Jump to content
Nanker

The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

Recommended Posts

Allen Dershowitz? Ken Starr? Those are the guys that defended Jeffery Epstein! No wonder Alex Acosta got a job with Trump. He was owed a favor 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Allen Dershowitz? Ken Starr? Those are the guys that defended Jeffery Epstein! No wonder Alex Acosta got a job with Trump. He was owed a favor 

  All kinds of posts bright and early on a Monday morning.  Trying to get back on board at the cubicle farm?  

  • Haha (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  All kinds of posts bright and early on a Monday morning.  Trying to get back on board at the cubicle farm?  

 

And on a Federal holiday.  He's trying to impress someone.  Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

And on a Federal holiday.  He's trying to impress someone.  Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm.

  He could afford to buy Campbell's Chunky Soup TWICE per week on that kind of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

And on a Federal holiday.  He's trying to impress someone.  Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm.

You are so stupid 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the thread......

 

Impeachment only unfair against Democrats.

 

 

Charles Schumer’s 1999 letter about impeachment comes back to bite him

Original Article

 

On Feb. 11, 1999 — one day before President Bill Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial before the Senate — Sen. Charles Schumer penned a passionate letter, outlining why the process had taken an unfair toll on the nation. He noted that the president believed he had not crossed a line, and praised the large threshold needed to get a conviction in the Senate. He also cheered the American people for opposing impeachment.

 

 

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks! (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B-Man said:

Back to the thread......

 

Impeachment only unfair against Democrats.

 

 

Charles Schumer’s 1999 letter about impeachment comes back to bite him

Original Article

 

On Feb. 11, 1999 — one day before President Bill Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial before the Senate — Sen. Charles Schumer penned a passionate letter, outlining why the process had taken an unfair toll on the nation. He noted that the president believed he had not crossed a line, and praised the large threshold needed to get a conviction in the Senate. He also cheered the American people for opposing impeachment.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

That's different because ... shuddup!

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many Democrats, many Republicans, and Trump's new lawyer Alan Dershowitz had different views on impeachment when Clinton was tried. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Many Democrats, many Republicans, and Trump's new lawyer Alan Dershowitz had different views on impeachment when Clinton was tried. 

 

 

Perhaps it's because Clinton actually committed a crime?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

 

 

Perhaps it's because Clinton actually committed a crime?

 

In 1998 Alan Dershowitz said there does not need to be a crime for impeachment, though. That is Trump's current lawyer who is arguing the opposite today.

 

Perhaps it's because people choose the side that most closely aligns with their personal interests. 

Edited by Gary Busey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

In 1998 Alan Dershowitz said there does not need to be a crime for impeachment, though. That is Trump's current lawyer who is arguing the opposite today.

 

Perhaps it's because people choose the side that most closely aligns with their personal interests. 

 

Well, obviously true on that point, but Dershowitz is nothing more than a hired gun who will say whatever the one paying him wants him to say. It really bothers me, personally, that Dershowitz is even on Trumps law team.

Edited by wnyguy
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan Dershowitz is a brilliant Constitutional scholar. 

This "Impeachment" of Trump is as unconstitutional as a kangaroo court and a lynch-mob. 

image.png.2a1d7a55a3469dcc8007a56ea2f738b6.png

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

 

Well, obviously true on that point, but Dershowitz is nothing more than a hired gun who will say whatever the one paying him wants him to say. It really bothers me, personally, that Dershowitz is even on this Trumps law team.

Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Alan Dershowitz is a brilliant Constitutional scholar. 

This "Impeachment" of Trump is as unconstitutional as a kangaroo court and a lynch-mob. 

image.png.2a1d7a55a3469dcc8007a56ea2f738b6.png

 

 

I agree with you about this impeachment fiasco, but to me the presence of Dershowitz sullies the whole thing for Trump.

Edited by wnyguy
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? 

 

They could have used pretty much any honest Constitutional Scholar -- or any good attorney at all for that matter.

I wouldn't have chosen Dershowitz.  Then again, I'm not in a position to choose.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? 

 

 

Because if I want to rake Clinton and the other politicians and Hollywood elite over the coals regarding their involvement in the whole Jeffrey Epstein crimes I have to include Dershowitz in that. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

 

Well, obviously true on that point, but Dershowitz is nothing more than a hired gun who will say whatever the one paying him wants him to say. It really bothers me, personally, that Dershowitz is even on this Trumps law team.

 

Yeah, how dare an expert on the Constitution take a job and do any work for the President during an impeachment proceeding proscribed by the Constitution!

 

BURN THE WITCH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

 

 

Because if I want to rake Clinton and the other politicians and Hollywood elite over the coals regarding their involvement in the whole Jeffrey Epstein crimes I have to include Dershowitz in that. 

Dershowitz has long been known as a left leaning constitutional scholar. There's little evidence that he was involved in sex crimes. I can't think of a better person to address the constitutionality of this impeachment and the left will have a tough time invalidating his testimony. I posted earlier in either this thread or another that Dershowitz is not actually on Trump's team and his testimony is to be limited. This allows both Trump and Deshowitz to remain at arms length. 

2 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Yeah, how dare an expert on the Constitution take a job and do any work for the President during an impeachment proceeding proscribed by the Constitution!

 

BURN THE WITCH!

I expect that at some point in time that a past democrat comment favorable to Dershowitz will be thrown back at a democrat denigrating Dershowitz during the Senate trial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Dershowitz has long been known as a left leaning constitutional scholar. There's little evidence that he was involved in sex crimes. I can't think of a better person to address the constitutionality of this impeachment and the left will have a tough time invalidating his testimony. I posted earlier in either this thread or another that Dershowitz is not actually on Trump's team and his testimony is to be limited. This allows both Trump and Deshowitz to remain at arms length. 

 

Dershowitz has been directly accused of participating in sex with an underage girl by the victim herself, if I remember correctly. Now Dershowitz may be a Constitutional Law genius but his presence in this sham of an impeachment trial tarnishes it even more. If I was Trump I would have told my advisors to get anyone else to address this situation other than Alan Dershowitz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Clinton attack machine has trained you well. Ignore the message and attack the messenger!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

Well, the Clinton attack machine has trained you well. Ignore the message and attack the messenger!

 

 

LOL Not even close. The guy has been accused of raping an underage child, not proven, but accused nonetheless. Trump should have steered clear of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...