Jump to content

The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump


Nanker

Recommended Posts

Just now, Gary Busey said:

 

They requested witnesses before but don't want to now. How is it too late if the Republicans make the rules? I wish I had some of Bob's medical. 

You obviously haven't been paying attention... Opening arguments, questions, then debate, and only then is there a decision made on calling witnesses. All of Schumer et all bluster is only that... bull####

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gary Busey said:

 

They requested witnesses before but don't want to now. How is it too late if the Republicans make the rules? I wish I had some of Bob's medical. 

If they were allowed to call witnesses, this sham of an impeachment might not be happening. Hey, don't let the truth interrupt a rail roading of the President. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cinga said:

You obviously haven't been paying attention... Opening arguments, questions, then debate, and only then is there a decision made on calling witnesses. All of Schumer et all bluster is only that... bull####

 

He's paid attention. He just lacks the cognitive ability to be able to understand it. Because he's a deeply stupid person.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cinga said:

You obviously haven't been paying attention... Opening arguments, questions, then debate, and only then is there a decision made on calling witnesses. All of Schumer et all bluster is only that... bull####

it's all about playing to the cameras.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Bring those requested witnesses in now then, Elise. 

Yeah, no.  What's good for the goose is good for the democrats.  

8 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Please stop with the personal insults. It's against the TOS.

Right, it is better to just say Gary...go ***** yourself.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not because we have different political beliefs :lol: 

 

Because you've spent YEARS doing nothing but wasting space down here, insulting people needlessly, and showing -- beyond any doubt -- that you are deeply stupid. That's why we tell you to go ***** yourself, Gary. 

 

You've earned it. Every bit of it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Not because we have different political beliefs :lol: 

 

Because you've spent YEARS doing nothing but wasting space down here, insulting people needlessly, and showing -- beyond any doubt -- that you are deeply stupid. That's why we tell you to go ***** yourself, Gary. 

 

You've earned it. Every bit of it. 

 

Do you also speak for your mother, or just for @CoudyBills?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Because we have a difference in political beliefs? I figured you were better than most of the lot here... nope.

Difference in political beliefs, do we?  I dont know.  What I do know is you either can't or won't recognize that an even playing field is needed in this situation.  

2 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Do you also speak for your mother, or just for @CoudyBills?

Well...not cool man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

What I do know is you either can't or won't recognize that an even playing field is needed in this situation.  

 

So I should go ***** myself?

 

The way I see it is that...

 

1. Democrats and Republicans both call witnesses.

 

2. Republicans exonerate Trump without calling a single witness.

 

Neither of these options even the playing field, though. So what is your suggestion?

Edited by Gary Busey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

So I should go ***** myself?

 

The way I see it is that...

 

1. Democrats and Republicans both call witnesses.

 

2. Republicans exonerate Trump without calling a single witness.

 

Neither of these options even the playing field, though. So what is your suggestion?

It's already been set.  No witness, so no witnesses.  Should have been witnesses from both sides in the house.   Did I offend you earlier?  Surely you know comments on this board are mainly said in jest, no?  Now if you'll excuse me I need to get busy taking my billions.  

Edited by CoudyBills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Cinga said:

You obviously haven't been paying attention... Opening arguments, questions, then debate, and only then is there a decision made on calling witnesses. All of Schumer et all bluster is only that... bull####

 

See what @Cinga so eloquently said above. It hasn't been set yet.

 

2 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

It's already been set.  No witness, so no witnesses.  

 

You say an even playing field is needed. How does that happen? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

So I should go ***** myself?

 

The way I see it is that...

 

1. Democrats and Republicans both call witnesses.

 

2. Republicans exonerate Trump without calling a single witness.

 

Neither of these options even the playing field, though. So what is your suggestion?

 

Yeah, right...

Remember that Minority Hearing Day that the Rules in the House required?  You know, the one Nadler completely ignored over notices, letters, and motions demanding them?  I remember it never happened. And that was just the icing on the cake.  For Democrats to be disingenuous enough to call for more Democrat witnesses and call the rejection of that "unfair" is utter B.S. and it shows that (A) they can't look far enough into the future to see that the wheel comes around, or (B) they're not honest. 

 

https://republicans-judiciary.house.gov/press-release/collins-to-nadler-minority-hearing-day-must-come-before-articles-of-impeachment/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

See what @Cinga so eloquently said above. It hasn't been set yet.

 

 

You say an even playing field is needed. How does that happen? 

There isn't one.  That's the point.  One side was not permitted to call fact witnesses during the lower house proceedings because the object was to get impeachment over the finish line.  There was no fair trial.  Therefore, the Senate should do the same thing.  It's partisan BS.  If you make a ***** sandwich then prepare to take a bite of a ***** sandwich.  There is no fixing this mess.  This was created to put some skid marks on the president's record.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

There isn't one.  That's the point.  One side was not permitted to call fact witnesses during the lower house proceedings because the object was to get impeachment over the finish line.  There was no fair trial.  Therefore, the Senate should do the same thing.  It's partisan BS.  If you make a ***** sandwich then prepare to take a bite of a ***** sandwich.  There is no fixing this mess.  This was created to put some skid marks on the president's record.  

 

What happened in the House wasn't a trial.

 

The trial is the Senate's job.

 

If Republicans want to call witnesses now, they can go right ahead. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jrober38 said:

 

What happened in the House wasn't a trial.

 

The trial is the Senate's job.

 

If Republicans want to call witnesses now, they can go right ahead. 

 

What happened in the House was a farce. It was nonsense, partisan, and completely without merit. 

 

The Senate will smash it. Per its mandate. And there's nothing Schumer or Schiff can do about it but whinge.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

There isn't one.  That's the point.  One side was not permitted to call fact witnesses during the lower house proceedings because the object was to get impeachment over the finish line.  There was no fair trial.  Therefore, the Senate should do the same thing.  It's partisan BS.  If you make a ***** sandwich then prepare to take a bite of a ***** sandwich.  There is no fixing this mess.  This was created to put some skid marks on the president's record.  

 

The minority was also permitted to call fact witnesses and a couple of their witnesses did testify.

 

It also wasn't a trial. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gary Busey said:

 

The minority was also permitted to call fact witnesses and a couple of their witnesses did testify.

 

It also wasn't a trial. 

 

 

 

False. Again. Proving how little you actually understand. The minority was NOT permitted to call any of its own witnesses. They were forced to call witnesses from a list approved by Schiff. 

 

***** off with that misinformation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

False. Again. Proving how little you actually understand. The minority was NOT permitted to call any of its own witnesses. They were forced to call witnesses from a list approved by Schiff. 

 

***** off with that misinformation. 

 

Who forced them to call a witness from Schiff's list? Nobody forced them - it was a choice the minority made. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Who forced them to call a witness from Schiff's list? Nobody forced them - it was a choice the minority made. 

of course, the key portion is, 'from Schiff's list...'. they were denied every single witness they wanted to call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...