During the impeachment inquiry hearing, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) staunchly criticized Stanford Law School Professor Pamela S. Karlan's comment involving the President's son, Barron Trump. #CNN #News
@@erinshuler8778 Leftiem has ruined our rule of law and democracy! Political Correct makes us cannot speak freely, race division makes equality no more exist. Only Trump can bring the our America back! MAGA!
ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-APoSHB9pQk8.html YOU GOT IT BACKWARDS....TRUMP IS THE BIGGEST SCAM ARTIST AND CAN'T EVEN FIGURE IT OUT....CHINA WON THE COLD WAR WITH LESS THE 2 MILLION DLLRS. EVERYONE THAT SUPPORTED TRUMP SHOULD BARE PART OF THE BLAIM. THERE FOCUS WAS ON THE WRONG POLICIES FRON THE START!!!
No he didn't. 'She' received votes from illegals and people who were listed as living in their community voting book who are deceased. Therefore those votes are invalid.
Which literally means nothing. Trump had more votes, and I'm not even a Trump supporter...which is why he's our president. Get over yourself and go vote next time.
Cubical Sorrow you sir are an idiot. He lost the popular vote, just like previous presidents. The electoral college won it for him. People need to stop blatantly lying. It’s easy to just look up, we have google....you’re making a fool of yourself.
Rowhaus please link and provide data showing this, as it’s been proven both dems AND republicans had illegal votes on both sides. Also it’s been completely unfounded and there is no evidence backing up “illegals” voting lol. Please link your evidence. I’ll wait. Here is what Trump took out of context and went viral. “In June 2019, Trump referenced a settlement that Judicial Watch had recently reached with California "where California admitted to a million votes...there was much illegal voting." The Judicial Watch settlement actually related to purging 1.5 million inactive individuals from voter registration rolls.”
Salb Wild Bunch the stupid one is u honestly because I bet u don’t have a single ethical Reason with proof why trump should be impeached i would love to hear it
Arent the Democrats suggesting impeaching the current president? And for what? Just because they hate him, that's what... And they were already considering ompeachment before he even won, and were actively talking about it before his inauguration. And for what reason? They certainly don't have any evidence. The Democrats have now set the precedent on this, so dont get upset if Republicans decide to take a page from your own damn playbook down the road...
@@lees.4084 I think you are just listening to a narrative that aligns with your viewpoint. I would agree that the Biden's/Ukraine/Burisma 2016 needs to be looked for impropriety by the DOJ. Now look at the facts. President Trump sent Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine for the sole purpose of getting Zelinskey to publically state that his Goverment will investigate the Biden's, etc. We now know that David Nunez was also involved. President Trump made a call to Zelinskey that Ukrainian military funding and Zelinskey's WH visit were predicated on publically making an announcement on American television that the Biden issue would be investigated. Have you noticed that we have been here before with Russia, except they were willing partners in the 2016 election. Have you also noticed that President Trump has prevented many of his close connections from testifying. I don't know whether President Trump should be removed from office, but I definitely believe that his behaviour and decision-making deserve an impeachment process.
