Neo-Stalinist Democrats are the domestic enemies we were warned would threaten our Freedom

DJDuck

Levy called it a EO-Barbarism.

The Stalinists have lowered the bar of justice, ethics, morality so far an anonymous spy that can regurgitate hearsay to try and undo a presidential election and do serious harm to our foreign policy. An anonymous spy can recite a conversation that someone overheard someone having with someone else retold by another that isn’t confirmed as being there because they also are anonymous.


Rep. Adam Schiff: Trump ‘Whistleblower’ Agrees to Testify Before Congress

HHusky

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

DJDuck

HHusky said:

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

You are talking nonsense. This is about removing a. President moron. So you’re ok with not knowing the accuser that has no direct evidence about this.....got it..

You have taken some pretty idiotic positions in the past like the Gentle Giant had his Hands up and was murdered but this may take the cake. You are a leftist moron.😂😂😂

HHusky

DJDuck said:

HHusky said:

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

You are talking nonsense. This is about removing a. President moron. So you’re ok with not knowing the accuser that has no direct evidence about this.....got it..

You have taken some pretty idiotic positions in the past like the Gentle Giant had his Hands up and was murdered but this may take the cake. You are a leftist moron.😂😂😂

Can you point me to anybody who is arguing the whistleblower complaint it’s is admissible evidence in Daddy’s trial?

SFGbob

DJDuck said:

HHusky said:

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

You are talking nonsense. This is about removing a. President moron. So you’re ok with not knowing the accuser that has no direct evidence about this.....got it..

You have taken some pretty idiotic positions in the past like the Gentle Giant had his Hands up and was murdered but this may take the cake. You are a leftist moron.😂😂😂

Come DJ, you know he doesn't give a fuck about facts and evidence. Hell he just claimed that Schiff's statement that Trump asked Ukraine to "manufacture" false evidence was true.

He is the same worthless lying piece of shit he has always been. He'll latch onto any lie and any line of bullshit he can just like he did in the Mike Brown case.

Sledog

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

HHusky said:

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

You are talking nonsense. This is about removing a. President moron. So you’re ok with not knowing the accuser that has no direct evidence about this.....got it..

You have taken some pretty idiotic positions in the past like the Gentle Giant had his Hands up and was murdered but this may take the cake. You are a leftist moron.😂😂😂

Can you point me to anybody who is arguing the whistleblower complaint it’s is admissible evidence in Daddy’s trial?

Not admissible at trial. In a court of law. The Congress.witha bunch of wanna be socialists hell yeah I'm sure they have 50 hookers and Jimmy Hoffa lined up too.

DJDuck

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of ....................and think this Is grounds for impeachment.

Also if he is impeached there WILL be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence” WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

HHusky

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

SFGbob

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

HHusky said:

The hearsay whine is for morons. Hearsay is often useful and is investigated every day. It is used to identify who the witnesses are, among other things.

You are talking nonsense. This is about removing a. President moron. So you’re ok with not knowing the accuser that has no direct evidence about this.....got it..

You have taken some pretty idiotic positions in the past like the Gentle Giant had his Hands up and was murdered but this may take the cake. You are a leftist moron.😂😂😂

Can you point me to anybody who is arguing the whistleblower complaint it’s is admissible evidence in Daddy’s trial?

I can point to you someone who lied and claimed the Complaint would reveal a quid pro quo and Trump threatening and coercing Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden even if that dirt is "manufactured" and that's you O'Keefed. I can also point to someone who thought it was a HUGE scandal for the the White House to store a classified document on a classified server.

Again that was you dumbfuck.

Sledog

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

HHusky

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

Boy I’d be pretty insulted if I was arguing that the whistleblower was a witness and that the complaint was evidence. In light of the fact I just said the opposite, one has to wonder how fucking stupid you actually are.

Sledog

HHusky said:

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

Boy I’d be pretty insulted if I was arguing that the whistleblower was a witness and that the complaint was evidence. In light of the fact I just said the opposite, one has to wonder how fucking stupid you actually are.

You are sorry. This whole thing is a set up. The convenient change in reporting requirements and the knows nothing first hand complaint. Dems went with impeachment immediately before having details. But of course they already knew the content because they made it up themselves.

2001400ex

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

I'm watching Matlock right now. Dick.

2001400ex

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

Boy I’d be pretty insulted if I was arguing that the whistleblower was a witness and that the complaint was evidence. In light of the fact I just said the opposite, one has to wonder how fucking stupid you actually are.

You are sorry. This whole thing is a set up. The convenient change in reporting requirements and the knows nothing first hand complaint. Dems went with impeachment immediately before having details. But of course they already knew the content because they made it up themselves.

Stand down order says hello.

Sledog

HHusky said:

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

Boy I’d be pretty insulted if I was arguing that the whistleblower was a witness and that the complaint was evidence. In light of the fact I just said the opposite, one has to wonder how fucking stupid you actually are.

HHusky said:

Sledog said:

HHusky said:

DJDuck said:

That is a stupid question. You know I think your lawyer claim is just a gag. Lawyers aren’t that bright. They sure don’t have the broad liberal education most of the rest of us have.......but you seem too much of a cretin to reach that bar.

I sure can point to many leftist Dems that accept an anonymous accusers iterations of evidence that he is not directly knowledgeable of is grounds for impeachment and if he is impeached there will be a trial moron and that bogus “evidence WILL TRY TO BE INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS

The whistleblower complaint refers to things said by the very witnesses Daddy wants to shoot. The investigators will want to know who those witnesses are and interview them. What the witnesses have to say will not be hearsay. You gals watched just enough Matlock episodes to confuse yourselves.

That doesn't make it admissible in court. It would supply an investigator with possible witnesses nothing more. You are one shitty attorney! Neither the report or whistleblower would matter in a trial. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery has failed you!

Boy I’d be pretty insulted if I was arguing that the whistleblower was a witness and that the complaint was evidence. In light of the fact I just said the opposite, one has to wonder how fucking stupid you actually are.

Only read the first sentence I hate wasting time on your posts.