quote:
Sondland clearly said Trump denied wanting a quid pro quo in so many words. So much for his evidence for impeachment.
Sondland was also very clear that Trump expected a quid pro quo. Your attempt to dismiss his evidence founders on the facts.
quote:
The rest is all hearsay. No matter how "consistent" it's all hearsay.
The transcript is hardly hearsay to name but one item.
quote:
And then there is the unidentified "whistleblower" whose identity we all know although they are protecting it despite the fact that it violates the principle that a defendant has the right to confront witnesses against him.
No it doesn’t because the whistleblower isn’t one of the witnesses. We all know that the reason his identity has to be protected is because of the threat of retaliation. Revealing his identity would not serve justice in any way,
quote:
This is such a travesty of justice how can any of you even dare to try to defend it?
If your idea of justice is that the crook gets away with it through obstruction and smears and lies then you are the one defending a travesty of justice. But I don’t think you believe that. I think you know you are fighting for injustice. Why else all the obvious falsehoods ?
™ Version 4.2
