Senate impeachment trial game thread
Comments
-
Nadler will eat these alsoPurpleThrobber said:PurpleThrobber said:
More cricketsPurpleThrobber said:
I can only assume you attended the Todd Graham School of Law because your reading comprehension sucks.HHusky said:
You can watch the replay. I’m sure it’s on the google machine. It was a little over two hours.PurpleThrobber said:
cricketsPurpleThrobber said:
From what puppy mill law school did you allegedly graduate?HHusky said:
It was spelled out very well this morning. The whole thing. You gals don’t seem to have any facts to contradict it, and curiously, you don’t seem to want the witnesses to come in and exonerate Daddy.RaceBannon said:I thought that no one would be stupid enough to fall for the democrats obvious play to not have any evidence of any crime but just hold their breath and cry for mommy until the bad man leaves
Then @HHusky showed people really are that stupid
Its a simple case. Allegedly. Spell it out and convict
Or shut the fuck up
No. Seriously - they don't teach your (lack of) logic or knowledge of legal process at any decent law school out there.
But go ahead a paraphrase what you think was 'spelled out'. In your own words.
But go ahead and paraphrase what you think was 'spelled out'. In your own words.
-
Destroying Shitf and the other commies is so easy.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/21/jay-sekulow-demolishes-adam-schiff-on-executive-privilege-by-quoting-him/ -
Southerndawg said:
Nadler ate it.Sledog said:
-
The left loves Shitf. They love their good liars. You would have thought that after the lies he repeatedly told on national television about having proof of Trumps collusion would have shamed him and the party from EVER having that POS liar front and center again. Instead, the left puts this most prolific liar as not only the lead in the House impeachment, where he completely disregarded any fairness, they made him a manager in the Senate impeachment trial.Sledog said:Destroying Shitf and the other commies is so easy.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/21/jay-sekulow-demolishes-adam-schiff-on-executive-privilege-by-quoting-him/
There isn't one rat that has an ounce of integrity or honesty. -
Bendintheriver said:
I am a giant pussy.Sledog said:Destroying Shitf and the other commies is so easy.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/21/jay-sekulow-demolishes-adam-schiff-on-executive-privilege-by-quoting-him/ -
So you're the sloppy, lazy attorney who goes to trial without evidence in hand to prove your case. You lose a lot don't you?HHusky said:
Madam, you and I know the audience is the electorate. You already have a coordinated acquittal in hand. But we all know Bolton’s testimony will be more difficult to simply disregard on the election trail. You don’t want any more evidence to come out.RaceBannon said:
This time we really fucking mean itHHusky said:
There’s plenty of evidence to convict now, and no contrary evidence in fact. But that’s not a legal excuse for wrongly withholding further documents and witnesses.SFGbob said:
Schiff and the Rats have been telling us they already had overwhelming evidence to convict Trump. Now you're crying because Trump hasn't given them the evidence. If Trump is in violation of the law the Rats were free to take him to court. They didn't do it, so shut the fuck up.HHusky said:
Daddy was legally required to turn over non-privileged materials and withhold only what he reasonably claimed was privileged. A blanket privilege as to everything your opponent wants to know is not a thing. Just so you know, you won’t be able to avoid producing your financial records when your wife’s attorney asks for them. There is no “I don’t wanna!” privilege.SFGbob said:
White flag.HHusky said:
Calm down, blob. We all know the “job” that’s expected of the GOP Senators is to acquit. That’s in the bag. Only the coverup is in question.SFGbob said:
Then the House Rats should have challenged Trump in court. Go fuck yourself O'Keefed. Don't blame Trump because your team was either too lazy or in too much of a rush to make their case. It's not the Senate's job to clean up their mess.HHusky said:
There's no absolute Presidential privilege not to provide information to Congress, blob. And we both know that you're parroting one of the two diametrically opposed positions offered by Daddy's administration on this point.SFGbob said:
The Rats were/are free to go to court and challenge the President's claims of privilege. They chose not to. Don't blame Trump blame the Rats you fucking hack. Why should Trump surrender his rights and due process?HHusky said:
There are no trial settings in which the defendant can successfully block the testimony of material witnesses. Isn’t civics still required to graduate high school?UW_Doog_Bot said:
HH thinks that witnesses just need to testify to their innocence and that the prosecution isn't required to present a case. Even @creepycoug makes a better pretend lawyer.HHusky said:
Partisan hack? I just proposed Joe and Daddy testify. Read gooder!RaceBannon said:
Trump cleared it up when he released the transcript.HHusky said:
I just assumed there was an innocent explanation and that it had nothing to do with the fact Joe had become his chief competitor for the presidency. I thought Daddy would want to clear things up. People can be so cynical about his motives, you know.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's not your daddy's responsibility to testify to his innocence. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Did you not learn that at some point in law school?HHusky said:
Just thought Daddy would want to explain the timing of his sudden interest in a statement Joe made three years prior.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Why would the GOP feel required to do that? Because Schiff wants it? The House Dems played partisan politics and are now crying about partisan politics. It's Hard.HHusky said:
Sure. And let’s have Daddy testify as well.UW_Doog_Bot said:I'd be perfectly happy if good old Boy Joe and his son Hunter were subpoenaed to testify in the Senate about Burisma like they would have been if the Republicans were allowed to play by the same rules in the House as the Dems were.
