This is the best evidence the democrats have got. Watch the video testimony of their star witness.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
This is the best evidence the Democrats have got.
- Thread starter GromsDad
- Start date
They have a little bit more. That's not including the obstructed evidence-
Testimony and Evidence Collected in the Trump Impeachment Inquiry (Published 2019)
The status of the documents and witness testimony being collected by congressional investigators.
www.nytimes.com
Trump: “We have all the material; they don’t have the material.”
The witnesses must be forbidden from testifying by the WH because Trump is so innocent.
clown - your partisan congress shouldve called the witnesses. thats not how this works.
are you even a US citizen?
You’re too stupid to understand the significance of the evidence that does exist.
Quintessential stupid trump rube.
They did dummy. Trump refused to provide evidence or let witnesses testify.
Did you just wake up from a coma?
Refused? Your side withdrew subpoenas rather than get a ruling from the courts. Now you’re crying over it. So dumb.
Dems could've got a court hearing to get the subpoenas, but withdrew because they didn't want to wait, and they knew it would be a fair trial. Can't do either of those, now can we?
.
And here's video of Trump's supposed "meeting" with Parnas.
www.independentsentinel.com
It was a political fundraiser dinner where Trump didn't know half of the people there, including Parnas. I wouldn't have remembered the little dork either.
.
And here's video of Trump's supposed "meeting" with Parnas.
MSM's 'Bombshell' video of a Parnas-Fruman-Trump 'meeting' helps Trump
The MSM released the full 90-minute tape of the President’s ‘meeting’ at the Trump Hotel with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman in attendance. The video is not of a meeting as the MSM portrayed it. It’s a casual, private dinner with light conversation. In fact, it’s amazingly uneventful. The President...
www.independentsentinel.com
It was a political fundraiser dinner where Trump didn't know half of the people there, including Parnas. I wouldn't have remembered the little dork either.
.
They knew they'd lose in court so they withdrew. They decided they'd rather have the issue to harp on rather than have it settled by the court.
Well, that's one theory.
The other is that it was strategic, they didn't want to get bogged down in court like the McGahn case. They were all claiming some variation of executive privilege so if McGahn loses, it sets precedent.
House did not subpoena John Bolton after his attorney threatened to go to court | CNN Politics
The House Intelligence committee did not issue a subpoena to John Bolton after his attorney threatened to go to court to fight if it was issued, according to a House Intelligence Committee official.
www.cnn.com
Regardless, the democrats in the House had every opportunity to have it play out. They chose to impeach without that testimony because in their minds their case was bulletproof even without it. Perhaps they will get it right in Peach Mints 2.0 or version 3.0Well, that's one theory.
The other is that it was strategic, they didn't want to get bogged down in court like the McGahn case. They were all claiming some variation of executive privilege so if McGahn loses, it sets precedent.
House did not subpoena John Bolton after his attorney threatened to go to court | CNN Politics
The House Intelligence committee did not issue a subpoena to John Bolton after his attorney threatened to go to court to fight if it was issued, according to a House Intelligence Committee official.
No, in all likelihood it would still be making its way through lower courts.
For example, McGahn was sent subpoena April 2019, Dems filed lawsuit to enforce in August and case is still unresolved.
So that’s what the swamp looks like. Thanks.
And here's video of Trump's supposed "meeting" with Parnas.
MSM's 'Bombshell' video of a Parnas-Fruman-Trump 'meeting' helps Trump
The MSM released the full 90-minute tape of the President’s ‘meeting’ at the Trump Hotel with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman in attendance. The video is not of a meeting as the MSM portrayed it. It’s a casual, private dinner with light conversation. In fact, it’s amazingly uneventful. The President...
It was a political fundraiser dinner where Trump didn't know half of the people there, including Parnas. I wouldn't have remembered the little dork either.
.
