If Mr Schitt has case against President.. Schitt keeps on telling us that he has rock solid case against President,if it's so than why do they need more witnesses??

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Schitt keeps on telling us that he has rock solid case against President,if it's so than why do they need more witnesses??

Weewillynobeerspilly Loc: North central Texas

proud republican wrote:

Schitt keeps on telling us that he has rock solid case against President,if it's so than why do they need more witnesses??

Same reason he said he had the evidence for the Mueooooller report if it did not show any.....he had absolute proof of collusion.....well, not really.. only kidding.

Adam is an idiot, not even a good liar....how did he ever get a democrat card being that bad at it?

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:

Same reason he said he had the evidence for the Mueooooller report if it did not show any.....he had absolute proof of collusion.....well, not really.. only kidding.

Adam is an idiot, not even a good liar....how did he ever get a democrat card being that bad at it?

Exactly!! I don't even see a reason to have more questions today (repetitious BS) I say we should vote today and end this waste of time!!!!!

Iliamna1

proud republican wrote:

Exactly!! I don't even see a reason to have more questions today (repetitious BS) I say we should vote today and end this waste of time!!!!!

I absolutely agree. Get it over and get back to work!

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

proud republican wrote:

Schitt keeps on telling us that he has rock solid case against President,if it's so than why do they need more witnesses??

On the other side of that question, if the President is as innocent as he indicates, why is he obstructing the appearance of witnesses and the introduction of documentary evidence? No one who is innocent ever blocked testimony to support said innocence. Ever.

As someone recently said, if there are no witnesses and evidence, there really is no trial.

Cherokee38 Loc: Atlanta

resubmit. Democrats have no intention of winning the impeachment they just want to tie the senate up and prevent them from doing anything to benefit the public.

They talk about other countries trying to influence our elections what do we do in other countries? Are we being hypocritical? Why do the democrats fight pictorial voter ID? IT would reduce their ability to cheat! How can it be racist? Driver licenses are required and are not racist! Next problem! Fix immigration laws or is that above their problem solving g abilities. You must be able to identify the real problems!

Carol Kelly

proud republican wrote:

Schitt keeps on telling us that he has rock solid case against President,if it's so than why do they need more witnesses??

They have nothing rock solid. They have nothing truthful. Mr. Schitt has nothing but definite proof that he lies. I’m so sick of this. I should not even post because I’m so thoroughly disgusted with watching the death of my country,

Liberty Tree

PaulPisces wrote:

On the other side of that question, if the President is as innocent as he indicates, why is he obstructing the appearance of witnesses and the introduction of documentary evidence? No one who is innocent ever blocked testimony to support said innocence. Ever.

As someone recently said, if there are no witnesses and evidence, there really is no trial.

I see you know little about how trials work. If the prosecution presents its case and the defense feels the evidence is not sufficient it moves for a dismissal or a direct verdict of not guilty. The defense is under no obligation to produce witnesses. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Cherokee38 wrote:

resubmit. Democrats have no intention of winning t... (show quote)

I agree 110%!!!

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Carol Kelly wrote:

They have nothing rock solid. They have nothing truthful. Mr. Schitt has nothing but definite proof that he lies. I’m so sick of this. I should not even post because I’m so thoroughly disgusted with watching the death of my country,

This is waste of time and money!!!We all know President Trump is going to be found not guilty probably bipartisan!! Get back to work we have hired you to do!!!Vacation is OVER!!!!

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Liberty Tree wrote:

I see you know little about how trials work. If the prosecution presents its case and the defense feels the evidence is not sufficient it moves for a dismissal or a direct verdict of not guilty. The defense is under no obligation to produce witnesses. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

Thank you !!?

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

The longer this drags on the more the loser looks bad.

proud republican wrote:

Exactly!! I don't even see a reason to have more questions today (repetitious BS) I say we should vote today and end this waste of time!!!!!

Carol Kelly

PaulPisces wrote:

On the other side of that question, if the President is as innocent as he indicates, why is he obstructing the appearance of witnesses and the introduction of documentary evidence? No one who is innocent ever blocked testimony to support said innocence. Ever.

As someone recently said, if there are no witnesses and evidence, there really is no trial.

If he is as guilty as you and yours claim, then why is the country in better shape than ever?

Carol Kelly

Liberty Tree wrote:

I see you know little about how trials work. If the prosecution presents its case and the defense feels the evidence is not sufficient it moves for a dismissal or a direct verdict of not guilty. The defense is under no obligation to produce witnesses. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

Normally.

Liberty Tree

Carol Kelly wrote:

Normally.

I know Democrats are not normal.