This is why you're a partisan shill.
He was making sure the aid wasn't going down a rat hole and that the corrupt Ukraine government that Obama and Biden used as an ATM was really any different. They got the aid. The military industrial complex got paid. More weapons of death are on the ground
Biden is crooked. Running for president doesn't give you a pass. Just partisan hacks like you have no interest in your frontrunner being a piece of shit Chi Com asset
Can you imagine having this Kunt as your attorney? Do you advise your client to turn over information and give statements to opposing counsel they aren't legally required to do so O'Keefed? Do you allow opposing counsel to review all of your client's financial statements and bank records and personal information. Surely you never make any claims of privilege do you not O'Keefed. You just freely turn everything over without even being asked, right Kunt?
I’m not crying at all. But I know you’re worried that Daddy’s conduct won’t be deniable once Bolton and Mulvaney are under oath. You gals are desperate for a coverup.
Now who is desperate?
Cause you're the type who files lousy, court-clogging nuisance lawsuits to shake down businesses, don't you? Fucking Turd. -
This sounds divisive. Collins is one of the fabled moderates that Team TDS needs to @Swaye . Good effort, good job
https://foxnews.com/politics/stunned-sen-collins-objected-to-nadlers-impeachment-accusation-in-note-to-roberts
One House Democrat's accusation amid the Trump impeachment trial “stunned” even the most moderate of Senate Republicans, reportedly prompting GOP Sen. Susan Collins to write a note to Chief Justice John Roberts about decorum on the floor of the upper chamber.
Collins, R-Maine, is the latest to signal her concerns, after impeachment manager Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., asserted earlier this week that GOP senators were engaged in a “cover-up.”
Collins told Politico she was “stunned” by Nadler’s comments, and confirmed to the outlet that she wrote a note that made its way to Roberts after a tense back and forth between Nadler and White House Chief Counsel Pat Cipollone.
“It reminded me that if we were in a normal debate in the Senate, that the rule would be invoked to strike the words of the senator for impugning another senator,” she told Politico. “So, I did write a note raising the issue of whether there’d been a violation of the rules.”
Collins said she gave the note to the secretary for the majority, Laura Dove, and “shortly thereafter, the chief justice did admonish both sides. And I was glad that he did.”
CNN first reported that Collins wrote a note for the chief justice.
Justice Roberts with the everyone does it card. What a piece of shit. I haven't forgotten about Obamacare -
For anyone with a memory, how hilarious it is that when Roberts was first put on the Court, the Dems were guaranteeing he'd overturn Roe, he'd be terrible on civil rights, race matters, etc., and instead the guy's been steady as a fucking rock. Libs and lefties are fucking hysterical.
-
Sounds like a whining woman.RaceBannon said:This sounds divisive. Collins is one of the fabled moderates that Team TDS needs to @Swaye . Good effort, good job
https://foxnews.com/politics/stunned-sen-collins-objected-to-nadlers-impeachment-accusation-in-note-to-roberts
One House Democrat's accusation amid the Trump impeachment trial “stunned” even the most moderate of Senate Republicans, reportedly prompting GOP Sen. Susan Collins to write a note to Chief Justice John Roberts about decorum on the floor of the upper chamber.
Collins, R-Maine, is the latest to signal her concerns, after impeachment manager Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., asserted earlier this week that GOP senators were engaged in a “cover-up.”
Collins told Politico she was “stunned” by Nadler’s comments, and confirmed to the outlet that she wrote a note that made its way to Roberts after a tense back and forth between Nadler and White House Chief Counsel Pat Cipollone.
“It reminded me that if we were in a normal debate in the Senate, that the rule would be invoked to strike the words of the senator for impugning another senator,” she told Politico. “So, I did write a note raising the issue of whether there’d been a violation of the rules.”
