OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 28, 2020 19:39:33 GMT -5
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 28, 2020 22:42:51 GMT -5
ROTFLMAO! Trump's defense lawyer...... Alan Dershowitz called Trump corrupt in 2016 and said he could be corrupt as President Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who is a member of President Donald Trump's impeachment defense team, said in 2016 that he believed Trump was more corrupt than Hillary Clinton and more likely to continue being corrupt as president. www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/politics/dershowitz-2016-trump-corruption-kfile/index.html
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,603
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 28, 2020 23:36:06 GMT -5
Kellyanne Conway before she went to work for trump: Conway: Trump “Says He's For The Little Guy But He's Actually Built A Lot Of His Businesses On The Backs Of The Little Guy. Conway: Trump Victims Include “Victims Of Trump University, Victims Of Trump In Atlantic City.” Conway: “I Would Like To See” Trump’s Tax Returns “Be Transparent.” Conway Condemned Trump For “Hurl[ing] Personal Insults” And Using “Vulgar” Language That Was “Unfortunate For Children.” Conway: Trump “Can Whine And Complain” By Saying “The System Is Rigged,” But “There’s No Place In Politics For Accusing Folks Of Using Gestapo Tactics.” And more: Here’s How Trump’s New Campaign Manager Attacked Him As A Cable News Pundit
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,603
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 29, 2020 23:20:11 GMT -5
John Roberts blocks Rand Paul's question on whistleblowerSen. Rand Paul's (R-Ky.) attempt to ask about the whistleblower whose report helped spark the impeachment inquiry is running into a roadblock in the form of Chief Justice John Roberts. A source confirmed that Roberts has indicated he would not read a question from Paul regarding the whistleblower at the center of the House impeachment inquiry. The question from Paul is expected to name the individual. Because Roberts is responsible for reading the questions that would put him in the position of publicly outing the person on the Senate floor. Paul indicated to reporters after a closed-door Republican dinner that he was not backing down from trying to ask his question. “It’s still an ongoing process; it may happen tomorrow,” the libertarian-leaning senator told reporters as he headed back to the Senate chamber. John Roberts blocks Rand Paul's question on whistleblower
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Jan 30, 2020 7:20:03 GMT -5
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Jan 30, 2020 9:47:19 GMT -5
With no bi-partisan support to impeach, and bi-partisan not to impeach. I wonder if any of either ones will change their view after what they have seen so far. I seen some good arguments but no evidence.
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Jan 30, 2020 9:57:26 GMT -5
Personally, to just post a article with out any comment on how hey feel about the posted article, kind of leaves me cold...but that's just me. If your post of the above was a answer to my question to u elsewhere..if u feel it's correct or not to call witnesses at the impeachment hearing...uh huh...won't work, sorry...not a answer...but then again, that's me.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,228
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 30, 2020 12:50:39 GMT -5
With no bi-partisan support to impeach, and bi-partisan not to impeach. I wonder if any of either ones will change their view after what they have seen so far. I seen some good arguments but no evidence. you've seen no evidence of obstruction?
that is hard to believe.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,603
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 30, 2020 12:50:59 GMT -5
SATIRE FROM THE BOROWITZ REPORT EL CHAPO OUTRAGED THAT HIS TRIAL INCLUDED WITNESSES
By Andy Borowitz FLORENCE, COLORADO (The Borowitz Report)—The convicted drug lord known as El Chapo said on Thursday that he was “outraged” his 2019 trial had included witnesses. He also revealed that he was demanding a new trial without them. Speaking from ADX Florence, a maximum-security facility in Colorado, the former drug kingpin complained that his trial would have resulted in a speedy acquittal had it not been for the irritating presence of witnesses. “If I had to point to one reason why I was convicted of all of those crimes, it would have to be witnesses,” he said. “Once the decision was made to include witnesses, things really went downhill for me.” El Chapo said that, at the time of his trial, he had been totally unaware that it was possible to have a trial without any witnesses at all. Complete article here: EL CHAPO OUTRAGED THAT HIS TRIAL INCLUDED WITNESSES
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,434
|
Post by thyme4change on Jan 30, 2020 13:07:22 GMT -5
I disagree with the argument that anything the President does to get re-elected is okay. I don't want that to be true for any President, ever, as long as we are a country. I just can't see that as a healthy claim, and as dangerous as it is today, if it get codified, every single President will do anything they want to stay in power. President Chelsea could use it. President AOC could use it. And then, Senators and Congressmen will declare that they can too. And Governors, and city council. We are greenlighting all future election corruption. Just no. thehill.com/homenews/administration/480566-dershowitz-if-president-does-something-to-win-election-its-ok-unless
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,772
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jan 30, 2020 16:12:21 GMT -5
I disagree with the argument that anything the President does to get re-elected is okay. I don't want that to be true for any President, ever, as long as we are a country. I just can't see that as a healthy claim, and as dangerous as it is today, if it get codified, every single President will do anything they want to stay in power. President Chelsea could use it. President AOC could use it. And then, Senators and Congressmen will declare that they can too. And Governors, and city council. We are greenlighting all future election corruption. Just no. thehill.com/homenews/administration/480566-dershowitz-if-president-does-something-to-win-election-its-ok-unlessThe argument that anything the President does to be re-elected is OK is non-Constitutional, impeachable, and slapped down as un-American during Nixon's impeachment trial. If someone really wants MAGA and not go into bad fantasy dreams of good ole England when we had Kings ... its clear that argument is Anti-Patriot and pro why did we ever become America. MO. Some of the arguments are so bad I want to bitch slap them back to the 1600s and they can choose whether to be American or keep a monarch the hard way.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,772
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jan 30, 2020 16:13:22 GMT -5
With no bi-partisan support to impeach, and bi-partisan not to impeach. I wonder if any of either ones will change their view after what they have seen so far. I seen some good arguments but no evidence. you've seen no evidence of obstruction?
that is hard to believe.
