There’s no opportunity for Dems to look more fair, and Pubs to look (even) stupider?
My concern is that not allowing the GOP witnesses reinforces the idea that this is all nothing but a partisan grudge match – which gives GOP senators all the cover they need to vote for acquittal. I know they will, anyway, but why give them this easy out?
From a political/practical standpoint, there was a time when people were shocked that the President used his position as a TV producer to con porn stars into sleeping with him, but then they got over it when no one in a position of power did anything about it and as further incidences of similar caliber came and went.
One suspects that impeachment proceedings, held more frequently, would lose their mysticism as well if they were used further and further, as incidences meriting them kept coming into existence.
And since there is no shortage of bad faith arguments that can possibly be made, it’s not like giving in on this one will result in any effect on Republican obfuscation attempts.
I want to put gasoline in my gas tank, and my neighbor wants to put sand in my gas tank. Do you think I should let him put sand in my gas tank both to be fair and to make him look stupid?
Trump has a very specific allegation against him. The only connection the Bidens have to the allegation against Trump is the fact that Trump mentioned them. It’s, to put it in the most diplomatic terms, INSANE to suggest that they should appear.
And another thing: Anyone that wants to connect the Bidens to Trumps violation of his oath, you can put Trump on the stand and ask him what specific things the Bidens had to do with Trump wiping his ass with his oath to the country.
If the object of the exercise is to convince a few hundred bystanders that your neighbor deserves to be escorted off in cuffs, yes.
The object is not to have a fucked up vehicle that won’t run.
I think that allowing the GOP witnesses would be what turns this into a partisan grudge match. If there is anything god g on with the Biden’s that’s is worthy of a hearing, it should be a separate proceeding. But they idea that every time someone says something bad about Trump it should be countered by exposing the unrelated bad deeds of some Democratic is just stupid.
Anyone suggesting that anything good can come of having anyone named Biden appear at the impeachment hearings either hasn’t been paying attention to the Republican Playbook or is a big fan of the Republican Playbook.
Well I’m about ready to drop this idea since no one even remotely agrees with me, but …
If Dems do not allow any GOP witnesses to be called, how do we make the case to undecided voters – the ones we need next year, many of whom are likely not as motivated to follow these events as we are – that the House process is fair? Most people associate “fairness” with “hearing equally from both sides.”
(And please don’t tell me how bogus the GOP argument is. I KNOW that. But many voters don’t.)
Remind those people that Trump is welcome to testify any old time.
The Republicans Don’t give a flying fuck about being “fair”-they want to totally disrupt the proceedings, and if you cannot understand this there is nothing more to be said to you about your ridiculous proposal. You have been given more than enough reasons why it won’t work out to the Democrats advantage, the most convincing being that the Republicans desperately want it to happen, but the only response to all the arguments against is to repeat “Why not?”
That would actually be a perfect response. “We’re not interested in hearing from people who were not directly involved in this matter. We’ve heard several credible witnesses describe the president’s actions and motivations, so in the interests of complete fairness we want to hear the other side of the story straight from the president himself.”
Of course the Pubs don’t give a fuck about fairness. But voters might. And if they don’t understand the process, they might buy the Pubs’ bullshit about the process not being fair.
Just because Pubs want it doesn’t mean Dems can’t turn it against them. But **bobot **has the simplest and best answer, so I’ll drop it for now.
Trump may not be willing to testify under oath, but he’s more than willing to tweet out any old lie that crosses his brain cell.
“It’s not exactly news these days when Donald Trump tells a lie. As of August, he had made more than 12,000 false or misleading claims over the course of his presidency. Even so, Trump began one of the most critical weeks of his presidency — the House will hold its first public impeachment hearings starting Wednesday — with a whopper that ranks among the most unpersuasive he’s ever pushed.
On Twitter, Trump suggested that House Intelligence committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) released doctored transcripts of impeachment depositions conducted behind closed doors — an explosive claim belied by the fact that not a single Republican or witness who has been in the room for them has said anything of the sort.”
Don’t worry. Republicans will subpoena the whistleblower, the Bidens and John Bolton for the trial in the Senate. And we’ll see if John Roberts is really a Constitutionalist and creature of the law – or only one when it suits his agenda.
It’ll be interesting to see if they actually do. It would be just like them to piss and moan about not being able to do it during the impeachment phase, and then completely blow it off during the removal phase because a) they know it’s all bullshit and b) they have the votes to acquit anyway.
Republicans don’t want fair…in fact what they want is Unfair. They want their lies and misdirections believed. They want treasonous acts mislabeled as appropriate. They should have as little input into to the proceedings’ rules as possible.
Yep and it’s important to recognize that when the dems humor the republicans and concede something they didn’t need to, it doesn’t stop the pubs from complaining, and demonizing democrats, let alone make them reciprocate in any way.
The dems must ignore distracting requests from now on.