Home› Tug Tavern

Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

Breaking Murkowski comes out against impeachment witnesses, putting Trump on path to acquittal

DJDuckDJDuck Member Posts: 5,970
5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes
edited January 2020 in Tug Tavern
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/murkowski-comes-out-against-impeachment-witnesses-putting-trump-on-path-to-acquittal
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • Options
    HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 19,162
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Still work to do, ladies.

    You'll need to smear your former hero, John Bolton.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    insinceredawginsinceredawg Member Posts: 5,117
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    insinceredawginsinceredawg Member Posts: 5,117
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    75% of Americans want witnesses in the trial. Why is the GOP afraid of?

    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480336-support-for-witnesses-in-senate-trial-at-75-percent-poll
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    GDSGDS Member Posts: 1,470
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 19,162
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    insinceredawg said:

    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.)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 19,162
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    PostGameOrangeSlices said:

    insinceredawg said:

    Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.

    That was the House's responsibility retard.

    Great goalpost moving as always
    Imagine requiring the President to comply with lawful process! Crazy talk!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,566
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Founders Club
    edited January 2020
    HHusky said:

    PostGameOrangeSlices said:

    insinceredawg said:

    Imagine having a trial and not allowing any witnesses then getting mad when accused of a cover up.

    That was the House's responsibility retard.

    Great goalpost moving as always
    Imagine requiring the President to comply with lawful process! Crazy talk!
    Imagine you saying anything of substance?

    Yeah, I cant imagine it either

    Fucking idiot
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 19,162
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    insinceredawg said:

    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!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 14,252
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    insinceredawg said:

    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?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 19,162
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    insinceredawg said:

    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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 14,252
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    HHusky said:

    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    insinceredawg said:

    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.
    Evidence of what exactly? Do spell it out for us. Quid Pro Quo? oh, wait, no, "abuse of power".
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.