Democrats first resolution NOOOOOOOPE

[Harpy Eagle]

Wow Adam shit head looks pissed
Elections have consequences

53-47
Republicans 1
Democrats 0

Don’t need one

Then it did not happen and you are just lying about it

 

[Jitss617]

No we heard joe Biden tell us what he did with our money, and Obama

Yeah. I did too. They got rid of a corrupt prosecutor in a country we were helping financially.

Now, the question is what Trump was doing. You don’t want to know. Scared of what you’ll find?

You forgot the part where he was about to investigate bursimia

I don’t include your fantasies in my posts. The only ones that believe he was “about” to investigate Burisma are hopelessly gullible.

Why don’t you want to hear from the witnesses?

Because the phone call was released and the witness said he was under no pressure.. move on

Now your quoting hearsay.

 

[Jitss617]

Wow Adam shit head looks pissed
Elections have consequences

53-47
Republicans 1
Democrats 0

Don’t need one

Then it did not happen and you are just lying about it

Cool story

 

[colfax_m]

Yeah. I did too. They got rid of a corrupt prosecutor in a country we were helping financially.

Now, the question is what Trump was doing. You don’t want to know. Scared of what you’ll find?

You forgot the part where he was about to investigate bursimia

I don’t include your fantasies in my posts. The only ones that believe he was “about” to investigate Burisma are hopelessly gullible.

Why don’t you want to hear from the witnesses?

Because the phone call was released and the witness said he was under no pressure.. move on

Now your quoting hearsay.

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

 

[Jitss617]

You forgot the part where he was about to investigate bursimia

I don’t include your fantasies in my posts. The only ones that believe he was “about” to investigate Burisma are hopelessly gullible.

Why don’t you want to hear from the witnesses?

Because the phone call was released and the witness said he was under no pressure.. move on

Now your quoting hearsay.

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

 

[kwc57]

Your the ignorant one, you should
Have evidence before you go
To trial
Lol moron

They’re treating you like an idiot. Telling you that you don’t need to know what your government is doing with your tax dollars in your name.

And you’re happy to be treated that way.

No we heard joe Biden tell us what he did with our money, and Obama

Yeah. I did too. They got rid of a corrupt prosecutor in a country we were helping financially.

Now, the question is what Trump was doing. You don’t want to know. Scared of what you’ll find?

Are you STILL crying because you morons rushed and didn’t do your job? Tough shit. Why didn’t you do a legitimate investigation? Oh that’s right. There’s nothing to find because you have nothing.

For someone with nothing to hide, y’all are sure desperate to prevent anything from being found.

Scared?

Allow me to introduce you to American justice. You are innocent until proven guilty. It's on you and your ilk to prove Trump guilty. To date, that hasn't happened. Accusations and innuendo isn't proof. You are going to need more than general claims of abuse of power. If that's the best you've got, why didn't you impeach Obama when he admitted that his DACA ruling was unconstitutional?

 

[colfax_m]

I don’t include your fantasies in my posts. The only ones that believe he was “about” to investigate Burisma are hopelessly gullible.

Why don’t you want to hear from the witnesses?

Because the phone call was released and the witness said he was under no pressure.. move on

Now your quoting hearsay.

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Wow Adam shit head looks pissed
Elections have consequences

53-47
Republicans 1
Democrats 0

Don’t need one

Then it did not happen and you are just lying about it

Cool story

Which is all you ever tell....your ever post is a lie

 

[colfax_m]

They’re treating you like an idiot. Telling you that you don’t need to know what your government is doing with your tax dollars in your name.

And you’re happy to be treated that way.

No we heard joe Biden tell us what he did with our money, and Obama

Yeah. I did too. They got rid of a corrupt prosecutor in a country we were helping financially.

Now, the question is what Trump was doing. You don’t want to know. Scared of what you’ll find?

Are you STILL crying because you morons rushed and didn’t do your job? Tough shit. Why didn’t you do a legitimate investigation? Oh that’s right. There’s nothing to find because you have nothing.