Maybe no arguments he chooses to think are important?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,603
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 30, 2020 16:22:05 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 30, 2020 17:27:07 GMT -5
... The argument that anything the President does to be re-elected is OK is non-Constitutional, impeachable, and slapped down as un-American during Nixon's impeachment trial. ... FWIW, there was no "Nixon impeachment trial."
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 30, 2020 17:30:34 GMT -5
... The argument that anything the President does to be re-elected is OK is non-Constitutional, impeachable, and slapped down as un-American during Nixon's impeachment trial. ... FWIW, there was no "Nixon impeachment trial." Not only no trial, no impeachment.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Jan 30, 2020 17:42:53 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 30, 2020 18:07:57 GMT -5
What a child. "The presiding judge didn't do what I wanted him to do so I walked out."
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jan 30, 2020 18:10:35 GMT -5
FWIW, there was no "Nixon impeachment trial." Not only no trial, no impeachment. I have determined, through careful deliberation and investigation, that Nixxon the war criminal bailed prior to A. Impeachment B. Trial C. Conviction and D. Removal. I would have been quite pleased with imprisonment at San Quentin gen pop but Ford...
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Jan 30, 2020 19:43:15 GMT -5
Get ready for the next Presidential reality show episode: TRUMP UNLEASHED
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Jan 30, 2020 19:58:36 GMT -5
I disagree with the argument that anything the President does to get re-elected is okay. I don't want that to be true for any President, ever, as long as we are a country. I just can't see that as a healthy claim, and as dangerous as it is today, if it get codified, every single President will do anything they want to stay in power. President Chelsea could use it. President AOC could use it. And then, Senators and Congressmen will declare that they can too. And Governors, and city council. We are greenlighting all future election corruption. Just no. thehill.com/homenews/administration/480566-dershowitz-if-president-does-something-to-win-election-its-ok-unlessThe argument that anything the President does to be re-elected is OK is non-Constitutional, impeachable, and slapped down as un-American during Nixon's impeachment trial. If someone really wants MAGA and not go into bad fantasy dreams of good ole England when we had Kings ... its clear that argument is Anti-Patriot and pro why did we ever become America. MO. Some of the arguments are so bad I want to bitch slap them back to the 1600s and they can choose whether to be American or keep a monarch the hard way. "I want to bitch slap them back to the 1600s and they can choose whether to be American or keep a monarch the hard way."
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on Jan 30, 2020 20:31:33 GMT -5
What a child. "The presiding judge didn't do what I wanted him to do so I walked out." I don't understand this lingering fixation to out the original whistleblower. We've had so many 'on the record' witnesses since that whistleblower, we could discount what he said and still have ten times over the number of credible witnesses needed to convict a normal criminal.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Jan 31, 2020 6:13:52 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 31, 2020 6:28:24 GMT -5
linkStill think it would have been the thing to do.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Jan 31, 2020 7:37:18 GMT -5
linkStill think it would have been the thing to do. I know you do. I think President Trump has gotten by with his corrupt ways all his life. And at least the House put a stain on his name.....But in the end, nothing or nobody will stop him from doing exactly what he wants to do. So bye. bye Miss American Pie Drove the constitution to the levy, but the levy was dry And good ole boys drinking whiskey and rye Singing this will be the day the US dies......this will be the day the US dies...….
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 31, 2020 8:42:56 GMT -5
What a child. "The presiding judge didn't do what I wanted him to do so I walked out." I don't understand this lingering fixation to out the original whistleblower. We've had so many 'on the record' witnesses since that whistleblower, we could discount what he said and still have ten times over the number of credible witnesses needed to convict a normal criminal. The whistle blower still need to be accountable, for their actions, they are protected, if we can keep secret any whistle blower, what keeps the whistle blower honest,,
I can say anything I want true or not?
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,434
|
Post by thyme4change on Jan 31, 2020 8:56:16 GMT -5
I don't understand this lingering fixation to out the original whistleblower. We've had so many 'on the record' witnesses since that whistleblower, we could discount what he said and still have ten times over the number of credible witnesses needed to convict a normal criminal. The whistle blower still need to be accountable, for their actions, they are protected, if we can keep secret any whistle blower, what keeps the whistle blower honest,,
I can say anything I want true or not?
THE OTHER WITNESSES THAT HAVE EVIDENCE THAT BACKS UP THE STORY.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 31, 2020 8:58:00 GMT -5
The whistle blower still need to be accountable, for their actions, they are protected, if we can keep secret any whistle blower, what keeps the whistle blower honest,,
I can say anything I want true or not?
THE OTHER WITNESSES THAT HAVE EVIDENCE THAT BACKS UP THE STORY. It could have happened, We just didn't actually recognize each other.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 31, 2020 8:59:58 GMT -5
Now, I am easy to recognize, I am one of the three men that wear long pant year round in Phoenix!
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,434
|
Post by thyme4change on Jan 31, 2020 9:04:55 GMT -5
THE OTHER WITNESSES THAT HAVE EVIDENCE THAT BACKS UP THE STORY. It could have happened, We just didn't actually recognize each other. ?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 31, 2020 9:12:31 GMT -5
It could have happened, We just didn't actually recognize each other. ? If I had actually seen "You", recognized you. I would have introduced my self, we could have had a pleasant chat. Now, the next time you go to Costco, You are going to wonder if the old guy wearing long pants, is oldcoyote.
|
|