The debate "Professor Turley is the only non-biased witness today and should be believed" was started by
December 4, 2019, 3:48 pm.
8 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 3 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
jrardin12 posted 23 arguments, Nemiroff posted 12 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff posted 7 arguments to the disagreers part.
jrardin12, Nemiroff and 6 visitors agree.
historybuff, marky and 1 visitor disagree.
Not if there is evidence.
you don't think most people would be upset that they were caught and may face consequences for their actions? especially if they thought they could get away with it?
Not really, when I am rightly accused I just take it. I get silent. But when I get wrongly accused I fight back. I am just talking about me though.
if you were justly accused im sure you would be upset.
If you are being wrongly accused I am sure you wouldn't be upset.
your saying the victim of bullying, under immenent threat, would always call out his bully, even when the bully isnt leaving anytime soon, if at all even if he does say something.
You don't know that.
That doesn't make sense. Even if Zelensky said he was bribed, republicans still wouldn't impeach him. The Republicans in the senate know that he is guilty but they don't care. The republican base either deny reality, such as yourself, or don't care that he committed crimes because he "sticking it to the 'libs!".
If he admitted what happened there is little chance trump would get removed from office. That would mean that Ukraine would likely lose it's support from the US for minimum the next year, potentially the next 5 years. He has nothing to gain by turning on trump and a great deal to lose.
He mentioned crimes, but didn't say how specifically Trump committed them.
rather then declaring what we need to present, can you present anything yourself?
buff listed the crimes he is accused of, as well as the what and how. can you respond to any of them?
I have listed his crimes for you several time.
Actually, according to Dems, Zelensky should say he was bribed so that Trump can be impeached and get help from a Demo president.
Well first historybuff has to name the instance that they happened.
how can we look at facts with 1 sentence replies? we have been presenting our side. you have simply declared your opening statement on repeat.
history buff stated the list of accused crimes. instead of simply saying "no", respond to each one with a rebutall.
Would be nice if we looked at the facts instead of looking at presumptions.
answering a question with a question will get us nowhere. of course it is possible i am bias against trump, which is why we must examine the facts and try to come to an agreement instead of blindly repeating your opening statements.
for example, in the "will impeachment pass the house" thread, history buff laid out a list of 3 or 4 crimes, with several sentences per crime laying out the reasoning for it.
your reply was a fragment of a sentence merely repeating "there is no crime".
no logic, no reasoning, no argument.
did you think you were a jedi? im sorry to say but even if you were, the force doesnt work across the internet.
So according to you, Zelensky is a liar. Well Russia is glad to hear that.
What would weaken his position? losing the millions of dollars in aid that trump controls? Losing the political support of his largest ally, which trump could take away in a heartbeat?
Those things would absolutely weaken his position. Which is why he will never say a bad word about trump in front of a camera.
So Zelensky is a liar. Good to know. However, that would weaken his position against Russia.
Zelensky needs American support and aid in order to survive. He gains absolutely nothing by contradicting Trump. But he has alot he could lose. He cannot be seen as a reliable witness since he is so beholden to trump.
To say so is saying Zelensky is a liar.
According to Zelensky, Trump didn't ask for anything.
Is it possible you are too biased against Trump?
TDS is real, and it describes trump supporters.
is it possible that you are simply far too biases pro trump?
as trump himself said: "i can shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and not lose a single voter."
that may have been his most honest statement
Why? We know he asked for a thing of value for an election. It is in the transcript. That is crime number 1.
We know from multiple people's tenstimony that trump dangled an invitation to the whitehouse as well as the aid money to get them to investigate Biden.
We know trump intimidated whitnesses, he did it on twitter.
We know trump obstructed justice by ordering people not to testify or provide documents to the inquiry.
We already know that he has committed these crimes. Why would we waste more time and allow the republicans to try to attack the investigators?
And have already testified.
Trump can order people not to testify, but as we have seen they can testify.
how many more?
is the problem that trump refuses to allow them to testify?
Right now there is no basis to impeach.
It can, but more witnesses are needed before there is legitimate cause to impeach.
"take impeachment to the courts"
lmao, read the constitution. impeachment can only go through congress.
the house brings the charges and acts as prosecutors, the senate acts as a jury, and the supreme court acts as the judges.
you cant blame democrats for your lack of knowledge about the constitution.
"If it is a legitimate impeachment then take it to the courts. The reason why Dems won't do it is because it will be revealed that it is a sham."
That statement is ridiculous and shows you don't know what you are talking about. The stages of an impeachment are :
1) the inquiry. this is where congress investigates to determine if charges of impeachment are necessary. That is where we are now.
2) drafting and voting on articles of impeachment in the house.
3) a trial in the senate.
No impeachment ever "goes to the courts". It has nothing to do with the courts. So saying to "take it to the courts" shows you have no idea what you are talking about and are just parroting things you heard on some right wing propaganda.
Bribery and abuse of office are exactly what impeachment are for. We know trump has committed both of those. This is the exact use case for impeachment.
Ordering your employees to not comply with law enforcement is obstruction of justice. He is literally using the power of the presidency to obstruct an investigation. You don't have to psychically prevent someone from testifying for it to be obstruction.
He did publish the transcript. And in that transcript he committed a crime. How is that a defense?
The supreme court already ruled on executive privilege in an impeachment inquiry. They ordered nixon to comply.
If it is a legitimate impeachment then take it to the courts. The reason why Dems won't do it is because it will be revealed that it is a sham.
The problem is there is nothing impeachable. Also a lot of people have testified. They haven't been prevented from testifying. Now if Trump were locking people up in a closet that would be obstruction of justice. Trump even let us read the transcript! What about executive privilege. Does the President have that right?
so if someone wants to jail a criminal, they should not be allowed to testify because they are biased against the criminal?
if the most biased person in the world told you 2+2=4 does that mean they are wrong because they are biased? do the independent facts not matter?
Trump has ordered lots of people not to testify. Some people have chosen to ignore that order and testify anyway. But trump is still obstructing justice by ordering them not to comply.
Trump and his team want to draw this out as long as possible because they know people will lose interest. That is exactly what they did with mueller. They dragged it out as long as they could while trashing the investigation the whole time. So when the report came out and said he was guilty, much of the country had already been biased against both mueller and the report.
They want to repeat this strategy. So trump has ordered people to block the inquiry as much as possible so they can drag it out in the courts. The democrats aren't going to play that game this time. Especially when they already have the evidence that he is guilty.
Also one more thing, Professor Feldman totally discredits himself by wanting to impeach Trump for defamation. Clearly that alone should show he has no knowledge of history.
If the Dems want the documents, then go to court. I think that is why Trump won't give them the info. Still no reason for Impeachment according to unbiased Professor Turley.
Trump has not prohibited anyone from testifying. Two weeks ago should have shown it. If the the Dems want Rudy, then subpoena him as well as any other witness.
Turley Is not biased and has not written about how the President needs to be impeached.
i want to hear your response to existentialist's concerns... but im also curious why you only think that this 1 witness is reliable and all the others are not.
If we should believe professor Turley, then we should also believe that Trump should make witnesses and material documents available to Congress. However, he hasn't. Turley is essentially saying that Congress should draw out this impeachment hearing because Trump won't comply with the subpoena power of the House. He's indirectly implicating Trump in obstruction of Congress. Turley's argument isn't that these witnesses shouldn't be produced or that the documents shouldn't be produced, but rather that the Dems should pursue the court battles to compel the Trump admin to testify and produce the desired documents.
So do you think Trump is wrong in not allowing witnesses to testify as Turley implied?