@@jamesdolan4042 Perhaps you should try listening to a few more narratives yourself. Many of the "facts" you talk of fall well short of qualifying as such. We all know that the Democrat's ties with Ukraine go well beyond the Biden's. We know that Hillary and the DNC were in bed with powerful Ukrainians who wanted to see her win, and were very active in helping her. Trump sent Giuliani there to try to find out how deep this corruption went. It certainly wasnt just about the Bidens... There was no "predication" in that phone call that stated that Ukraine wouldn't get the aid if they didnt do certain things. Let me guess: you "read between the lines" of the transcript to find that? Give me a break.... And yes, I have noticed we have been here before with Russia, but once again, with Hillary and the Democrats, not Trump.... Let's face it: the powers that be, and the players in both Russia and Ukraine never wanted to see Trump win the presidency. They knew he would much harder on them than Hillary ever would. They knew that all they had to do was to just throw a few million dollars at her, here and there, and she would see things their way.... They knew she had no problem selling out America to line her own pockets... They knew Trump was unlikely to do that. Ukraine's interests were more for money and much of it was from wealthy citizens and businesses that wanted business advantages. With Russia, it was more from Putin and the government, wanting political and world power advantages over America. They both saw these advantages in Hillary and the DNC... If you're going to say that Trump "colluded" with Russia, then you need to present the evidence for it. The Meuller investigation found NONE, despite it's best efforts... And sure, trump told some people not to partake in this Democrat sham. Why shouldnt he? We all know they have no evidence, no proof. The Democrats know it too. Just look at the impeachment articles. "Abuse of power" What the hell does that even mean??? It's so general and vague, it's just laughable. If you want to charge him with a specific real CRIME, then do so. If you want to say that he colluded with a foreign government for his own personal benefit, then say that. If you want to say that he tried to personally benefit by withholding funding from Ukraine, then say it. In both cases you need charge him with the SPECIFIC crime you think he violated, then provide the proof that he did it. They dont have any.... Then there's "obstruction of congress".... That's not even a real crime. Trump is within his legal right to deny Congress testimony, when they havent even conducted this so-called "impeachment inquiry" in the proper, constitutional manner. If they wanted to properly and legally impeach him, and compel testimony from people from his administration, then they should've done this whole thing by the book. They did not... NOTHING the Democrats have presented warrants impeachment or removal from office.... They've slung out a thousand "crimes" they claim he's committed, yet haven't produced a single shred of evidence or proof for ANY of them. If you listen to these Democrats, there's nothing that President Trump has done during his entire presidency that has been done legally... They thought that President Trump would've been long gone by now. They thought that if they made life tough enough for him, that he would just give up and resign. THEY WERE WRONG. If they had succeed in running Trump off, they would've immediately turned their attention to ousting Mike Pence, and they would be using the exact same accusations against him... Then who would assume the office of the presidency??? The deviousness, cortuption and fraud of these Democrats knows no limits....
Exactly. And Mr. Gaetz said Sondland is the only one to admit the assumption of a quid pro quo....lmao guess he forgot about his homeboy Mulvaney publicly announcing that they did it, then he walked it back. 😂
He got angry when he was interrupted but literally interrupted every person he asked a question to. Thats pushing agendas and not asking questions, the lawyers didn’t even have to be there for his segment, he talked over them anyways.
@Connor Cornelius The correct spelling is “save”, not “Sade”; no need for capitalizing the “S”. For more information, here is a quick guide on grammar :) www.grammarly.com/blog/capitalization-rules/
@Mahendra Patel Not true (fake news), if I had ignored it I wouldn’t have noticed the spelling and capitalization problems. Interestingly enough, by your logic you are saying Connor ignored my original comment (which he didn’t).
@@hectorbutton590 no it shows they are constitutional scholars. Their personal opinions do not change their view of what Trump has done. If it was Obama who did what Trump has done they would be calling to impeach Obama as well.
kale n saying they would of wanna impeached Obama as well, which the wouldn’t want, doesn’t disprove that they are biased against trump they donated for trumps political rival and the party he is against so they are obviously gonna be biased against trump
He was looking for a yes-no answer, not a song and dance. His questions were very simple, their political donations prove that they (as witnesses) are biased and (therefore) should be discredited. But I assume that since you can't understand that you will simply disagree with me. WNBGJ, let me tell you something, you (and everyone like you) made your mind up about impeachment of POTUS Trump on Nov 8th, 2016. All of these hearings are pointless. No one gives a damn who these 'witnesses' are, nor do they care that they don't actually have any evidence of anything. Just impeach the President and get it over with so that the Senate can quickly over-ride that vote and we can get to POTUS Trumps electoral landslide in 2020 over Joe Biden.
And to add to the hypocrisy - Gaetz then keeps talking past when his time expires. Classic Republican - yells about rules when he wants others to follow them, but turns around and ignores rules that are supposed to apply to them.