For someone with nothing to hide, y’all are sure desperate to prevent anything from being found.

Scared?

Allow me to introduce you to American justice. You are innocent until proven guilty. It's on you and your ilk to prove Trump guilty. To date, that hasn't happened. Accusations and innuendo isn't proof. You are going to need more than general claims of abuse of power. If that's the best you've got, why didn't you impeach Obama when he admitted that his DACA ruling was unconstitutional?

It hasn’t happened because Trump is allowed to conceal the truth.

If one of us ignored all subpoenas in an investigation, we’d be in jail.

 

[Thunk]

Democrats never learned that accusations do not equal evidence!

 

[Jitss617]

Because the phone call was released and the witness said he was under no pressure.. move on

Now your quoting hearsay.

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

 

[Care4all]

So, this proves there are no documents in the White House that would clear Trump.

Go to court

Justice delayed is justice denied. The president seems to wantt to tie this up in the courts for years....

That is justice denied.

However, in this trial, the SC, MINUS Roberts, can make rapid decisions if brought directly to them.... much like in Nixon's impeachment, the SC ruled immediately on Nixon having to release the tapes from his oval office that he claimed executive privilege....the SC ruled against Nixon. The taped conversations with the President and his admin were released. No executive privilege was allowed to be a valid claim when involved in an impeachment.

 

[colfax_m]

Now your quoting hearsay.

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

 

[Jitss617]

So, this proves there are no documents in the White House that would clear Trump.

Go to court

Justice delayed is justice denied. The president seems to wantt to tie this up in the courts for years....

That is justice denied.

However, in this trial, the SC, MINUS Roberts, can make rapid decisions if brought directly to them.... much like in Nixon's impeachment, the SC ruled immediately on Nixon having to release the tapes from his oval office that he claimed executive privilege....the SC ruled against Nixon. The taped conversations with the President and his admin were released. No executive privilege was allowed to be a valid claim when involved in an impeachment.

Your not entitled to it. Stomp your feet some more .. maybe just maybe daddy will give you what you want lol

 

[Jitss617]

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

Oh it’s hear say? Vinderman said under oath it wasn’t should he be in jail?

 

[Thunk]

A vote of 53 - 47....

 

[colfax_m]

I didn’t see any Ukrainians in that little video clip.

When you get Zelinsky on the witness stand saying there was no pressure, then you can make that claim. Until then, it’s an out of court statement and therefore hearsay.

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

Oh it’s hear say? Vinderman said under oath it wasn’t should he be in jail?

Some hearsay is admissible under federal rules of evidence. An official record would fall under that category.

Tell me, are you so uninformed that you think the transcript of the phone call is all there is to this interaction?

 

[Jitss617]

It’s the transcript that everyone said was ok

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

Oh it’s hear say? Vinderman said under oath it wasn’t should he be in jail?

Some hearsay is admissible under federal rules of evidence. An official record would fall under that category.

Tell me, are you so uninformed that you think the transcript of the phone call is all there is to this interaction?

Between the two presidents yes

 

[colfax_m]

It’s a statement made by someone under duress.

Not under oath.

Not subject to cross examination.

Get Zelinsky on the stand and then you can use him as a witness.

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

Oh it’s hear say? Vinderman said under oath it wasn’t should he be in jail?

Some hearsay is admissible under federal rules of evidence. An official record would fall under that category.

Tell me, are you so uninformed that you think the transcript of the phone call is all there is to this interaction?

Between the two presidents yes

Direclty, yes. But through intermediates, obviously not.

You only know a fraction of the story.

 

[Jitss617]

Well call him as a witness.. we have the transcript.. but ok lol

The transcript is hearsay. You want to use his statements in court, you call him.

Oh it’s hear say? Vinderman said under oath it wasn’t should he be in jail?

Some hearsay is admissible under federal rules of evidence. An official record would fall under that category.

Tell me, are you so uninformed that you think the transcript of the phone call is all there is to this interaction?

Between the two presidents yes

Direclty, yes. But through intermediates, obviously not.

You only know a fraction of the story.

Well that hearsay