claiming that Republicans were welcome to call witnesses?

Thank you. Honesty is a refreshing thing.

What witnesses would you have liked to have seen, and what would you have liked them to say?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The republicans were wanting to call witnesses that had nothing to do with the case and the charges that were being filed, any judge would throw that out of court.

Correct. They only wanted to obstruct. If they could call countless witnesses that had nothing to say they probably thought that it would dilute the few that were bold and honest enough to come forward.

 

[dianaiad]

Not what I said or implied. If the Republicans had witnesses that could give evidence that Trump did not commit the crimes that he was accused of committing then they would be welcome. The problem is that Republicans did not want to find out the truth. They wanted to obstruct. I am far more reasonable than the false Republicans of today. Show me valid evidence and I will change my mind.

You have just doubled down on the circularity. Fun, that...

It is simply your opinion that the Republicans 'didn't want to find out the truth." After all, they had the transcript and the Democratic witnesses. The implication here is pretty simple; if the Republicans had witnesses that would utterly exonerate Trump, they would have been deemed false and unreliable...and not admitted.

Besides which, how can a witness exonerate Trump from doing something that EVERYBODY acknowledges wasn't a crime, much less a 'high crime or misdemeanor?"

 

[dianaiad]

What witnesses would you have liked to have seen, and what would you have liked them to say?

Any witnesses fairly called, and they should say what they would say.

but there were no Republican witnesses allowed, to say anything at all.

 

[sooda]

Impeachment witness Alexander Vindman and his twin brother were abruptly fired and escorted from the White House as part of Trump's payback

This is particularly sad when you think about Vindman’s testimony to Congress where he praised America as a country where you could speak the truth without fear of reprisal. Apparently Trump’s America is not the country Vindman though it was.

History will remember Lt. Col.Vindman as a hero.

Wow.. Trump has always been vindictive.

 

[Stevicus]

Not what I said or implied. If the Republicans had witnesses that could give evidence that Trump did not commit the crimes that he was accused of committing then they would be welcome. The problem is that Republicans did not want to find out the truth. They wanted to obstruct. I am far more reasonable than the false Republicans of today. Show me valid evidence and I will change my mind.

I think the Republicans' contention was that the House impeachment hearings were controlled by the Democrats, so the assumption is that they could have or would have brought forth all the available evidence and witnesses during those proceedings. If they didn't do so, then that's really on them. I hope they weren't expecting Republican goodwill to allow them to pull off any "new evidence" or surprise witnesses at the last minute. If they were holding back for the sake of some political or legal drama, that may indicate a botched strategy.

Everyone knew what the outcome was going to be before this even started.

These are conventional politicians using conventional methods, and they're confounded that their strategies aren't working. I don't think they truly understand the bizarro world they're contending with.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think the Republicans' contention was that the House impeachment hearings were controlled by the Democrats, so the assumption is that they could have or would have brought forth all the available evidence and witnesses during those proceedings. If they didn't do so, then that's really on them. I hope they weren't expecting Republican goodwill to allow them to pull off any "new evidence" or surprise witnesses at the last minute. If they were holding back for the sake of some political or legal drama, that may indicate a botched strategy.

Everyone knew what the outcome was going to be before this even started.

These are conventional politicians using conventional methods, and they're confounded that their strategies aren't working. I don't think they truly understand the bizarro world they're contending with.

You are forgetting about the President's illegal activities that made that impossible. Which was why Obstruction of Congress was added as a charge.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have just doubled down on the circularity. Fun, that...

It is simply your opinion that the Republicans 'didn't want to find out the truth." After all, they had the transcript and the Democratic witnesses. The implication here is pretty simple; if the Republicans had witnesses that would utterly exonerate Trump, they would have been deemed false and unreliable...and not admitted.

Besides which, how can a witness exonerate Trump from doing something that EVERYBODY acknowledges wasn't a crime, much less a 'high crime or misdemeanor?"

Now please, just because you don't understand logic does not mean you can make false accusations.

You were given a challenge, and as usual when you are wrong you ducked it. If you had been paying attention during the hearings you would have heard the Republicans demand to hear from "witnesses" that were of no value since they were not witnesses. You were the one that claimed there were exculpatory witnesses and the challenge was to name one.

It appears that you could not so you replied with a false personal attack.

Lastly that some are not honest enough to admit that Trump did perform high crimes and misdemeanors is not an excuse to provide witnesses. You are blowing smoke at vest there. Try again.

 

[dianaiad]

Now please, just because you don't understand logic does not mean you can make false accusations.

You were given a challenge, and as usual when you are wrong you ducked it. If you had been paying attention during the hearings you would have heard the Republicans demand to hear from "witnesses" that were of no value since they were not witnesses. You were the one that claimed there were exculpatory witnesses and the challenge was to name one.