@@innertubez Yeah probably because all of those Democrats deliberately interrupted him to waste his time. Look at when he asked them for facts, none of them put their hands up. Trump was only impeached because the Democrats were trying their best since 2016 to do just that, sore losers. The President of Ukraine himself said that there wasn't any secret "deal" between him and Trump.
@@warriorofzues did they have bias? Or are they just basing their statements on the presented claims? There's a difference between "bribery is an impeachable offense" and "the president committed bribery in office"
But it is OK for Nadler to interrupt the Congressman? It is terrible that they only get 5 minutes. it is more terrible for the witness to take up 4 minutes trying to double talk. This goes both ways. I see mostly that a Democrat will speak for 4 minutes, setting the stage of a witness instead of asking questions. Again, they both do it. That is how the current Congress works.
@Michael C Go look up the definition of coup, then come back here and explain how this is by definition a coup. No wonder Trump felt comfortable telling his followers to read the 'transcript'... The transcript (memo) he's now on twitter trying to explain LMFAO!
DON'T TALK BACK, LET ME ATTACK YOU! MY TIME IS PRECIOUS! I need to slander all of you as much as possible before you respond to the overwhelming evidence.
Usually you use your time to ask questions and listen for answers. He spoke like 90% of the time wtf that's not how you exonerate someone... you let the evidence speak for itself (The evidence has spoken and it said, "I would like you to do us a favor though")
@@BeezyNgeezY-ul1nu He spoke so long because he has to gin up 45's base. They are the ONLY ones who actually BELIEVE that the bullsh*t pouring forth from his mouth is actually a defense, or even relevant.
@kingtorta They weren't there to give evidence. They were there to give legal opinions and/or precedents about, and for, Impeachment in this case. But then, you already know that, don't you.
"You don't get to interrupt me!" barks man who has twice interrupted committee meetings on which he does not sit - once backed up in a farcical 'protest' by colleagues who WERE on the committee.
Chris R I like how you focus on him interrupting but yet you didn’t even listen to what the video was a about, typical liberals finds little details of the person they don’t like and just blows it all out of proportion
@@ethancraw54 You mean like Gaetz concentrating on Hunter Biden's alleged cocaine habit when he has been arrested for DUI (and bailed out by his dad)? Or how he focused on Michael Cohen's alleged infidelity (and got dragged before the Florida bar for witness intimidation)? Or how he blew up this witness's mention of Barron Trump out of all proportion? Gaetz is one big interruption. Oh, and I saw the whole testament the other day, but thanks for focusing on the one little detail I mentioned here...
How does that old saying go.. “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”.
Foghorn Leghorn yea that’s what the Dems gave doing. Pure projection So Trump is overstepping his authority and impeachable in asking a Ukrainian President to uphold the Ukraine US Reciprocal Cooperative Corruption Treaty signed by BC regarding the 2016 election corruption but It’s not impeachable when O and Holder sell weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels (Operation Fast and Furious) which are then used to kill 300 Mexicans along with Border Patrol Officer Brian Terry. (And incidentally, Holder refused to appear before Congress) Pure evil personified
Everything Trump does is offensive. He shouldn't only be impeached, he should also eat shit for breakfast every day for the rest of his life. If he skips breakfast, he gets to drink diarrhea like milkshake.
@@chrisgermo1956 if you feel that way cool. I'm just making a point, he said we voted him in nope electoral college did..... whatever floats your boat. Happy holidays
We live in a two party system that gives us candidates that the two aforementioned parties choose for the most part. We weren't/aren't/haven't exactly been a democracy.
@@Cube210 No he gets that time to cross examine the witnesses. The fact that he chose to use his time to *hear himself talk* is his right to do so, but don't pretend that it was anything other than that. He wasn't asking questions, he was making a point (again his prerogative), hence steam rolling over anyone attempting to answer his "questions". Furthermore, Americans are free to donate their money wherever they choose, just as Professors are free to write articles and changes their minds on their substance afterwards (after a certain July phone call for example).
