Really. Typically doesn’t mean can't. Bipartisan doesn't mean impartial to Trump. There were 2 Republicans on the panel who participated. Nothing token about them Originally Posted by HDGristle
it's unusual. and if you consider either Cheney or Kinsinger impartial to Trump then you aren't aware of their views.
The_waco_kid "without proper minority representation, no rebuttal witnesses and even a television producer brought in to "produce" a tv hearing, this committee is perhaps the largest political hack job in US history..."
Was the above written by just FOX news ala Mark Levin? Haha ...fucking such bullshit
just one example is needed. the testimony of a second hand account that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of his car. the secret service denied this happened and offered to testify. no offer was extended.
there are plenty of other examples. this was never about a fair bipartisan fact finding. it was about presenting a one sided "opinion" tailored by the Democrats.
When the assertion of charges and detail of information is being gathered, that is not the time for ANY defense. A defense happens once someone is charged, vs. referred for charges. This whole notion of the right not able to question the accusers or mount a defense shows just how stupidly ill-informed they are about the process of how courts work. It doesn't make a defense unavailable- but the GOP has yet again, pulled the wool over the eyes of the Republicans who don't understand how the court system works.
wasn't asking for a defense. just something other than the obviously engineered one-sided parade of mostly heresay second hand accounts.
Relative to TV production...tell me all about it while there are people like Kari Lake was awashed in flattering portrait scape and warm lighting. Her producer hubby was responsible for that....and yep, she still lost.
that's a campaign. not a congressional committee. false equivalence.
While this won't ever end up with a court-case, it's good to show the cowardice of Trump and his supporters who would cheat to steal an election at any cost Originally Posted by eyecu2
then what other than political grandstanding did this serve? scratch rebuttal. replace with others who were actually there to present testimony. "IF" this had been a court of Law both Cheney and Kinsinger would have been stricken from a jury pool due to known prejudicial comments. as so-called bipartisan representation their known bias makes them no more than tokens of the Democrats and their agenda.
