Jump to content
knapplc

The First Trump Impeachment Thread

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

you really do believe that lie...don't you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

 

You’re wrongly implying indictment proceedings feature irrelevant and/or defense witnesses while also admitting McConnell is running a political sham trial.
 

Giuliani would be proud of your legal acumen and admissions. 

20 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

 

You’re wrongly implying indictment proceedings feature irrelevant and/or defense witnesses while also admitting McConnell is running a political sham trial.
 

Giuliani would be proud of your legal acumen and admissions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

 

You’re wrongly implying indictment proceedings feature irrelevant and/or defense witnesses while also admitting McConnell is running a political sham trial.
 

Giuliani would be proud of your legal acumen and admissions. 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

So what you’re saying is the GOP isn’t above tit for tat. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

Every step in this process, Republicans have been involved. There were people in the house testifying representing the President. There have been times when the President has refused to have anyone involved represent him even though he could have. 
 

then, he turns around and cries that he isn’t allowed to defend himself. 
 

then, the Republicans have control of the Trial in the Senate and they refuse to call witnesses that could prove his innocence

 

He still refuses to do that.....but still cries that it’s unfair. 
 

And you believe him. 
 

 

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The House restricted the investigation to the witnesses that they wanted to hear.  A political sham indictment deserves a political sham trial. Finally we've found a quid pro quo.

 

Joe, there's only one thing that's abundantly clear: the actions of the White House and the GOP are the exact opposite of what innocent people would do. 

  • Plus1 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Every step in this process, Republicans have been involved. There were people in the house testifying representing the President. There have been times when the President has refused to have anyone involved represent him even though he could have. 
 

then, he turns around and cries that he isn’t allowed to defend himself. 
 

then, the Republicans have control of the Trial in the Senate and they refuse to call witnesses that could prove his innocence

 

He still refuses to do that.....but still cries that it’s unfair. 
 

And you believe him. 
 

 

There are no facts that support you opinion.  In the House, Trump was not allowed to call witnesses or cross examine the ones the Ds allowed.  That is never allowed.  As stated, any prosecutor or plaintiff who went to court and said he needed more evidence would be told to leave.  

 

4 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Joe, there's only one thing that's abundantly clear: the actions of the White House and the GOP are the exact opposite of what innocent people would do. 

Like claiming executive privilege?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Joe, there's only one thing that's abundantly clear: the actions of the White House and the GOP are the exact opposite of what innocent people would do. 

If OJ Simpson is reading this he is happy you were not sitting in that jury box at his trial!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else already sick and tired about hearing how these poor/tired senators had to "sit and listen" for 12.5 hours?

 

Good lord.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The amazingly short-sighted plans of this Republican group will never cease to amaze me.

 

The precedents they're setting will be used against them by a corrupt Democrat. There's no chance this doesn't come back to haunt them.

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

There are no facts that support you opinion.  In the House, Trump was not allowed to call witnesses or cross examine the ones the Ds allowed.  That is never allowed.  As stated, any prosecutor or plaintiff who went to court and said he needed more evidence would be told to leave.

What was John Turley doing in the House?
 

And, Trump refused to have his lawyers involved when they could have been. 
 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/4351772002

 

He has also refused constantly to allow people to testify that could prove his innocence like Bolton and others. 
 

the entire scene of the House Republicans storming the room where testimony was happening was a sham. Republicans were already in the room. 
 

Did you read the link I provided you the other day?

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, teachercd said:

If OJ Simpson is reading this he is happy you were not sitting in that jury box at his trial!  

OJ Simpson wasn't blocking documents and testimony.

5 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Like claiming executive privilege?

You can't just claim executive privilege every time you want to avoid congressional oversight which is what we are seeing 

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...