@@YangBalanceYin I mean, you don't actually believe this. If you watch hearings, it's politicians ranting for most of the time on both sides of the aisle. I recall a certain director of ICE getting viciously verbally attacked with no opportunity to respond by a series of Democrats... So ya, if you believe what you're saying, you really must be new or have some major partisan blinders on
Holy crap. This guy is pressed. He’s totally turning this into a partisan issue instead of actually getting into the facts. What the fuck does it matter who the people donated to?
“If you’re weak on the facts and strong on the law, pound the law. If you’re weak on the law and strong on the facts, pound the facts. If you’re weak on both, pound the table.”
@@playlist55 in what sense? So admitting to doing these things on live TV isn't fact? Setting the terms of your own impeachment and not abiding by court orders isn't against the law? Hmmm. Funny how I remember the Republicans swearing up and down how Obama was lawless but couldn't say what laws were broken. But turn it around, actual laws on the books by letter and number are broken with 45 and he's an innocent victim. How does that work? How do you break laws but have the nerve to try to set the terms of the hearing you're implicated in? And not to mention, attempting commit a crime is STILL A CRIME!! You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube once you squeeze it out.
@@mvmishler not entertaining what's obvious. I'll have you know a person's opinion has nothing to do with being Democrat, Republican or what have you. You're funny though because your doing the exact same thing. Lol
you do understand that their role was to present an educated position on the constitution and hence the legality of the impeachment process? in the opening statements a GOP representative alluded to the fact that they may not have had enough time to review the details of the previous proceedings. that alone should suggest that they would not have been in possession of any factual information regarding the President, those around him and their actions.
These were Constitutional EXPERTS! THE WITNESSES THAT HAD PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF HEARING TRUMP BRIBERY SKIM. WITH THEIR OWN EARS. THEIR TESTIMONY WAS LAST WEEK. THE IMPEACHMENT HEARING HAS BEEN GOING OW FOR A NUMBER OF WEEKS NOW. TRY FACT CHECKING B4 DISAGREEING LOVE.(ANALOGY) WE DIDN'T PERSONALLY WITNESS A BABY BEING BORN BUT WE WILL SEE A BABY SOON. ( ANALOGY). TRUMP ASS IS CAUGHT & JUST ACCEPT IT.....
queen samara those “witnesses” are saying they heard others say these things that “trump did.” There was only one true “witness” and that is the Whistleblower. Who will not even come fourth with his claims. It’s against the constitution to impeach a president unless there are two EYE WITNESSES involved. They are so wrong for doing all this & wasting everyone’s time
He was caught fondeling the male wrestlers as well? I mean, I wouldn't put it past the alchoholic drunk driver that he is. He has no regard for anyone on the streets, why should bld he have it for anyone between the sheets, or with cleats, or pleats, or meat?
Who cares how they look? The court of law works on evidence and I haven't seen any since these hearings started. This is a colossal waste of time and I'm a Democrat.
Obama had both houses and was the president for 2 years and he did nada. Not one thing. nothing. and the healthcare was a joke and he's a fookin. racist. All he did was write racist executive orders like a fuckin communist.
Rep. Gaetz was stopped for not submitting referenced material. He also seems to take the view that giving money to one candidate is a dismissal of their opponent. This is a classic example of the "you're either with me or against me." His view of conservatives and liberals shows an unfortunate bias. His tactic of not letting witnesses answer his questions is bullying. That's not surprising as he was censured by the Florida Bar that he was “unprofessional, reckless, insensitive, and demonstrated poor judgment.”
@@steviedangerboy look up the full name for the Nazi Party and what they did. Ignorance is bliss tis folly to be wise. Now go back to fortnite lil kid before Sniffy Joe wants you to hop on his lap
I love how he interrupts everybody right after he asked them a question, but first person to cut him off he flips out. That whole thing is just mind boggling.
