Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Impeachment proceedings have only to do with the Constitution. The way it's run has nothing to do with the unfortunate-for-Hillary BengHazi self-imposed political sanfu. I salute your loyalty to your party, though. It's just that I think your managers pulled the wool over your innocent eyes.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?Is there even one Democrat here who thinks the closed door hearings were a lovely thing?
I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Is there even one Democrat here who thinks the closed door hearings were a lovely thing?
I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
Is lying to remove a president acceptable?
If your lies and treason fail in removing the president, do you support assassination as an acceptable alternative?
Jay Sekulow's Defense and Testimony
He shows that the House Managers ignored evidence in the Mueller Report that refutes their entire case against President Trump. And the House managers did it on purpose, against every tenet of American justice that there is.
Naughty, naughty.
Was it omission? Yes it was.
Was it crossing their fingers behind their backs? Hmmmm
Were they mean to the President? Yes, they were
Did they tell the truth? They told a tale, and it sounded good.
But was it the true fact of guilt? Not exactly...
You decide. Listen to what was said January 25 in the Senate Impeachment trial:
If you need to hear it again, please listen again. Thx. Now talk below about how you feel about the Democrats curbstoneing information away from their base, away from the news media, and especially away from everyone their obfuscations have hurt.
Omission?
Every one of those six points were covered by the managers.
You should have watched instead of being a rube.
You obviously are discussing an event you did not see or hear. Please watch the video of the official proceedings and listen to what President Trump's case is all about as described by his lawyer's defense in his behalf. I know the media has helped with the obfuscation of the House Democrat "Get Trump" management committee, because all of their alleged "news" are actually infotainment hour for the Democrat base who cannot handle the truth that President Trump did not do wrong as President, did nothing even remotely resembling quid pro quo--all that was profusely and hastily painted with malice aforethought by Hillary Clinton's bag men, two of whom are Rep Jerold Nadler and Rep Adam Schiff. This is about what happened to an innocent man by poisoning-the-well partisans in the Democrat House of Representatives. Please see the video so that you can participate in this discussion, which is the ways and means by which the Democrats are doing a con job on even their friends, their supporters,
I guarantee I've seen more of this process than almost anyone on this board.
I watched probably 70% of the managers myself and the higlights of what I missed. Those points were made repeatedly ad nauseum.
I also watched most of the 2hrs yesterday.
I also watched all of the testimony that was televised as it happened. Trump's team is obviously ignoring all of the testimony that works against them as you are.
Trump's team has nothing but BS process complaints. They addressed none of the substance presented by the managers.
You watched that much?
Please, immediately get one of the following:
A girlfriend
A job
A life.
Thank you.
Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, said it wasn’t necessary to have new information due to House errors that did not validate documents. Also, they issued subpoenas not agreed to in the House by both sides as done in past impeachments, which was unlawful in its best light. IOW, Democrats abided by no rules or precedents.
He debunked all that leftist lockstep whining in less than 5 minutes.
Closed hearings are anathema to the Sixth Amendment and if you don't well know it, go sit in the corner. You can call me names if you want to because I'm a seamstress, not a lawyer. But you better not mess with BriPat, because in a single sentence, he can hit the ball straight outta the park and your team loses.Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?Is there even one Democrat here who thinks the closed door hearings were a lovely thing?
I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
Closed hearings are anathema to the Sixth Amendment and if you don't well know it, go sit in the corner. You can call me names if you want to because I'm a seamstress, not a lawyer. But you better not mess with BriPat, because in a single sentence, he can hit the ball straight outta the park and your team loses.Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, said it wasn’t necessary to have new information due to House errors that did not validate documents. Also, they issued subpoenas not agreed to in the House by both sides as done in past impeachments, which was unlawful in its best light. IOW, Democrats abided by no rules or precedents.
He debunked all that leftist lockstep whining in less than 5 minutes.
He lied because there is no defense of this president's actions.
There is no such rule that subpoenas must be agreed to by both sides and it is certainly not illegal in any way to not do so.
Stop being a rube.
Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, said it wasn’t necessary to have new information due to House errors that did not validate documents. Also, they issued subpoenas not agreed to in the House by both sides as done in past impeachments, which was unlawful in its best light. IOW, Democrats abided by no rules or precedents.
