Liz Cheney Referred For Criminal Prosecution

I have repeatedly dembot
That’s simply untrue.

But if you wish to prove me wrong, here’s your chance. Post the language from the report showing evidence that Cheney told her what to say.
 
That’s simply untrue.

But if you wish to prove me wrong, here’s your chance. Post the language from the report showing evidence that Cheney told her what to say.
No I have.
 
No I have.
Yet again you fail to prove me wrong.

But you still can! Just post the language from the report that shows this. All you ever do is link the report and quote from the conclusion. You never quote any evidence supporting your accusations.
 
Yet again you fail to prove me wrong.

But you still can! Just post the language from the report that shows this. All you ever do is link the report and quote from the conclusion. You never quote any evidence supporting your accusations.
No you’ve repeatedly proven yourself to be wrong
 
Look, imo the prosecutions of Trump were absurd, UNLESS there was evidence he was connected to the mob's decision to invade the capital. (Although lobbying for GA's election folks to "find" more votes could be a crime as well .... if the dems could spin "finding" as "creating" votes. But imo that's a stretch)

But like it or not, Cheney was legally elected and legally placed on the committee.
But if she actually booted the lawyer and rewrote the witness testimony to be better suited for prosecuting the Target she sure as hell did something wrong..... Witness tampering on a federal level carries much larger penalties than on a state level.
 
But if she actually booted the lawyer and rewrote the witness testimony to be better suited for prosecuting the Target she sure as hell did something wrong..... Witness tampering on a federal level carries much larger penalties than on a state level.
Yep liz is looking at 20 years
 
No you’ve repeatedly proven yourself to be wrong
All you’re doing is proving me right. You haven’t posted the evidence and won’t.

It would be easy to prove me wrong but you never do.
 
All you’re doing is proving me right. You haven’t posted the evidence and won’t.

It would be easy to prove me wrong but you never do.
Ooook silly dembot…that doesn’t even think the report exist! Haha
 
Not sure what you mean by transcript. People keep claiming there’s evidence in the report but consistently fail to produce any part of the report that would constitute evidence.

It’s like they’re making it up.

The 128 page report that you claim to have read contains footnotes listing books, media articles, interviews, and text messages. Do you want to read them?
 
Yet again, given the opportunity to prove me wrong, you don’t.

The longer you fail to do so, the clearer it is that you can’t.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.
I have dembot see all my post on this thread in response to you
 
The 128 page report that you claim to have read contains footnotes listing books, media articles, interviews, and text messages. Do you want to read them?
I’d be happy for any of you to post the relevant text and footnotes. If there’s something relevant, I’ll be happy to go and read it.

So far no one has done so.
 
I have dembot see all my post on this thread in response to you
None of your posts have done anything of the sort. I’ve read them all.

You make lots of accusations, but do not substitute these accusations with relevant facts and evidence.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom