- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: TRUMP FULLY ACQUITTED
Posted on 1/24/20 at 10:32 pm to cajunangelle
Posted on 1/24/20 at 10:32 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
“I’m not going to be requesting any additional witnesses, especially when they say the evidence is overwhelming and the facts are undisputed,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “In the world I've grew up in, that means there's no need for additional witnesses.”
This has been my number one argument.
Dems say, well new evidence blah, blah, blah. BS, they are asking for witnesses they originally had discussed bringing in during their sham hearings. They chose either not to send a "subpoena", did not ask a court, or even withdrew their requests in courts to force cooperation.
They live and die by the articles of impeachment, and whatever evidence and testimony they submitted with them. All the blabbering is just grandstanding, and lying.
The dems know they have nothing to support a constitutionally proper impeachment of the President.
This post was edited on 1/24/20 at 10:39 pm
2
Posted on 1/24/20 at 10:35 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
They chose either not to send a subpoena
They chose to not have a formal inquiry through the Judiciary Committee so they had no subpeona's. Not legal ones anyway.
Posted on 1/24/20 at 10:37 pm to BuckyCheese
Right to you and I we know this. I'm referring to what they claimed they were. I should have put it in quotations.
This post was edited on 1/24/20 at 10:38 pm
Posted on 1/24/20 at 11:08 pm to BuckyCheese
I’m probably completely wrong in this thought (and it isn’t mine originally either) but why wouldn’t the President want witnesses? He put together this great legal team, for what? A quick dismissal? I’d hardly think so. Trump wants his team to go in there, and legally bring evidence into the record of terrible shite the DNC has done. He wants his team to lay out the case as to why little Biden should show. He wants to keep Democrat senators tied up in this foolishness their own party ate, and keep them off the campaign trail. He isn’t going to be impeached, so why not continue with the “ridiculous bullshite” the dems played, and turn the tables.
Posted on 1/24/20 at 11:16 pm to Junky
I think Trump wants that, but the GOP doesn't as I'm betting a number of it's caucus would be caught up in it.
See Ms. Lindsey.
See Ms. Lindsey.
Posted on 1/24/20 at 11:35 pm to Junky
Because the trial would go on for 6-8 weeks. Everyone had enough with muh Russia. Enough is enough already. Those that think this trial will magically defeat all of the dirty rat enemies live in fairy tale land of fantasy.
ETA: the democrats want a long drawn out trial so that the dirty work can be done for them. Subpoenaing witnesses that they didn't do because they didn't have the legal impeachment vote to subpoena. The dems would have their guys plead the fifth and we would have to listen to Bolton say he has better foreign policy.
Meanwhile Trump is under an impeachment cloud longer. The democrats will impeach him again. Let them do the work again in a re-boot to completely destroy their party and lose seats.
ETA: the democrats want a long drawn out trial so that the dirty work can be done for them. Subpoenaing witnesses that they didn't do because they didn't have the legal impeachment vote to subpoena. The dems would have their guys plead the fifth and we would have to listen to Bolton say he has better foreign policy.
Meanwhile Trump is under an impeachment cloud longer. The democrats will impeach him again. Let them do the work again in a re-boot to completely destroy their party and lose seats.
This post was edited on 1/24/20 at 11:44 pm
Posted on 1/25/20 at 5:55 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Justice Roberts is going to screw the Repubs. Now that the Repubs have control of the trial, watch how he interjects himself.
If you think any different, remember and keep in mind how he's conducted himself in the past.
He's not a constitutionalist.
If you think any different, remember and keep in mind how he's conducted himself in the past.
He's not a constitutionalist.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 5:59 am to hogcard1964
Keep in mind, any ruling or order he were to pass down can itself be overruled by a simple majority.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 6:37 am to davyjones
If witnesses were to be called...I'd fully expect the Senate majority to hand pick what witnesses could testify and who couldn't....much like the majority in the house did.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 6:56 am to rumproast
..and that's when Roberts will interject himself.
If the Repubs show any hint of bias or start to have an advantage, Roberts will rewrite law. It's what he does.
If the Repubs show any hint of bias or start to have an advantage, Roberts will rewrite law. It's what he does.
This post was edited on 1/25/20 at 7:09 am
Posted on 1/25/20 at 7:45 am to hogcard1964
hogcard1964
I could be wrong but, I think in this case you are wrong. He cannot interject himself unless asked to by the Senate.
quote:
ustice Roberts is going to screw the Repubs. Now that the Repubs have control of the trial, watch how he interjects himself. If you think any different, remember and keep in mind how he's conducted himself in the past.
I could be wrong but, I think in this case you are wrong. He cannot interject himself unless asked to by the Senate.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 7:55 am to dafif
Watch
Posted on 1/25/20 at 8:25 am to hogcard1964
It will be the biggest tell of the deep state if Roberts interjects himself in any way. This particular board, anyway, will now have proof of what has been discussed on here repeatedly.
Personally, I would be shocked and saddened by the corruption but who knows. I think the Senate would have to vote to allow witnesses. Then Trump objects based on privilege, then Roberts rules on the objection and then the Senate would vote again to allow.
This would show that the actual fix is in. I cannot believe the Senators want Trump gone but rather, wait out his next four years and build on the momentum.
Personally, I would be shocked and saddened by the corruption but who knows. I think the Senate would have to vote to allow witnesses. Then Trump objects based on privilege, then Roberts rules on the objection and then the Senate would vote again to allow.
This would show that the actual fix is in. I cannot believe the Senators want Trump gone but rather, wait out his next four years and build on the momentum.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:10 am to dafif
R's simply need to point out the outright lies from Schitty's presentation and stress the critical point that Trump has every right to investigate corruption in foreign countries involving American politicians/citizens.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:11 am to Bass Tiger
White House counsel up now
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:14 am to Lynyrd
I’ve stayed out of this so much that I didn’t realize Trump’s team was starting this morning.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:15 am to Roll Tide Ravens
Just for 2-3 hours today then resume on Monday
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:15 am to Lynyrd
Cipollone putting the whole transcript out there and in context......it's just too easy destroying the Dims 24 hours of BS.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:19 am to Bass Tiger
Cipollone just nailed the Dims....saying the Dims are the ones trying to influence the 2020 GE just like the Swamp Dims with the Mueller Sham SC during the midterms.
Posted on 1/25/20 at 9:20 am to Bass Tiger
Going right after Schifty shite! Gut his arse!
Page 25 of 214
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News