Actually republicans were allowed to ask witnesses questions.
In a selective narrow partial truth, you can lyingly allege that. But the mere fact that Republicans
were provided with traanscripts WEEKS AFTER the closed-room SCIF hearings puts the lie to what you are trying to allege.
And in the case of intelligence community inspector general (I C I G) Michael Atkinson, whose testimony
was NEVER provided to Republicans, AT ALL your lie begins to fall apart.
The transcripts from the House hearings show republicans asking almost as many questions as the democrats on the panels involved.
Maybe on select transcripts. But it's ridiculous that a Republican on House Judiciary committee would not be permitted to sit in on and ask questions of the House Intelligence committee and vice versa. Whereas no such limits are put on Democrats of these two committees. The purpose is to limit Republicans' ability to have access to all the hearings, and to coordinate an adequate defense, in the absence of full disclosure by the piece-of-shit lying Democrats.
Let alone the ability for Republicans to call thier own witnesses and cross-examine depositions they were not able to see first hand, read the witness' body language to detect if they are lying, not able to be present to ask questions.
As Democrat say they are restricting attendaance of SCIF hearings, even as Dems leak any testimony advantageous to their side,
to the reporters right outside the SCIF room, called there by the Bolshevik Dems for precisely that purpose. The hypocrisy just overflows.
As compared to the bipartisan and unquestionably fair rules in the previous Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton hearings, where there was no calculated exclusion of either side from hearings, equal advance notice and attendance of hearings, equal ability to cross examine and present exculpatory evidence, and equal ability and advance notice for both sides to call witnesses.
And remember Trump was and is still trying to block any and all witnesses and documents.
That is your employment of Moscow Central Committee tactics, to repeat a lie so many times that by mere repetition the lie takes on an appearance of truth. Trump did not cooperate because the rules were partisan and unfair, Dems never made any attempt to set up fair and bipartisan rules, did not give Trump and his lawyers and the House Republicans equal ability to attend hearings, to present exculpatory evidence, to present his own witnesses, and
again Trump's lawyers were excluded from all but 4 of the 78 days of the House impeachment hearings.
I think Bolton wanted the House to go to the courts first to get his testimony but that could have taken years.
"I think Bolton..." is not a fact. It's pure unsubstantiated speculation.
As repeated many times now, Bolton did offer to testify if the Senate asked him [to]. Given the leak I suspect Bolton’s testimony will be much like the others that were willing to testify under oath when we finally get it. Unlike the story being told by those who don’t want to testify under oath.
I think the leak had to do with the fact it occurred within a week of the release of Bolton's book. It's not even a leak, it's just a rumor, no facts, or even any specific quoted lines of Bolton's
opinion were disclosed.
I think it's a publicity stunt, where he or the leakers in his staff didn't disclose any actual quotes from the book.
Even if Bolton discloses anything in the book, it's still his opinion and a case of "he said/he said", his word vs. Trump's. And Bolton, having been fired humiliatingly, has a clear grudge motive for anything he alleges.
