I saw his vote change as a way of ensuring the def would bring on the witnesses. I don't think a lot of them knew what they were voting for. And, when one of them tried to ask, he was told there was no debating the issue. He didn't even know what he was voting for. He probably thought it was the conviction vote.
Witnesses would have been great. It was only when the defense told the other side what witnesses they would call that Schumer moved to shut down all witnesses.
They were sneaky about it (like they usually are) and most people didn't understand what they had done.
I've seen claims about what the defense said they would do, but nothing official. One person said they were going to call Pelosi. Another said they had a list of 300 witnesses.
Something happened, and the puzzling thing is why the defense would not object to overriding the vote to have witnesses.
Another great opportunity to red pill the public -- missed.
As it stands now, a lot of people think there was an "insurrection" and that the election fraud is "a big lie."
The defense did NOTHING to refute those two things, and they had the perfect opportunity to do it.
I completely agree with your last comment. I think they wanted to focus on the Article of Impeachment, but they missed a GREAT opportunity to present the election info to the public.
I think the D back down from witnesses when Van der Veen said he would subpoena Nazi and Harris. I didn't hear much about it after that.
Hopefully, once his cases are heard in court the results will come out in the media - HOPEFULLY!
He KNEW that he is voting for, right after his phone call with Rattsberger in GA came up overnight. Let's not clear him here for his misdeeds. He also tried introducing Haley to GOPe donors this past week, again against Trump.
And prior to start of impeachment HE was dead against ANY witness testimony.
You're way too trusting, problem with our side, especially when all the data are in front of your face.
WTF cares!? Graham voted with the rest of traitors. Give it up already. YOU, and the likes of you, are the reason our side always seems on the losing end. Always coming up with more than lame excuse, time after time.
You don't know me! You have no idea what side I'm on (if I wasn't on his side, why would I be here, and have been for a while, in support of 45). I was asking a question, which you, OBVIOUSLY, have no F'ing idea about. I'll ask someone more intelligent than you.
I saw his vote change as a way of ensuring the def would bring on the witnesses. I don't think a lot of them knew what they were voting for. And, when one of them tried to ask, he was told there was no debating the issue. He didn't even know what he was voting for. He probably thought it was the conviction vote.
Witnesses would have been great. It was only when the defense told the other side what witnesses they would call that Schumer moved to shut down all witnesses.
They were sneaky about it (like they usually are) and most people didn't understand what they had done.
I've seen claims about what the defense said they would do, but nothing official. One person said they were going to call Pelosi. Another said they had a list of 300 witnesses.
Something happened, and the puzzling thing is why the defense would not object to overriding the vote to have witnesses.
Another great opportunity to red pill the public -- missed.
As it stands now, a lot of people think there was an "insurrection" and that the election fraud is "a big lie."
The defense did NOTHING to refute those two things, and they had the perfect opportunity to do it.
I completely agree with your last comment. I think they wanted to focus on the Article of Impeachment, but they missed a GREAT opportunity to present the election info to the public.
I think the D back down from witnesses when Van der Veen said he would subpoena Nazi and Harris. I didn't hear much about it after that.
Hopefully, once his cases are heard in court the results will come out in the media - HOPEFULLY!
He KNEW that he is voting for, right after his phone call with Rattsberger in GA came up overnight. Let's not clear him here for his misdeeds. He also tried introducing Haley to GOPe donors this past week, again against Trump.
And prior to start of impeachment HE was dead against ANY witness testimony.
You're way too trusting, problem with our side, especially when all the data are in front of your face.
So, who was asking for clarification on what was being voted on? It wasn't Graham.
WTF cares!? Graham voted with the rest of traitors. Give it up already. YOU, and the likes of you, are the reason our side always seems on the losing end. Always coming up with more than lame excuse, time after time.
BYE.
You don't know me! You have no idea what side I'm on (if I wasn't on his side, why would I be here, and have been for a while, in support of 45). I was asking a question, which you, OBVIOUSLY, have no F'ing idea about. I'll ask someone more intelligent than you.