It's called barking louder than they bite. They have the same power as the Dems, but if they yawp like dogs then they have a chance of intimidating whatever it is they are scared of. Pussy tactics
it's their only way to try sound authoritative and also talk over the facts they are being told (cutting others off), it's a kind of school yard bulling technique
Dennis Franklin Production - I know, right? When they’re on, I turn volume all the way down, and go to Baby YODA memes on RU-vid ☺️. Not listening to that 💩 😑
Everyone in the comments taking personal jabs at Mr. Gaetz, even stating that he still is an alcoholic like how is that relevant. Was it that needed to be shared?
@chris bleau Asking a foreign power to make an announcement that is damaging to a political opponent whilst holding make military aid to that foreign power who is under attack from his friend Putin. Is a crime. How will you like it Chris when your ex-wife runs for office and asks the Australian govt (who lease USA several Islands generating millions) for evidence that you have comitted a capital offence. Do you think we will find it and have you killed just for a few million bucks? Who do you think is supplying your opiate crisis?
@@captainedscythe Clinton lied under oath, Trump apparently did "something" that changes depending on what a focus group thinks it should be for called. It's possible you weren't lying, just too stupid to interpret reality.
"That does not add credibility to your argument. It makes you look mean." boy I can't think of one single person who has been saying offensive things about everyone who has any discernable differences from him for the last 3 years.
Questions? He never even listened to responses. That POS just rambled aimlessly about jibberish and never made a single comprehensive point. Did you contribute to Hillary? Yes. Ok you are dismissed you Dem. hack. Hmmmm....but he contributed much more to Ronny Dump....shouldn't he be dismissed then?
you hate him because he exposed these liberal hacks for the anti-trump extremist they are.These"expert professors" would support impeaching Trump for jay walking.
@@christophertan3195 They are there to give their"opinions".....I get it...but its like having Don Lemon and other CNN host giving their opinion. That's how biased they are. It's a joke.
Why didn’t someone say that there? Are our dem politicians stupid or something? Stop being weak and attack these republican mother fuckers! Come on it’s not hat hard!
What the hell does that have to do with it? If you call on someone to testify in a judicial matter such as this, you are not looking for bias. What you need are people that can judge the facts. If there is a hint of bias (gross bias in this case) their testimony loses all credibility.
Wesley Farkenharder So Trump is overstepping his authority and impeachable in asking a Ukrainian President to uphold the Ukraine US Reciprocal Cooperative Corruption Treaty signed by BC regarding the 2016 election corruption but It’s not impeachable when O and Holder sell weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels (Operation Fast and Furious) which are then used to kill 300 Mexicans along with Border Patrol Officer Brian Terry. (And incidentally, Holder refused to appear before Congress) Pure evil personified
Size Wow!!! I can’t believe you said considering the well known fact that trump and the republicans lie daily everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie and or an exaggeration.🤦♀️
@@pirquo You need to learn some actual facts about fast and furious and understand that it was an operation that went wrong for reasons outside of Obama and Holder's control. It was an operation attempting to catch the cartels and people smuggling weapons, and the people involved running the operation didn't do their job properly. It had NOTHING to do with Obama and Holder "selling weapons to the cartels". Go learn something instead of just spewing the lies your right wing media told you. The information is out there, there are official reports about it. You just don't WANT to know the truth, because these lies suit your blinded bias better.
Haha... ok Paulie. Matt is what is wrong, not the Dems 4 star witnesses being partisan hacks, everyone of them being bigger donors than me and you bub... You are what is wrong with this country Paul.
Did Barak Obama not get 90% of everything he wanted out of congress? Get real. That was part of the issue with Republican voters in the 2016 election that Republicans didn't stand up for what they believed in.
Seymour Butts what did Obama do in his 8 years in office? Obamacare? We know how that shit played out. He said he’d get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, he failed. Trump is the one pursuing that. Our economy was fucked. Our debt skyrocketed. He was one of the shittiest presidents of the 21 century
North Star save me The chivalry, first you drop such a disrespectful comment and than try to be all balanced and objective in response to me. You’re a sorry excuse of a man
Was it absurd when no one raised their hands for having any evidence to the shift report 😂 .....I'm sure in your perspective they raised their hands but reality is they did not . Have a great day
@@elroythegreat1590 No, they are highly educated scholars of the Constitution. A document that you obviously don't understand due to the fact that you don't understand what a trial is versus a gathering of evidence.
