Johnathan Turley is a disingenous ass and shill

[ChristianProgressive]

During his "testimony" during today's hearings, he repeatedly slammed the impeachment process for its "lack of substance", claiming that the record insufficiently established a basis for impeachment.

That conveniently overlooks the fact that it is because of Trump's deliberate obstruction that needed documents and witnesses have not been made available to the committees time and again...

 

[Stacyhs]

Yes. The GOP are screaming about the lack of first hand testimony while Trump blocks those with first hand knowledge from testifying. You know...all those witnesses who could prove there was no quid pro quo according to them.Quite the little scam they have going there.

 

[phiwum]

I disagreed with what he said much of the time, but I thought he was a well-reasoned and consistent fella. I think he had a point that it's hard to make obstruction of Congress charges stick unless you wait for the fallout from the court cases to determine whether the subpoenas are legally binding.

I don't regard him as a shill at all. He's a man with certain convictions, some of which I don't share (though, of course, he's thought a lot more deeply about legal matters than I ever will). I only caught pieces of his testimony, but I thought he was a respectable choice for the Republicans.

 

[angrysoba]

Well, the GOP are unlikely to put someone up who is going to say, “Yep! You’ve got him bang to rights!”

I heard only a summary of what he said on 538, and it didn’t sound like he was a shill. Didn’t he say that the Democrats should issue subpoenas? That at present the case was somewhat thin and that he disagreed with the behavior of the Trump administration as far as we know what happened?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Well, the GOP are unlikely to put someone up who is going to say, “Yep! You’ve got him bang to rights!”

I heard only a summary of what he said on 538, and it didn’t sound like he was a shill. Didn’t he say that the Democrats should issue subpoenas? That at present the case was somewhat thin and that he disagreed with the behavior of the Trump administration as far as we know what happened?

I disagreed with what he said much of the time, but I thought he was a well-reasoned and consistent fella. I think he had a point that it's hard to make obstruction of Congress charges stick unless you wait for the fallout from the court cases to determine whether the subpoenas are legally binding.

I don't regard him as a shill at all. He's a man with certain convictions, some of which I don't share (though, of course, he's thought a lot more deeply about legal matters than I ever will). I only caught pieces of his testimony, but I thought he was a respectable choice for the Republicans.

Consistently biased.

Whooptidoo he didn't vote for Trump. He consistently writes opinions that favor Republicans by a long shot.

Did you catch the testimony when the Democrats called him out on his hypocritical opinion Clinton deserved to be impeached? Tell me how exactly did Clinton's perjury happen as he abused his power? Did Clinton need to be POTUS in order to lie under oath about a BJ?

As opposed to Trump who clearly used his POTUS position to get something from Zelensky.

Turley is a GOP shill.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

I only caught pieces of his testimony, but I thought he was a respectable choice for the Republicans.

Red card for using "respectable" and "Republicans" in the same sentence.

 

[angrysoba]

Red card for using "respectable" and "Republicans" in the same sentence.

Let me guess, “They” are partisan and you are fair-minded.

 

[BobTheCoward]

During his "testimony" during today's hearings, he repeatedly slammed the impeachment process for its "lack of substance", claiming that the record insufficiently established a basis for impeachment.

That conveniently overlooks the fact that it is because of Trump's deliberate obstruction that needed documents and witnesses have not been made available to the committees time and again...

The defense attorney said there was insufficient evidence for a murder conviction....

...conveniently overlooking that his client pled the fifth and refuses to answer the question if he committed the murder.

 

[Brainster]

The Democrats and the media have been out to impeach Trump since before he took office. IIRC Maxine Waters was the first; within a few hours of the election. The editorial board of the Washington Post was much more restrained; they didn't propose impeachment until a few minutes after Trump was inaugurated.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Trump and his campaign have been committing acts unworthy of the Presidency since before getting the nomination.

 

[PhantomWolf]

The defense attorney said there was insufficient evidence for a murder conviction....

