Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Breaking Murkowski comes out against impeachment witnesses, putting Trump on path to acquittal
Comments
-
Imagine requiring the President to comply with lawful process! Crazy talk!PostGameOrangeSlices said:
That was the House's responsibility retard.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Great goalpost moving as always -
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.HHusky said:
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.)UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
-
Imagine you saying anything of substance?HHusky said:
Imagine requiring the President to comply with lawful process! Crazy talk!PostGameOrangeSlices said:
That was the House's responsibility retard.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
Great goalpost moving as always
Yeah, I cant imagine it either
Fucking idiot -
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.HHusky said:
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.)UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
-
H isn't melting down
At all -
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?HHusky said:
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.HHusky said:
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.)UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
-
There was already plenty of evidence of the President's guilt. Hell. Much of it played out in public.UW_Doog_Bot said:
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?HHusky said:
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.HHusky said:
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.)UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
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.
-
Evidence of what exactly? Do spell it out for us. Quid Pro Quo? oh, wait, no, "abuse of power".HHusky said:
There was already plenty of evidence of the President's guilt. Hell. Much of it played out in public.UW_Doog_Bot said:
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?HHusky said:
Yes, the emperor's clothes are very impressive!UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine thinking you had the evidence for impeachment in the first place without actually having any evidence.HHusky said:
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.)UW_Doog_Bot said:
Imagine still believing this is anything but a partisan exercise by the Dems.insinceredawg said:Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
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. -
I was told the case was rock solid
Back when they were all congratulating each other -
What is Bolton going to add anyway? Another third hand account of the big lie. The aid got sent. There was no investigation
Game over
Now, Biden isn't above the law. No one is. Time to investigate
