Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!
Someone's mad today. It seems like they probably should have had a fairly airtight case before leaving the House. I mean, that's what they did with Nixon. Why the need for new witnesses in the Senate?
There was already plenty of evidence of the President's guilt. Hell. Much of it played out in public.
It's okay though. It's probably better for his opponents that the facts roll out like a hand of cards. In a few months or years, you'll all be "adjusting" your positions on this and it will be impossible to find anyone who will admit to defending Daddy.
You gotta love Murkowski's argument. She admits there is no way the GOP will give the President's wrongdoing a fair trial so fuck it, why bother calling witnesses. At least she's honest that there is no act the President could undertake at this point that the GOP won't coverup for him.
Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.
Are you calling this Republican senator a liar?
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., announced Thursday night he will vote against calling witnesses to the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump. “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” Alexander said, adding that the president’s actions were the kind that “undermines the principle of equal justice under the law.”
“But,” he added, “the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”
"The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday,” Alexander said.
The whole thing was a ridiculous abuse of the impeachment process by the dems. Exactly what the founders feared. This is election meddling as well.
I want to see the secret 18th witness transcript. Shitt should not be able to withhold evidence. Especially when it shows he knew the whistle blower and set up the whole thing.
The whole thing was a ridiculous abuse of the impeachment process by the dems. Exactly what the founders feared. This is election meddling as well.
I want to see the secret 18th witness transcript. Shitt should not be able to withhold evidence. Especially when it shows he knew the whistle blower and set up the whole thing.
Trump did it. He could literally shoot someone in the street and you still wouldn't remove him from office.
I feel that's more what the founders feared. But you do you.
Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
You're such a faggot. You sound like some little girl whore dipshit. DADDY
Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
You're such a faggot. You sound like some little girl whore dipshit. DADDY
Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!
Someone's mad today. It seems like they probably should have had a fairly airtight case before leaving the House. I mean, that's what they did with Nixon. Why the need for new witnesses in the Senate?
There was already plenty of evidence of the President's guilt. Hell. Much of it played out in public.
It's okay though. It's probably better for his opponents that the facts roll out like a hand of cards. In a few months or years, you'll all be "adjusting" your positions on this and it will be impossible to find anyone who will admit to defending Daddy.
Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.
So we can't find out the details of Daddy's abuses until we determine that everyone asking for the truth has only pure motives. (The Constitution as "living, breathing document", I guess.)
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!
Someone's mad today. It seems like they probably should have had a fairly airtight case before leaving the House. I mean, that's what they did with Nixon. Why the need for new witnesses in the Senate?
There was already plenty of evidence of the President's guilt. Hell. Much of it played out in public.
It's okay though. It's probably better for his opponents that the facts roll out like a hand of cards. In a few months or years, you'll all be "adjusting" your positions on this and it will be impossible to find anyone who will admit to defending Daddy.
which is it?
Whichever one supports what he is saying at that particular moment. When you're an expert at talking out of both sides of your mouth it's always good to give yourself options.
They have spent three years trying to impeach Trump and still the leftards can't cite a crime that he has committed. They just say that there is all this proof and then still decline to cite the crime. Definitely the low information leftard politicians playing to the low information base that they have. The Hondo bros love themselves some Nadler and the Schiffster. Leftards lie and love to be lied to.
Comments
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., announced Thursday night he will vote against calling witnesses to the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump. “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” Alexander said, adding that the president’s actions were the kind that “undermines the principle of equal justice under the law.”
“But,” he added, “the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”
"The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday,” Alexander said.
I want to see the secret 18th witness transcript. Shitt should not be able to withhold evidence. Especially when it shows he knew the whistle blower and set up the whole thing.
I feel that's more what the founders feared. But you do you.
dayweekmonthyear4 years for the Democrats man.