Maybe if he would've complied to prove his innocence. Why would you order witnesses not to testify unless you knew you had done something wrong? At the very least, he obstructed Congress. At worst, he is a traitor. Trading downvotes for facts btw so bring it on boys!

7 ...

Report Post

Posted by roadGator

Member since Feb 2009

140719 posts

Posted on 2/11/20 at 1:22 pm to DimTigerDontHate

quote:
At the very least, he obstructed Congress.

Facts?

Lol

Downvotes?

Hell yeah. Deranged progs get plenty.

prove his innocence?

You are a pedo and raped 1283 sheep and donkeys in the past 10 years. Prove your innocence. Dumbass commie.

You people are insane.

This post was edited on 2/11/20 at 1:26 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by BuckyCheese

Member since Jan 2015

49783 posts

Posted on 2/11/20 at 1:24 pm to DimTigerDontHate

quote:
Maybe if he would've complied to prove his innocence.

In our justice system the accused doesn't prove their innocence.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by AggieHank86

Texas

Member since Sep 2013

42941 posts

Posted on 2/11/20 at 2:52 pm to DimTigerDontHate

quote:
Maybe if he would've complied to prove his innocence. Why would you order witnesses not to testify unless you knew you had done something wrong? At the very least, he obstructed Congress. At worst, he is a traitor. Trading downvotes for facts btw so bring it on boys!

I disagree

Even if the analogy of impeachment to criminal prosecution is an imperfect one, we have a tradition in this country that the person making an accusation must carry the burden of proof.

This post was edited on 2/11/20 at 2:55 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Muleriderhog

NYC

Member since Jan 2015

3116 posts

Posted on 2/11/20 at 6:03 pm to DimTigerDontHate

quote:
Maybe if he would've complied to prove his innocence. Why would you order witnesses not to testify unless you knew you had done something wrong? At the very least, he obstructed Congress. At worst, he is a traitor. Trading downvotes for facts btw so bring it on boys!

Wow, you really are stupid. He does not have to comply with the subpoenas even though he probably should have but that’s a moot point. If the house really wanted to hear witnesses they should have taken it to court as opposed to retracting the subpoenas. You don’t understand how this shite works and you need to shut up because you are making yourself look very idiotic.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by s2

Southdowns

Member since Sep 2016

5574 posts

Posted on 2/11/20 at 6:22 pm to DimTigerDontHate

quote:
if he would've complied to prove his innocence

a socialist hack with no knowledge of the law.

surely you have heard the term "innocent until proven guilty."
means only that a defendant has a presumption of innocence.
which is why the outcome of a trial is "not guilty." instead of "innocent."

Trump was not allowed any type of defense in the house chamber while the clown act was going on.