He debunked all that leftist lockstep whining in less than 5 minutes.
He lied because there is no defense of this president's actions.
There is no such rule that subpoenas must be agreed to by both sides and it is certainly not illegal in any way to not do so.
Stop being a rube.
I'm proud of being a "rube." Jesus Christ was a "rube," and you should steer clear of offending him, too, because your six-shooter is firing at innocent people in a 360-degree circle, Sugar. (the empty-calorie sweetener.) Your arguments thus far have been nonnutritive to human welfare.
Obviously.I'm proud of being a "rube."
Was it omission? Yes it was.
Was it crossing their fingers behind their backs? Hmmmm
Were they mean to the President? Yes, they were
Did they tell the truth? They told a tale, and it sounded good.
But was it the true fact of guilt? Not exactly...
You decide. Listen to what was said January 25 in the Senate Impeachment trial:
If you need to hear it again, please listen again. Thx. Now talk below about how you feel about the Democrats curbstoneing information away from their base, away from the news media, and especially away from everyone their obfuscations have hurt.
Omission?
Every one of those six points were covered by the managers.
You should have watched instead of being a rube.
You obviously are discussing an event you did not see or hear. Please watch the video of the official proceedings and listen to what President Trump's case is all about as described by his lawyer's defense in his behalf. I know the media has helped with the obfuscation of the House Democrat "Get Trump" management committee, because all of their alleged "news" are actually infotainment hour for the Democrat base who cannot handle the truth that President Trump did not do wrong as President, did nothing even remotely resembling quid pro quo--all that was profusely and hastily painted with malice aforethought by Hillary Clinton's bag men, two of whom are Rep Jerold Nadler and Rep Adam Schiff. This is about what happened to an innocent man by poisoning-the-well partisans in the Democrat House of Representatives. Please see the video so that you can participate in this discussion, which is the ways and means by which the Democrats are doing a con job on even their friends, their supporters,
I guarantee I've seen more of this process than almost anyone on this board.
I watched probably 70% of the managers myself and the higlights of what I missed. Those points were made repeatedly ad nauseum.
I also watched most of the 2hrs yesterday.
I also watched all of the testimony that was televised as it happened. Trump's team is obviously ignoring all of the testimony that works against them as you are.
Trump's team has nothing but BS process complaints. They addressed none of the substance presented by the managers.
the entire Democrat case is based on hearsay, people's musings, and conclusions non-partcipants made, all of which fit neatly into the conspiracy theory category. The Democrat House managers are treating theories like proven facts. The resultant lie they have fomented will cause a civil war. Treason against President Trump is in full play. Most societies eliminate people who commit treason all the way up to a queen's throne.The Democrats didn't work very hard on electing their candidate, nor did she. And the false witness that omission can be is in full play here. America has been listening with disgust leftist hatemongers since before the turn of the twentieth century into the Twenty-First. People who took Communications 101 in any given University and understood the material know that the American Journalism's former reachout to truth has lost its moral compass by means of favoritism sweetened with $20,000. expenses-paid vacations to the world's ritziest destinations to cavort with occasional fallen angels of Hollyweird.
the entire Democrat case is based on hearsay,
Liar.
I stopped right there.
Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, said it wasn’t necessary to have new information due to House errors that did not validate documents. Also, they issued subpoenas not agreed to in the House by both sides as done in past impeachments, which was unlawful in its best light. IOW, Democrats abided by no rules or precedents.
He debunked all that leftist lockstep whining in less than 5 minutes.
He lied because there is no defense of this president's actions.
There is no such rule that subpoenas must be agreed to by both sides and it is certainly not illegal in any way to not do so.
Stop being a rube.
I'm proud of being a "rube." Jesus Christ was a "rube," and you should steer clear of offending him, too, because your six-shooter is firing at innocent people in a 360-degree circle, Sugar. (the empty-calorie sweetener.) Your arguments thus far have been nonnutritive to human welfare.
Obviously.I'm proud of being a "rube."
