trump Inpeachment...............

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Here is the thing, maybe it does muddy the waters but as the defense/accused the president should be given every opportunity to defend himself and call witnesses that make his case, and part of his case includes whether or not it can be legitimately argued that Biden and Burisma have direct relevance to Trump's asking Ukraine to investigate.

Rights of the ACCUSED are what fair trials are supposed to preserve and safeguard.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Im with you ... Im 100% fine with Bidens, Trump, Mulvaney, Blair, Bolton testifying under oath.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Im with you ... Im 100% fine with Bidens, Trump, Mulvaney, Blair, Bolton testifying under oath.

Edit: i realize this is a little moving the bars fallacy, but it is extending the thought of what is a "fair trial"

- in a "real trial"(which this is not) suppose the ACCUSED(president) feels that the STATE(house managers) did not meet their burden of proof and rejects additional witnesses, in a regular trial a JUDGE/JURORS (senators) can't and would not ask for more prosecution witnesses, that would be generally seen as an unfair trial.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk