POTUS attacking you is intimidating and can impact you and others from participating in hearings. Just because that's his normal behavior doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact on the witness.
Why'd you have to go and make it dirty? A couple selective responses to your responses: Regardless of whatever previous hijinx (which I don't believe, but even if it was true), Comey, McCabe and Mueller are all gone. Even Rosenstein is gone. These are his own agencies, so why can't he trust them? Trump's own appointments run the FBI and the DOJ. And he trusts the latter, William Barr, so much that he was also tapped to be the guy to work with Zelensky on the Biden announcement. Why can't he ask Barr for a formal domestic investigation but he can ask him to help gin up a foreign one? If he trusts Giuliani, why didn't he appoint him to a formal role in the government? At the moment, we're just trying to consider Trump's motives. The lies he tells, the improper classifications, and so on are not impeachable of themselves, but the fact that he's trying to cover up tells you something about his motives to do the things he later doesn't want the public to learn about. One, due process is for criminal prosecutions, not job reviews. But more importantly, Trump has the biggest platform on the planet. He can say confefe and 200 million Americans will hear about it. He doesn't need Congress to give him 'due process' (whatever that is) to get his story out to the American people. Just go on Hannity and say it. Write a letter to the editor and the NYT will put it on the front page. Tweet it. The reason you haven't heard an adequate explanation is not because he's been denied a forum, it's because he has no good explanation or doesn't think we deserve one. Obviously, I disagree. He might be an alt or a resurrection, but what's the point of this forum if we're going to engage in some collective shunning of people who won't conform to our orthodoxy? I do ignore some posters after they've shown over a long period of time that they're disruptive or bring no value. For now, whether he's sincere or not, he provides a foil to actually test what you think and how you can respond to the objections of a hostile audience. So anyway I'm sorry if I degrade your bbs experience by responding. I know I got frustrated by people continuing to engage BtG long after I determined it was no fun. But I guess that's how these things go out here. Kidding me? Best political hotspot on the internet! Getting convicted of jaywalking would require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Marie Yovanovitch: "As Foreign Service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded. This will soon cause real harm, if it hasn't already. The State Department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same attention and respect as the military might of the Pentagon does, but we are— as they say—"the pointy end of the spear." If we lose our edge, the U.S. will inevitably have to use other tools, even more often than it does today. And those other tools are blunter, more expensive, and not universally effective. "
That, and he can't help himself. The conviction of Roger Stone on all counts, including lying to Congress, is huge. Those who have yet to testify in the impeachment hearing have to think long and hard about telling the truth. If they don't, they could end up like Mr Stone, facing many years in prison. Stone has been released until sentencing in February. I was a bit surprised that he wasn't taken into custody, but on reflection, it's obvious why the judge did that. Stone has a few weeks before he is sentenced to ponder his fate. Clearly, if he "sings" to the prosecution, it will have an impact on his sentence. If he doesn't? The guy is, what, 68? He could be looking at spending the rest of his life behind bars. Definitely food for thought, and not the kind of meal Stone will enjoy thinking about. Mr trump should be very worried.
Well since she said she felt intimidated after being told about the tweet live, what if she suddenly decided that it wasn’t worth it to keep testifying? Or maybe doesn’t want to tell the whole truth for fear of continued attacks by the president? Also it could affect future witnesses. Some of them might now think twice about publicly testifying, knowing that there is a chance the most powerful man in the world will tweet about him/her, thereby enraging Trump’s base and potentially putting themselves in harms way.
Well spoken human being, this one. Glad we still have Americans who can form speak and think so clearly.
For what it's worth, I never "shun people who won't conform to my orthodoxy." That's why I will always have people like @Commodore, @Os Trigonum and countless other non-libs in my feed, and with interest and respect. I also have several libs on my ignore list. People can disagree about a given account's intent, and that's fine. But if you don't want people to label him, then don't label some of us who disagree with you. I personally think, based on posting and word-choice patterns, etc, that we've seen that account before, but whatever. If people enjoy that long back-and-forth, by all means, have at it. To me, it was gumming up threads with what felt like disingenuous "but what is the evidence" comments. Cheers.
Sadly, this is true of every government agency and institution. The damage done by this cancerous administration will take years to repair. He's damaged the federal workforce, policy process, integrity, agencies, and the programs they administer.
Witness tampering is now added to the pile. How long until the Republican's show some backbone and honor? Or will they continue to grovel at their emperor' feet at the expense of our Republic? DD
I want nothing more than to engage with people who have a different point of view or orthodoxy. That isn't a reason to shun anyone. I agree with you 100% on that. The problem is that he's dishonest, has no intention of actual discussion and uses his dishonesty to disrupt the actual discussions people from various differing viewpoints might engage. The point of ignoring people who aren't honest, and are just trolling is to not pollute the boards.
He is Nunes, or Jim Jordan - they don't want the truth, they want to muck things up so much to hide the truth. DD
Wait, @Os Trigonum is a "non-lib"? Wow, all this time I thought otherwise. It's all very cool though.
Tone is hard to communicate in writing. I don't know how I sounded, but I didn't intend to sound like I was condemning Franchise or anyone else (well, except BtG, I guess). I felt I had to address him because I was very conspicuously continuing to engage with a poster while he was imploring people not to engage. Because I respect him, I wanted to not ignore his call but to tell him why I didn't agree. If you or he took offense, I apologize, it wasn't my intent.
