Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Whistleblower update

13»

Comments

  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    They had private hearings to corroborate what the whistleblower said. Now it's becoming public. Keep up.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,460 Standard Supporter

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    So you have no idea about article 2 section 4, among thousands of other things. He’s not the complainant.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,693 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,460 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
    Nothing impeachable. Absolutely nothing. But we already knew that.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,693 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
    Trump was exonerated

    Not surprising that you missed it
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
    Nothing impeachable. Absolutely nothing. But we already knew that.
    That remains to be seen.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
    Trump was exonerated

    Not surprising that you missed it
    Lil lyin Race lying as always.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,693 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    It was fun watching a Hondo laying his trap over a couple posts, only to have the snare made of dental floss.

    Except I'm right. And sadly you know it.
    I don't know the evidentiary rules of impeachment proceedings or whatever the fuck phase this is in, and doubt you do either. Between that, Schiff apparently reneging on bringing the blower in to testify, and general principles of American due process, is why I called your trap thin.
    Serious question. If everyone around Trump corroborates the whistleblower. Is the whistleblower testimony relevant?

    Second question, do you believe in whistleblower protections?
    Because he the whistleblower is the complainant. It's all that legal Shit.
    The whistleblower is not the complainant. You need to read the constitution.
    Yes he is. Impeachment isn't by anonymous complaint. HTH
    Have you missed all the relevant testimony? Google is your friend.
    The chick who exonerated Trump? Yeah we all read it

    Case closed
    And you wonder why they call you a simple mind Race.
    Trump was exonerated

    Not surprising that you missed it
    Lil lyin Race lying as always.
    Hondo the pathological liar

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Just shitpost that over every thread. Whatever makes you feel better Race.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,460 Standard Supporter
    I don't know with this kind of damming testimony how can trump escape impeachment?

    “Taylor indicated that he had talked to Tim Morrison … and Tim had indicated he had talked to Gordon, and Gordon told … Tim, and Tim told Bill Taylor that he, Gordon, had talked to the president. … And POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go [on] microphone and say investigations, ­Biden and Clinton.”

    And these are the "star" witnesses!
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    Sledog said:

    I don't know with this kind of damming testimony how can trump escape impeachment?

    “Taylor indicated that he had talked to Tim Morrison … and Tim had indicated he had talked to Gordon, and Gordon told … Tim, and Tim told Bill Taylor that he, Gordon, had talked to the president. … And POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go [on] microphone and say investigations, ­Biden and Clinton.”

    And these are the "star" witnesses!




    Wasn't this the basic plot of Mean Girls?

    Wood, wood, craves it, wood
Sign In or Register to comment.