@Goddess Sky What does it matter? If the law professors are democrats that does not undermine their credibility or professionalism. This is not a dictatorship where you have to pray to the supreme leader. And he was a criminal scumbag from day one minus several decades. Why does anyone have to be for him? That is just bs.
Goddess Sky he’s ignoring the relevant information to the hearings for partisan assholery. They’re human beings. Of course they have political bias. His dumbass is displaying his for everyone to see.
Yeah.. his point is that these "witnesses" have no relevant facts to this shit show Dems call "impeachment". And he established that their only presence at this hearing is a bipartisan, political attack on the president. It's very clear to see. After he established they have no facts to offer, he exposed their motive.
@@patriciafavreau9631 Should totally have the camera just not look at the person talking during the only allotted time you have to talk and present an argument. Should just sit quietly and say nothing with the camera panning the room huh?
The people he is trying to impress- trump and his base, would think this is very “manly”and “brave”, how he pulled the rug from under the feet of the witnesses. They don’t care that these are not witnesses to trump’s wrong doings but to say whether the evidence proves trump committed an impeachable offence. Perhaps Matt Gatz missed the point as well.
Absolutely nothing, but I bet the Trump supporters think his questioning was brilliant when in reality there is no substance to it at all. I find it hilarious that he is accusing the professor of having a partisan bias against trump to try and discredit her when the republicans are behaving like cult members and have no room to talk
@@samadrid6321 They are law experts. That's the same as me claimimg Gaetz has no basis for defending Trump because he lacks personal involvement. It's a plea to ignorance.
4:15 what a joke gaetz is. "You look mean, us conservatives are so fragile when it's us being attacked, you hurt our feelings. Just disregard our supreme leader over there calling people fat at rallies and trying to sick mobs on his opponents through Twitter and making up childish nicknames for anyone that confronts him." Pathetic joke of a congressman.
So it's ok for you snowflakes to call the POTUS "Orangeman" ...f'kn hypocrite. It's ok for that b|tch Maxine Waters to tell her constituents to harass GOP members in public? F'kn hypocrites. Sometimes you morons need to hear yourselves talk. Confucius say, "He who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". But I'm sure you leftist demwits can't understand that.
@@davyjoneslocker4134 Yeah, I'm sure Confucius said that....idiot. I'll tell you what, let's bet money on it. $1000 USD? I'll take internet transfer preferrably but a bank cheque will do. 'Tard.
@William Blake PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN'T THROW STONES - "Those who are vulnerable should not attack others. The proverb has been traced back to Geoffrey Chaucer's 'Troilus and Criseyde' . George Herbert wrote in 1651: 'Whose house is of glass, must not throw stones at another.Jun 29, 2000 I win. You lose. Google for the win. Where's my money you deadbeat?
Love how no one against the guy is talking about the facts in this debate. Gaetz eviscerated these witnesses. No hands at the end by them shows that ten times over.
ya know when you argue with someone and youre in the right/truth, and they almost burst blood vessels trying to justify the lies? that silly gaetz is a prime example.
LovedBy You Because the fact we are here today talking to each other about this subject is proof that we hsve a party (or forces within that power) that are trying to subvert our elective. Our Constitution. And most importantly, Liberty 🗽
"And maybe it's a different president that we should be impeaching". We only have one president. What is he talking about? Impeaching people who aren't in office? What a nut.
@Donna Willams your reply is just plain weird and lacks substance, I am embarrassed for you, since you lack the self restraint, to keep such a response to yourself!
not only that HUNTER BIDEN is a crackhead who screwed his brothers widow and knocked up some skank who he refuses to support. Real piece of work that one. Now he has testified he has NO INCOME because daddy didn't get him a new job!?!?!