It appears that you could not so you replied with a false personal attack.

Lastly that some are not honest enough to admit that Trump did perform high crimes and misdemeanors is not an excuse to provide witnesses. You are blowing smoke at vest there. Try again.

Really? I used the word 'exculpatory?" Care to give us the quote?

the problem is that the articles of impeachment didn't allege ANY crime, much less 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' No crime was actually committed here, by Trump.

the problem is that Biden and his son were absolutely guilty of the quid pro quo that the Dems were accusing Trump of (and that he did not commit) and the Dems were absolutely ignoring, if not supporting, Biden's actions. Actions that were pertinent to the case, involving the same people and requiring opposite things from Ukraine: Trump was asking Ukraine to do 'a favor for US in investigating political corruption...that happened to involve Hunter Biden...and the aid was NOT tied to it. Biden, on the other hand, bragged about withholding aid until Ukraine fires a prosecutor who was investigating Barisma, for whom his son was working, without experience or expertise, for very big bucks. Nobody was worried about THAT....because Biden was a Democrat.

Therefore, having witnesses to that effect would have pointed out the hypocritical and political nature of the impeachment, completely proving it's sole intent.Very pertinent to the case...and absolutely denied. It would have shown up the motives for the accusation, and that would absolutely not be allowed.

In other words, if those Democrats who pulled this stuff didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

Oh, I didn't personally attack you, SZ. Nor did I 'duck' anything, you demanded that I prove something I did not, myself, claim. You claimed it FOR me. Don't do that.

 

[sooda]

Really? I used the word 'exculpatory?" Care to give us the quote?

the problem is that the articles of impeachment didn't allege ANY crime, much less 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' No crime was actually committed here, by Trump.

the problem is that Biden and his son were absolutely guilty of the quid pro quo that the Dems were accusing Trump of (and that he did not commit) and the Dems were absolutely ignoring, if not supporting, Biden's actions. Actions that were pertinent to the case, involving the same people and requiring opposite things from Ukraine: Trump was asking Ukraine to do 'a favor for US in investigating political corruption...that happened to involve Hunter Biden...and the aid was NOT tied to it. Biden, on the other hand, bragged about withholding aid until Ukraine fires a prosecutor who was investigating Barisma, for whom his son was working, without experience or expertise, for very big bucks. Nobody was worried about THAT....because Biden was a Democrat.

Therefore, having witnesses to that effect would have pointed out the hypocritical and political nature of the impeachment, completely proving it's sole intent.Very pertinent to the case...and absolutely denied. It would have shown up the motives for the accusation, and that would absolutely not be allowed.

In other words, if those Democrats who pulled this stuff didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

Oh, I didn't personally attack you, SZ. Nor did I 'duck' anything, you demanded that I prove something I did not, myself, claim. You claimed it FOR me. Don't do that.

Wrong. Biden was charged with discouraging corruption and promoting democracy in Ukraine. That was the policy of the Obama Administration and the EU.

 

[Cooky]

Impeachment witness Alexander Vindman and his twin brother were abruptly fired and escorted from the White House as part of Trump's payback

This is particularly sad when you think about Vindman’s testimony to Congress where he praised America as a country where you could speak the truth without fear of reprisal. Apparently Trump’s America is not the country Vindman though it was.

History will remember Lt. Col.Vindman as a hero.

that little liar didn’t speak the truth though. He’s a disgrace.

 

[Lyndon]

nothing like the big fat liar in chief!!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

that little liar didn’t speak the truth though. He’s a disgrace.

Amazing.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Impeachment witness Alexander Vindman and his twin brother were abruptly fired and escorted from the White House as part of Trump's payback

This is particularly sad when you think about Vindman’s testimony to Congress where he praised America as a country where you could speak the truth without fear of reprisal. Apparently Trump’s America is not the country Vindman though it was.

History will remember Lt. Col.Vindman as a hero.

Is Trump legally allowed to do this? It sounds like he is.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The truth is Trump was deemed not guilty.

The truth is slightly more complicated. 52 Senators voted not to convict and removed from office. Of those, at least 3 (who acknowledged it publicly) voted that way even though they acknowledge he is guilty of wrongdoing. Others probably acknowledge that but won’t say it publicly - we can only speculate.

Also: if a defendant is found not guilty, should all the witnesses get fired from their jobs because they testified when called upon?

 

[SoyLeche]

Any witnesses fairly called, and they should say what they would say.

but there were no Republican witnesses allowed, to say anything at all.

No, seriously. Give me an example of what you think would have been a helpful thing for a republican called witness to say.