Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (150556)	1/20/2020 7:32:21 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 358897

>>Do you have an example of a potential witness for the defense who would have relevant fact testimony? "Hunter Biden" Was he on the perfect phone call? Did he try to smear Yovanovich? Was he listening to Sondland-Trump in the restaurant? Did he help bury the evidence in the secret computer? Did he replace Pence at the inauguration?

To: i-node who wrote (150556)	1/21/2020 10:17:34 AM
From: Lane3	3 Recommendations Recommended By bentway Brumar89 Wharf Rat Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 358897

The problem facing Democrats is that Hunter Biden is a clearly material witness to the defense on why there was a hold on military aid to Ukraine. Hunter Biden is not a material witness. He has no direct evidence of anything that Trump did or didn't do. His role in this is as a potential justification/excuse for what Trump and his fellows did or didn't do. There is no question that he could be asked that would inform Trump's actions. For him to be useful to the defense, questions would need to be asked of Trump and co. about whether and how Biden was a factor in their actions. There's no way Biden is privy to that information.