Closed hearings are anathema to the Sixth Amendment and if you don't well know it, go sit in the corner. You can call me names if you want to because I'm a seamstress, not a lawyer. But you better not mess with BriPat, because in a single sentence, he can hit the ball straight outta the park and your team loses.Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
You're wrong. The sixth amendment applies because this entire impeachment is about political angst of the left and not wrongdoing of the President who has been shown to be innocent of every stinking charge brought forth for the last 39 months by overbearing Democrats trying to coup the American people's decision to put President Trump in the White House and not the socialists of the Democrat Smarty Party. ugh!Closed hearings are anathema to the Sixth Amendment and if you don't well know it, go sit in the corner. You can call me names if you want to because I'm a seamstress, not a lawyer. But you better not mess with BriPat, because in a single sentence, he can hit the ball straight outta the park and your team loses.Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
The 6th amendment doesn’t apply here. That applies to criminal proceedings. Even if it did, the protections apply to trial phase, which is not what the House was doing. An investigation behind closed doors is precisely the normal course of events for the average citizen. Trump was given more benefit than you or I would be afforded.
Incorrect. You need to answer two questions to see how easy this is to figure out.You're wrong. The sixth amendment applies because this entire impeachment is about political angst of the left and not wrongdoing of the President who has been shown to be innocent of every stinking charge brought forth for the last 39 months by overbearing Democrats trying to coup the American people's decision to put President Trump in the White House and not the socialists of the Democrat Smarty Party. ugh!Closed hearings are anathema to the Sixth Amendment and if you don't well know it, go sit in the corner. You can call me names if you want to because I'm a seamstress, not a lawyer. But you better not mess with BriPat, because in a single sentence, he can hit the ball straight outta the park and your team loses.Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
The 6th amendment doesn’t apply here. That applies to criminal proceedings. Even if it did, the protections apply to trial phase, which is not what the House was doing. An investigation behind closed doors is precisely the normal course of events for the average citizen. Trump was given more benefit than you or I would be afforded.
Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, said it wasn’t necessary to have new information due to House errors that did not validate documents. Also, they issued subpoenas not agreed to in the House by both sides as done in past impeachments, which was unlawful in its best light. IOW, Democrats abided by no rules or precedents.
He debunked all that leftist lockstep whining in less than 5 minutes.
He lied because there is no defense of this president's actions.
There is no such rule that subpoenas must be agreed to by both sides and it is certainly not illegal in any way to not do so.
Stop being a rube.
I'm proud of being a "rube." Jesus Christ was a "rube," and you should steer clear of offending him, too, because your six-shooter is firing at innocent people in a 360-degree circle, Sugar. (the empty-calorie sweetener.) Your arguments thus far have been nonnutritive to human welfare.
Obviously.I'm proud of being a "rube."
Any other racial slurs you got, bot?
I don't think so. What rules are you referring to?Closed door hearings have always been the rule for classified information, shit for brains.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?Is there even one Democrat here who thinks the closed door hearings were a lovely thing?
I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Nope, dope.
Dems’ closed hearings follow rules ‘Republican majority’ put in place: Fox News legal analyst
“As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors,” Mr. Napolitano said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” “the hearings for which Congressman [Adam] Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules.”
The House didn't determine anything because they didn't vote on it. That's why Adolph Schiffler's subpoenas are all worthless.Impeachment proceedings have only to do with the Constitution. The way it's run has nothing to do with the unfortunate-for-Hillary BengHazi self-imposed political sanfu. I salute your loyalty to your party, though. It's just that I think your managers pulled the wool over your innocent eyes.2015What rule is that? When did they make it?Is there even one Democrat here who thinks the closed door hearings were a lovely thing?
I see no problem with them. It is a rule made by the republicans that even made them possible.
See Benghazi, dope.
Impeachment proceedings have only to do with the House. There are no directions or rules set forth in the constitution. The House alone determines their process.
The investigation conducted by the intel committee was done to see if the evidence supported impeachment and was no different than any other investigation. They followed the same rules the Republicans did during Benghazi.
There was nothing improper in their actions.
Jay Sekulow's Defense and Testimony
He shows that the House Managers ignored evidence in the Mueller Report that refutes their entire case against President Trump. And the House managers did it on purpose, against every tenet of American justice that there is.
Naughty, naughty.
The Mueller report has not a thing to do with the president's actions toward Ukraine.
