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

Whistleblower update

1235

Comments

  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 38,559 Standard Supporter
    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 115,413 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    RaceBannon said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 38,559 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    RaceBannon said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 115,413 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    RaceBannon said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    RaceBannon said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    2001400ex said:

    GrundleStiltzkin 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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter