Trump impeachment defense team will include Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz

[AzogtheDefiler]

Honesty under oath is not a duty?

Bye, bud.

I'm tired of your deflections

A Trumpster talking about honesty!

You’re such an immature twit.

bad day little man?

You’re a pussy

Awwwwww

Troll.

 

[JLW]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Had not heard about possibly raping a 13 year old. Heard rumor about Russian chicks peeing on his chest, and of course we are all familiar with some of the really good looking bimbos he cheated on his current wife with. Don't like him, but doubt he raped any 13 year old kid. Bet there is good money in suing his ass.

FYI

Lawsuit Charges Donald Trump with Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl

 

[toobfreak]

Trump will become the OJ of presidents. Acquitted but not innocent.

like Clinton and Johnson?

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

 

[okfine]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Had not heard about possibly raping a 13 year old. Heard rumor about Russian chicks peeing on his chest, and of course we are all familiar with some of the really good looking bimbos he cheated on his current wife with. Don't like him, but doubt he raped any 13 year old kid. Bet there is good money in suing his ass.

I think there were multiple stories about Trump's escapades in a Moscow hotel.

He was having sex with a 14 year old.
He was getting a golden shower.
He had some Russian hoes pee on the bed because Obama slept there.

I wouldn't put it passed Fat Donnie on all three. Putin knows, and of course, Fat Donnie himself.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump will become the OJ of presidents. Acquitted but not innocent.

like Clinton and Johnson?

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

 

[toobfreak]

Trump will become the OJ of presidents. Acquitted but not innocent.

like Clinton and Johnson?

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

 

[White 6]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Had not heard about possibly raping a 13 year old. Heard rumor about Russian chicks peeing on his chest, and of course we are all familiar with some of the really good looking bimbos he cheated on his current wife with. Don't like him, but doubt he raped any 13 year old kid. Bet there is good money in suing his ass.

I think there were multiple stories about Trump's escapades in a Moscow hotel.

He was having sex with a 14 year old.
He was getting a golden shower.
He had some Russian hoes pee on the bed because Obama slept there.

I wouldn't put it passed Fat Donnie on all three. Putin knows, and of course, Fat Donnie himself.

Maybe. But I hate to speculate about the veracity of some of the unproven accusations. It is without question he has the morals of stray tomcat and would lie his way out of anything if he could, as he has tried before. He is proven corrupt enough without me having to gang on about the unproven. We started out talking about Dershowitz. I do not trust that shifty little weasel. Like Trump, a man is known by the company he keeps. Look at the people Trump has kept company with and employed in the past.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump will become the OJ of presidents. Acquitted but not innocent.

like Clinton and Johnson?

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

We are supposed to believe that Trump just cares about rooting out corruption. And he only seems to think Biden is corrupt. And he only seems to care now that Biden is running against him (and leading in polls). And Biden is corrupt for getting a corrupt prosecutor fired. And the corrupt prosecutor is totally the one telling the truth. And we are supposed to think it’s totally normal that his personal attorney is involved but not the DoJ. And the DoJ is involved but they’re involved in investigations of his personal attorney and have indicted his associates who were helping his private investigation. And that it’s perfectly normal for him to demand a public statement including Biden’s name. And that the hold on aid had nothing to do with Biden’s candidacy. And that the phone call had no pressure even though the hold came immediately after the phone call. And this could also be cleared up if we had testimony from his staff, but that isn’t a good idea.

Sorry, but objectively that cover story is laughable.

 

[lantern2814]

"On August 17, 1998, William Jefferson Clinton swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before a Federal grand jury of the United States. Contrary to that oath, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury concerning one or more of the following: (1) the nature and details of his relationship with a subordinate Government employee; (2) prior perjurious, false and misleading testimony he gave in a Federal civil rights action brought against him; (3) prior false and misleading statements he allowed his attorney to make to a Federal judge in that civil rights action; and (4) his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of evidence in that civil rights action."

clinton impeachment charges - Yahoo Search Results

Which has nothing to do with his duties as president.

Contrary to that oath, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury

Honesty under oath is not a duty?

Bye, bud.

I'm tired of your deflections

A Trumpster talking about honesty!

You’re such an immature twit.

bad day little man?

Not as bad as your days are going to be little boy. When Trump is exonerated and then re-elected. Starr and Dershowitz are going to eat you idiot Dims for lunch.

 

[White 6]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Had not heard about possibly raping a 13 year old. Heard rumor about Russian chicks peeing on his chest, and of course we are all familiar with some of the really good looking bimbos he cheated on his current wife with. Don't like him, but doubt he raped any 13 year old kid. Bet there is good money in suing his ass.

FYI

Lawsuit Charges Donald Trump with Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl

Was not actually aware that. Was it ever settled if not an election year smear?

 

[lantern2814]

Lying under oath about having an affair. Don't let the facts get in your way. LOL.

Don't forget suborning perjury too.

Lets not forget the part about having an affair, lying under oath about it, and suborning perjury is she is called.

So having an affair!! and not wanting your dtr or wife to find out. That is what he was impeached by starr for, nothing else.

Starr did not impeach Clinton you ignoramus. Congress did that. Starr did not search out Lewinsky. One of her friends went to Starr with information that he then followed up on, leading to Bill’s perjury and subsequent impeachment. You’re welcome for the history lesson.

 

[charwin95]

President Donald Trump’s impeachment defense team will include Ken Starr, whose investigation led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, whose clients have included notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and O.J. Simpson.

The Trump team choices came to light as the president’s impeachment trial is set to begin in earnest next Tuesday in the Senate, where he is accused of abusing power by pressuring Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden last summer while withholding military aid to that nation.

In addition to Starr and Dershowitz, the lawyer Robert Ray is expected to be on Trump’s impeachment defense team. Ray had succeeded Starr has independent counsel in the Whitewater investigation of Clinton.

White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow are heading the impeachment defense team.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...

Wondering how these progressive liberals will jump on Dershowitz, a staunch liberal that has fought side by side with him for decades on social issues.....more HYPOCRISY from our low IQ CROWD!!!

Dershowitz is a joke dude.

I saw him debating with CNN and they kick his ass.
Only defense he has was politically and philosophical evasion.

 

[lantern2814]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Sorry derpster. That suit was thrown out in both California AND New York for something called NO EVIDENCE. You couldn’t get the two most liberal states in the Union to accept that garbage.

 

[toobfreak]

like Clinton and Johnson?

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

THAT'S THE POINT. I DON'T buy the cover story that Trump did anything meriting impeachment, and the fact that the House passed two articles, neither of which is even a crime and one of them laughable and specious, and now they want to retry Trump all over again in the senate, proves it.

 

[White 6]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Sorry derpster. That suit was thrown out in both California AND New York for something called NO EVIDENCE. You couldn’t get the two most liberal states in the Union to accept that garbage.

Really appreciate you posting that, Lantern. Like I said, I already have enough valid exhibits of his character to disavow and shun the man without, having election year smear tactics included in the mix.

 

[colfax_m]

Johnson has right to complain about his impeachment. Clinton was a judgement fall about whether his crime was pertinent to his position.
Trump did the deed. Dershowitz is going to make sure he doesn’t have to face consequences. Just like he did for Epstein.

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

THAT'S THE POINT. I DON'T buy the cover story that Trump did anything meriting impeachment, and the fact that the House passed two articles, neither of which is even a crime and one of them laughable and specious, and now they want to retry Trump all over again in the senate, proves it.

Just do we are clear, the president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever?

Is that right?

 

[JLW]

So Dershowitz will be convincing us that Trump is innocent the same way he convinced us that OJ was innocent?

Actually Dershowitz got Epstein off with a slap on the wrist. Since Trump. Epstein and Dershowitz all ran in the same circle, Dershowitz being retained by Trump was inevitable.

Isn't Dershowitz being investigated for screwing little girls, he got on loan from Epstein?

I think so. Just like Trump being sued for raping a 13 year old.

Sorry derpster. That suit was thrown out in both California AND New York for something called NO EVIDENCE. You couldn’t get the two most liberal states in the Union to accept that garbage.

Sorry Trumpster, the case was voluntarily dismissed which is common after settlement. How much did the rapist pay the victim. I’m guessing ten million.

 

[toobfreak]

What is this? Another snowstorm of Progressive History Revision?
Johnson was probably understandable in who he fired, but he clearly broke the law in doing so.
Bill Clinton broke a STRING of laws.

Laws that are all on the books as crimes.

If Trump has broken any law much less any high crime, the Democrats failed to name it in their articles! Schiff can try the snow job of continually referring to them in the company of treason and bribery, but the folks in the Senate are not idiots like the public for which the MSM broadcasts to. One article was at worst, political malfeasance no worse than 10-20 things Obama did, done in an attempt to expose actual nefarious actions Biden did as VP as part and parcel to his execution of foreign policy; the other was nothing more than Trump's right as a citizen not to cooperate with what he deemed an unjust proceeding, for which the court was charged with rendering a decision on, but the Democrats never gave the court the chance.

They were too much in a hurry to retire for Christmas Recess.

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

THAT'S THE POINT. I DON'T buy the cover story that Trump did anything meriting impeachment, and the fact that the House passed two articles, neither of which is even a crime and one of them laughable and specious, and now they want to retry Trump all over again in the senate, proves it.

Just do we are clear, the president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever?

Is that right?

Do we are clear? Can you even type a sentence? For whatever reason whatsoever? Where did you pluck THAT one out of your ass? Trump gave the reason: Biden was using his power as VP to effect changes in Ukraine for personal gain. Now we'll finally get to the bottom of that.

If Uncle Joe had some honest and legit explanation, the Democrats sure have fought hard to keep it from the public.

 

[colfax_m]

The law that Johnson “broke” was unconstitutional. He had a legitimate gripe and his impeachment was a farce.

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

THAT'S THE POINT. I DON'T buy the cover story that Trump did anything meriting impeachment, and the fact that the House passed two articles, neither of which is even a crime and one of them laughable and specious, and now they want to retry Trump all over again in the senate, proves it.

Just do we are clear, the president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever?

Is that right?

Do we are clear? Can you even type a sentence? For whatever reason whatsoever? Where did you pluck THAT one out of your ass? Trump gave the reason: Biden was using his power as VP to effect changes in Ukraine for personal gain. Now we'll finally get to the bottom of that.

If Uncle Joe had some honest and legit explanation, the Democrats sure have fought hard to keep it from the public.

That’s not the question. Can you answer it?

The president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever. True or false?

 

[Auld Phart]

That makes TWO impeachments then that are a farce.

Only if you buy the very doubtful cover story.

THAT'S THE POINT. I DON'T buy the cover story that Trump did anything meriting impeachment, and the fact that the House passed two articles, neither of which is even a crime and one of them laughable and specious, and now they want to retry Trump all over again in the senate, proves it.

Just do we are clear, the president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever?

Is that right?

Do we are clear? Can you even type a sentence? For whatever reason whatsoever? Where did you pluck THAT one out of your ass? Trump gave the reason: Biden was using his power as VP to effect changes in Ukraine for personal gain. Now we'll finally get to the bottom of that.

If Uncle Joe had some honest and legit explanation, the Democrats sure have fought hard to keep it from the public.

That’s not the question. Can you answer it?

The president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever. True or false?

The president is allowed to order investigations into his political opponents for any reason whatsoever.

when did that happen?