Collins said she gave the note to the secretary for the majority, Laura Dove, and “shortly thereafter, the chief justice did admonish both sides. And I was glad that he did.”
CNN first reported that Collins wrote a note for the chief justice.
Justice Roberts with the everyone does it card. What a piece of shit. I haven't forgotten about Obamacare -
Sounds redundantPitchfork51 said:
Sounds like a whining woman.RaceBannon said:This sounds divisive. Collins is one of the fabled moderates that Team TDS needs to @Swaye . Good effort, good job
https://foxnews.com/politics/stunned-sen-collins-objected-to-nadlers-impeachment-accusation-in-note-to-roberts
One House Democrat's accusation amid the Trump impeachment trial “stunned” even the most moderate of Senate Republicans, reportedly prompting GOP Sen. Susan Collins to write a note to Chief Justice John Roberts about decorum on the floor of the upper chamber.
Collins, R-Maine, is the latest to signal her concerns, after impeachment manager Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., asserted earlier this week that GOP senators were engaged in a “cover-up.”
Collins told Politico she was “stunned” by Nadler’s comments, and confirmed to the outlet that she wrote a note that made its way to Roberts after a tense back and forth between Nadler and White House Chief Counsel Pat Cipollone.
“It reminded me that if we were in a normal debate in the Senate, that the rule would be invoked to strike the words of the senator for impugning another senator,” she told Politico. “So, I did write a note raising the issue of whether there’d been a violation of the rules.”
Collins said she gave the note to the secretary for the majority, Laura Dove, and “shortly thereafter, the chief justice did admonish both sides. And I was glad that he did.”
CNN first reported that Collins wrote a note for the chief justice.
Justice Roberts with the everyone does it card. What a piece of shit. I haven't forgotten about Obamacare -
-
Schiff is a truly pathetic faggot
-
Trump’s legal team is on the floor methodically shredding the impeachment case. Turns out, things aren’t so slam dunk for House Democrats when the President gets a chance to respond.
— Mark Meadows (@RepMarkMeadows) January 25, 2020
Imagine that. -
And the crickets are chirping louder.
-
-
-
In the Courts, the DA needs to be convinced that there is a case against a defendant that will result in a conviction by evidence presented to the jury before prosecution begins. In what Kangaroo court would a DA make a decision to prosecute this case?HHusky said:
There are no trial settings in which the defendant can successfully block the testimony of material witnesses. Isn’t civics still required to graduate high school?UW_Doog_Bot said:
HH thinks that witnesses just need to testify to their innocence and that the prosecution isn't required to present a case. Even @creepycoug makes a better pretend lawyer.HHusky said:
Partisan hack? I just proposed Joe and Daddy testify. Read gooder!RaceBannon said:
Trump cleared it up when he released the transcript.HHusky said:
I just assumed there was an innocent explanation and that it had nothing to do with the fact Joe had become his chief competitor for the presidency. I thought Daddy would want to clear things up. People can be so cynical about his motives, you know.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's not your daddy's responsibility to testify to his innocence. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Did you not learn that at some point in law school?HHusky said:
Just thought Daddy would want to explain the timing of his sudden interest in a statement Joe made three years prior.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Why would the GOP feel required to do that? Because Schiff wants it? The House Dems played partisan politics and are now crying about partisan politics. It's Hard.HHusky said:
Sure. And let’s have Daddy testify as well.UW_Doog_Bot said:I'd be perfectly happy if good old Boy Joe and his son Hunter were subpoenaed to testify in the Senate about Burisma like they would have been if the Republicans were allowed to play by the same rules in the House as the Dems were.
This is why you're a partisan shill.
He was making sure the aid wasn't going down a rat hole and that the corrupt Ukraine government that Obama and Biden used as an ATM was really any different. They got the aid. The military industrial complex got paid. More weapons of death are on the ground
Biden is crooked. Running for president doesn't give you a pass. Just partisan hacks like you have no interest in your frontrunner being a piece of shit Chi Com asset -
No crime. Constitution says high crimes and misdemeanors. Treason etc. No crime has been alleged. None. Just vague bullshit. Nothing prosecutable. Time to and the sham. We'll hear all the lefties testify at their criminal trials when Durham files.