@@MickLoud999 hunter biden is not a member of the government and congress which makes our laws. drunkard gaetz is and btw whose daddy got him out of his dui problems? oh right his daddy who was a senator.funny how that shit works,right?
@@MickLoud999 Since you so predictably brought up someone irrrelevant to the conversation, would you maybe like to talk about Hillary next? Just guessing...
" You don't get to interrupt me!" It seems to be the attitudes of the government towards "We The People." We put them in office and then they treat us with disrespect. It's time to clean the house in 2020 by voting out the career politicians, folks.
@Russell T Vote out career democrats and republicans. And, exile you for bipartisan arson, for you get off on the misery of opposing party members when in fact they are your fellow Americans. We are Americans, not democrats or republicans.
alohatic when being interrogated during someone’s inquiry time, you don’t get to elaborate beyond answering the question unless they ask or allow you to. He has a limited time to speak and sway.
It's the problem with televised hearings: politicians don't try to do their work, they are just there to talk over everyone and have their ideas run on TV.
He has a certain amount of time, and the witnesses are trying to justify an answer they already gave. They are wasting his time, and he isn't letting them. Plain and simple.
The chairman the other day said he had the right to take yes or no as an answer and continue. I don't think it's right that the witnesses don't get to put context behind what is brought forwards but i guess rules the rules 🤷♂️
@Just a bystander Truth can make someone "frustrated". The conservatives are getting disgusted with stupidity, and there seems to be a lot of stupidity on the side of the Democrats at the moment.
You missed the part where Gaetz asked all three to raise their hands if they heard any material fact(s) in the Schiff Shitt Show. Not one hand went up. You missed that part of this, how convenient.
sheryl martin I’m sure there are others there who practice this little tactic for themselves. Im sure they’re all watching gleefully as this guy preforms.
The only person who should get to question a witness in front a committee should be the rep from the witness' home district. Not a 20 something child from Florida.
"You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office." -Lindsey Graham I agree...Trump should be impeached and removed. 👍
Chris Johnson, as the Constitutional Republic’s Representative Democracy is destroyed by Trump, it is Lady Liberty🗽”Libby”, “Libtard” whatever you want to call her, who is weeping and it is her tears you rejoice for.
So you're saying Trump should be impeached when everyone testifying have literally NO first hand knowledge or evidence of anything they're testifying about, so if a democrat gets in office we can have some republican people of office say they heard something from somewhere and that democratic president should be impeached too?
Suzy Q Should I cite Pelosi’s quote about how impeachment is a very serious thing and should be bipartisan with overwhelming evidence, or Jerry Nadler’s similar speech ???
I been reading many of these comments aimed at Representative Gaetz and discovered something interesting. All of the comments I read were all about Gaetz emotional state and his presentation of his comments, and I didn't see even one arguing about why it's fine that none of the alleged "witnesses" had any material evidence whatsoever regarding the issue at hand. That would indicate that apparently they are OK with the House of Representatives spending their (the commentors) money and wasting time that could be spent on making the lives of citizens better in the United States in order to whip up allegations that are based on hearsay and rumor. Would these same posters speak the same tune if when there's not enough evidence actually impeach anyone if only members of the party that instigated the process all received a bill to pay for the running of Congress during all that time these hearings and investigations take place?
If you read comments on the other side, they are the same, personal attacks on the witnesses with no substance. Unfortunately, people seem to think that is how to make comments, call people names and attack them personally rather than make any counter-points; a tactic constantly used by Trump with his childish name-calling and snide personal comments. Many of the witnesses up to now have been opinion witnesses, but there have been witnesses who do have knowledge of what was happening. Amb. Sondland, Dr Hill, and the aide who was present during the call in which Trump mentioned he only cared about investigating the Bidens are a few. Most of the others subpoenaed who have direct knowledge are being blocked from testifying by Trump. The main issue with Gaetz is his constant twisting of facts and then cutting witnesses off when they try to correct him and throwing his temper tantrums with long-winded speeches to use up his time without letting the facts get into play. Once again, a strategy used by other Trump defenders like Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Sanders.
