Murkowski to vote "no" on witnesses.
Source: The Hill
What a shock! (Sarcasm)
Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480863-murkowski-to-vote-against-witnesses-dashing-democrats-hopes-of-extending
wryter2000
(46,023 posts)Not.
Firestorm49
(4,030 posts)its in the guarded optimism the press has shown. There isnt a snowballs chance in hell that this trial farce will have a fair and equitable ending. Lets only hope that after this trial🤣🤣🤣 ends, that we can come forward continuously before the election with unprecedented pressure, news releases, and evidence of how corrupt this fool is, then pray for a landslide, because a close swing state result will be open prey to rigging.
not_the_one
(2,227 posts)That is all they have been doing.
The democrats can really milk this for all it's worth, if they do it right.
Of course, that is a BIG IF.
Firestorm49
(4,030 posts)olddad65
(599 posts)The constitution has been rendered unenforceable. Putin won
cstanleytech
(26,251 posts)them but rather via ads that gets people to start questioning why they would refuse to allow witnesses if they believed the President was innocent.
After all an innocent person should not have anything to fear from something someone might say.
tavernier
(12,370 posts)Anyone who believes that, boy do I have a bridge to sell you!!
Response to Firestorm49 (Original post)
Post removed
Polybius
(15,340 posts)We'll vote him out in November.
OneCrazyDiamond
(2,031 posts)Is there some other vote that we can get to replace hers?
Behind the Aegis
(53,922 posts)No one was fooled by her.
sakabatou
(42,141 posts)KatyBR
(183 posts)You all should support the candidate (a woman) who is running against him. Amy McGrath!
He's orchestrated this entire dictatorship through his hold on the Senate.