-
I'm hearing that despite Hillary breaking the law with her emails no DA would bring chargessalemcoog said:
In the Courts, the DA needs to be convinced that there is a case against a defendant that will result in a conviction by evidence presented to the jury before prosecution begins. In what Kangaroo court would a DA make a decision to prosecute this case?HHusky said:
There are no trial settings in which the defendant can successfully block the testimony of material witnesses. Isn’t civics still required to graduate high school?UW_Doog_Bot said:
HH thinks that witnesses just need to testify to their innocence and that the prosecution isn't required to present a case. Even @creepycoug makes a better pretend lawyer.HHusky said:
Partisan hack? I just proposed Joe and Daddy testify. Read gooder!RaceBannon said:
Trump cleared it up when he released the transcript.HHusky said:
I just assumed there was an innocent explanation and that it had nothing to do with the fact Joe had become his chief competitor for the presidency. I thought Daddy would want to clear things up. People can be so cynical about his motives, you know.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's not your daddy's responsibility to testify to his innocence. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Did you not learn that at some point in law school?HHusky said:
Just thought Daddy would want to explain the timing of his sudden interest in a statement Joe made three years prior.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Why would the GOP feel required to do that? Because Schiff wants it? The House Dems played partisan politics and are now crying about partisan politics. It's Hard.HHusky said:
Sure. And let’s have Daddy testify as well.UW_Doog_Bot said:I'd be perfectly happy if good old Boy Joe and his son Hunter were subpoenaed to testify in the Senate about Burisma like they would have been if the Republicans were allowed to play by the same rules in the House as the Dems were.
This is why you're a partisan shill.
He was making sure the aid wasn't going down a rat hole and that the corrupt Ukraine government that Obama and Biden used as an ATM was really any different. They got the aid. The military industrial complex got paid. More weapons of death are on the ground
Biden is crooked. Running for president doesn't give you a pass. Just partisan hacks like you have no interest in your frontrunner being a piece of shit Chi Com asset -
I'm tired of hearing about her damn emails!RaceBannon said:
I'm hearing that despite Hillary breaking the law with her emails no DA would bring chargessalemcoog said:
In the Courts, the DA needs to be convinced that there is a case against a defendant that will result in a conviction by evidence presented to the jury before prosecution begins. In what Kangaroo court would a DA make a decision to prosecute this case?HHusky said:
There are no trial settings in which the defendant can successfully block the testimony of material witnesses. Isn’t civics still required to graduate high school?UW_Doog_Bot said:
HH thinks that witnesses just need to testify to their innocence and that the prosecution isn't required to present a case. Even @creepycoug makes a better pretend lawyer.HHusky said:
Partisan hack? I just proposed Joe and Daddy testify. Read gooder!RaceBannon said:
Trump cleared it up when he released the transcript.HHusky said:
I just assumed there was an innocent explanation and that it had nothing to do with the fact Joe had become his chief competitor for the presidency. I thought Daddy would want to clear things up. People can be so cynical about his motives, you know.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's not your daddy's responsibility to testify to his innocence. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Did you not learn that at some point in law school?HHusky said:
Just thought Daddy would want to explain the timing of his sudden interest in a statement Joe made three years prior.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Why would the GOP feel required to do that? Because Schiff wants it? The House Dems played partisan politics and are now crying about partisan politics. It's Hard.HHusky said:
Sure. And let’s have Daddy testify as well.UW_Doog_Bot said:I'd be perfectly happy if good old Boy Joe and his son Hunter were subpoenaed to testify in the Senate about Burisma like they would have been if the Republicans were allowed to play by the same rules in the House as the Dems were.
This is why you're a partisan shill.
He was making sure the aid wasn't going down a rat hole and that the corrupt Ukraine government that Obama and Biden used as an ATM was really any different. They got the aid. The military industrial complex got paid. More weapons of death are on the ground
Biden is crooked. Running for president doesn't give you a pass. Just partisan hacks like you have no interest in your frontrunner being a piece of shit Chi Com asset -
Did we win yet?
-
-
Schiff now attacking the Intelligence agencies
Seems like yesterday they were at the forefront of freedom -
-
And yet Trump has been investigated by political opponents since before he won
Go figure -
Answer- no agency. No investigation. Not debunked. The H and Scott big lie approach
-
This question and answer back and forth is such BS - when a question is asked it is amazing that whoever answers instantly has backing up material, videos, documents that can be shown.
So methinks that last night the WH team and the House prosecutors wrote the questions then gave them to the Senators to present. I have had to laff at many of the answers with the speaker pretending they were caught off guard by the question. Tim to go watch sports... -
-
-
Roberts is running cover again
Rand Paul is going after him on the whistleblower
