Comments by "Voix de la raison" (@voixdelaraison593) on "DIFFERENT RULES: Mitch McConnell BLASTS Democrats Over Impeachment "Charade"" video.

  1. Christopher Hanzelka I hope you realize how closely your rhetoric resembles those who would favor fascism or any other form of dictatorship. Do not flirt with that you can not control as ultimately extra judicial measures may be used against you in the end. You may think you are being funny but you are on a very slippery immoral slope.
    3
  2. Black Philip We already have the Russians, or more succinctly the Russians have us. Well not really us but our president. So you can proudly claim that our president Treasonous Trump has the best relationship with Russia on any former president. You might even say Trump is a real Russian Asset.
    3
  3. Christopher Hanzelka Sorry, tossing it back at me only works in grade school.
    2
  4. Gary Rosie If you want a response from me, you are going to have to expound on your last post - “Conspiracy Theory”.
    2
  5. Moscow Mitch is one to talk. He is trying to avoid any witnesses be called, or heard from, in the Senate. I suspect that he is strategic in his thinking. A Defense Lawyer (yes I know MM should be an impartial juror) basically has one of two strategies to employ: 1. Highlight the truth and use it to your advantage. 2. Obscure, Bury, Confuse, and limit the Truth to make the juries job impossible and cause doubts. Strategy number two will be MMs strategy of choice. Why, because the Truth does not favor the defense. Each witnesses will be under oath and may not care to purger themselves. Thus, the answer is to make the trial fast with no witnesses. Why, because MM already knows what outcome he can achieve with his fellow lock step Republicans. Witnesses will only expose the American Public to more Damming Testimony and possibly sway public opinion.
    2
  6. Brian Borstein Several of the House Witnesses had First Hand Knowledge and outright damming testimony. Several more Witnesses with First Hand Knowledge we’re blocked from testifying to the House by Trump. The Senate can now rectify this by allowing for the following people to testify to the Senate: Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to the Acting White House Chief of Staff; Mike Mulvaney, Acting White House Chief of Staff; JohnBolton, former National Security Advisor, andMichael Duffey, Associate Director for National Security , Office ofManagement and Budget. All four of these witnesses were asked to testify in the House impeachment inquiry did but were blocked by Trump from appearing. So once again I very clearly state that the Truth does not favor the Defense - if it did Both the Republican House Minority, and the Republican Senate Majority would WANT witness who could “exonerate” Trump to testify. It really is that simple.
    2
  7. xNBK- YOTIEx Care to elaborate? Perhaps with some detailed examples? Maybe some citations of articles? Or perhaps you would care to re post and very clearly acknowledge that you have an uninformed opinion based on feelings?
    1
  8. Black Philip Thank you for the laugh. I know it’s not polite to laugh at “challenged” people but laugh I did. 😂🤣😂🤣
    1
  9. WASHINGTON — Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, on Tuesday rejected calling four White House officials as witnesses during President Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate. These are people with first hand knowledge, and participated in the crime. Blocking their testimony makes the Senate Trial a Sham - not that there were ever any doubts.
    1
  10. Chet You are 100% correct, your opinion is not evidence. However, First Hand Account Witnesses are Evidence. Please point out which, if any, witnesses were not first hand accounts. You can’t for the following reasons: 1. Most witnesses were first hand accounts 2. Some witnesses relayed conversations with people in the inner circle, confirmed by Sonland and others. All acceptable testimony in any criminal trial. 3. If McConnell and Trump really felt that Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, former National Security Adviser John Bolton, Mulvaney’s senior adviser Robert Blair, and Associate Director for National Security at the Office of Management and Budget Michael Duffey. Could exonerate the president they would let them testify under oath in the blink of a eye. 4. I highly suspect you can offer nothing more than your feelings and are incapable of doing any research. Am I wrong?
    1
  11. Moscow Mitch is one to talk. He is trying to avoid any witnesses be called, or heard from, in the Senate. I suspect that he is strategic in his thinking. A Defense Lawyer (yes I know MM should be an impartial juror) basically has one of two strategies to employ: 1. Highlight the truth and use it to your advantage. 2. Obscure, Bury, Confuse, and limit the Truth to make the juries job impossible and cause doubts. Strategy number two will be MMs strategy of choice. Why, because the Truth does not favor the defense. Each witnesses will be under oath and may not care to purger themselves. Thus, the answer is to make the trial fast with no witnesses. Why, because MM already knows what outcome he can achieve with his fellow lock step Republicans. Witnesses will only expose the American Public to more Damming Testimony and possibly sway public opinion.
    1
  12. Moscow Mitch is one to talk. He is trying to avoid any witnesses be called, or heard from, in the Senate. I suspect that he is strategic in his thinking. A Defense Lawyer (yes I know MM should be an impartial juror) basically has one of two strategies to employ: 1. Highlight the truth and use it to your advantage. 2. Obscure, Bury, Confuse, and limit the Truth to make the juries job impossible and cause doubts. Strategy number two will be MMs strategy of choice. Why, because the Truth does not favor the defense. Each witnesses will be under oath and may not care to purger themselves. Thus, the answer is to make the trial fast with no witnesses. Why, because MM already knows what outcome he can achieve with his fellow lock step Republicans. Witnesses will only expose the American Public to more Damming Testimony and possibly sway public opinion.
    1
  13. Free In Christ Thank you for fact checking, we all get sucked into propaganda from time to time. I commend you for fact checking, I wish all of us would more closely follow your example. I have removed my post as well.
    1