...conveniently overlooking that his client pled the fifth and refuses to answer the question if he committed the murder.

And won't let anyone else who was in the room testify either.

 

[uke2se]

The Democrats and the media have been out to impeach Trump since before he took office. IIRC Maxine Waters was the first; within a few hours of the election. The editorial board of the Washington Post was much more restrained; they didn't propose impeachment until a few minutes after Trump was inaugurated.

So? Should a president be allowed to solicit foreign aid for an election campaign, and should he be allowed to withhold foreign aid in order to obtain said aid?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

The Democrats and the media have been out to impeach Trump since before he took office. IIRC Maxine Waters was the first; within a few hours of the election. The editorial board of the Washington Post was much more restrained; they didn't propose impeachment until a few minutes after Trump was inaugurated.

Elect an Infowarior get an Impeachment, Trump has way to many links to Infowars and Conspiracy theorists, Like Stone, 9/11No Planer Jerome Corsi, and Alex Jones.
Trump has endorsed many crazy conspiracy theories to get elected, he wanted New conspiracy theories that Brietbart and ,fox News could spin for him to get him Re elected in 20/20. I am positive that, that Putin was hiding fake server parts at the computer salvage yard in Ukraine.
Trump doesn't care about Putin, Ukraine, or The United States he only cares for and about himself.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

So? Should a president be allowed to solicit foreign aid for an election campaign, and should he be allowed to withhold foreign aid in order to obtain said aid?

It was never about the aid it was all about providing a conspiracy theory that would have assured Trump's Re Election by finding faked evidence planted By Putin at the computer salvage yard in Ukraine. Pieces of a dismantled server with Clinton data on it.

 

[angrysoba]

The Democrats and the media have been out to impeach Trump since before he took office. IIRC Maxine Waters was the first; within a few hours of the election. The editorial board of the Washington Post was much more restrained; they didn't propose impeachment until a few minutes after Trump was inaugurated.

True. And many others were urging electors to vote against Trump, and social media was filled with constitutional scholars arguing that Mike Pence and Trump’s cabinet can invoke the 25th amendment and many other pie-in-the-sky silly ideas.

That said, in this case, on the face of it, does it not look to you like Trump has (or potentially could) have a serious charge to answer to? Isn’t that what even the Republican legal expert is talking about?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Trump and his campaign have been committing acts unworthy of the Presidency since before getting the nomination.

When you partner with a 9/11No Planer to Start Birtherism because you don't understand how punch cards work, and are too dumb to understand that a man who publicly Stated Osama Bin Laden was Innocent for 9/11/2001, should never ever be trusted again. Then that Happens.

 

[uke2se]

It was never about the aid it was all about providing a conspiracy theory that would have assured Trump's Re Election by finding faked evidence planted By Putin at the computer salvage yard in Ukraine. Pieces of a dismantled server with Clinton data on it.

For Ukraine, it was about the aid. That aid could save lives in their struggle against invasion.

But whatever. The question was to Brainster. Is a president allowed to do as I described or not? Because the facts show that Trump did it.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

For Ukraine, it was about the aid. That aid could save lives in their struggle against invasion.

But whatever. The question was to Brainster. Is a president allowed to do as I described or not? Because the facts show that Trump did it.

No because that endangers the republic.

The problem is this time there was not the Independent push back on the Conspiracy theories that there was when Obama was elected.
A history lesson for all.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120517

 

[BobTheCoward]

And won't let anyone else who was in the room testify either.

Which may be he right to do so.

Those pesky rights make it is so difficult to prosecute a case against someone.

 

[Cabbage]

The Democrats and the media have been out to impeach Trump since before he took office. IIRC Maxine Waters was the first; within a few hours of the election. The editorial board of the Washington Post was much more restrained; they didn't propose impeachment until a few minutes after Trump was inaugurated.

The GOP have been turning a blind eye to Trump's criminal activities since before the election.