Schiff Infers Dershowitz Is A Liar

[Crepitus]

His ridiculous statement about the Constitution is a lie.

Well given the fact his testimony was entirely about the Constitution, what part did you disagree with? Better still, did you even watch his entire testimony?

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

 

[Crepitus]

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

No, it's not. He did none of those things. Anything he's accused of doing, the Dumbama administration already did.

Lol, your denial is strong, but useless.

He did do those things. Even the republicans are not really denying it anymore. The new defense is that they weren't illegal.

 

[Dragonlady]

After Dershowitz smashes the leftist commie narrative, Adam Schiff calls him a liar.

And there you have it. Stick a fork in it when you have to do that in desperation.

Discuss: Schiff hurts, not helps The Impeachment COUP!

Dershowitz hasn't smashed anything but what was left of his once great reputation. Everything he is currently arguing against, he was for during the Clinton impeachment. Dersch has defended every heinous criminal in recent history including OJ and Jeffrey Epstein. He's become a desperate attention-seeking whore who will make up any phony consitutional argument necessary to get some crook off. He has even admitted that other constitutional scholars disagree with his arguments.

And Tree, an Impeachment is the direct opposite of a coup. A coup is an illegal removal of a President. An impeachment is a constitutionally mandated remedy for a lawless President, harming the nation.

None of which exists.

You continue to ignore the fact that you wanted to impeach him and have spent the last three years looking for an excuse.

It's all over the place.

You really deny that ?

She is a Canadian. She is basically trolling.

I don't really care that she is a Canadian.....but the fact that she is a Leftist, they don't come more Leftists than her.......grrrrrrrrrr.....I do care about that.

I despise that fact actually.

What you despise is that I come here and consistently expose your lies, your fallacies, and your utter failure to display any of the characteristics of genuine Christians.

Your constant lying is a problem Tree. You come here and post that you''re a righteous man, and then you slander other posters, lies about your President, and blather meaningless scripture. The level of demonization and anger you spew, utter puts the lie to the idea that you're a Christian.

Judge not lest you be judged. Tree.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

No, it's not. He did none of those things. Anything he's accused of doing, the Dumbama administration already did.

Lol, your denial is strong, but useless.

He did do those things. Even the republicans are not really denying it anymore. The new defense is that they weren't illegal.

So riddle me this: Why are they illegal when Trump does it, but not illegal or impeachable when DumBama did it?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well given the fact his testimony was entirely about the Constitution, what part did you disagree with? Better still, did you even watch his entire testimony?

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

The concept that Trump was doing it for that reason is not only un-provable, but a lie by the commies. The phone call took place on July 25th. That was almost a year away from the Democrat party's decision on who their nominee would be.

In order to properly make that claim, the Democrats would have to do one or all of three things: Show us this crystal ball of theirs that predicted the win of Joe Biden; show us how they planned to rig the primary once again by putting Biden as the winner, and then prove that Trump was aware of these predictions.

Now, please show me this law that a US President seeking help from a foreign leader into providing evidence of wrongdoing by the past administration is unlawful.

 

[blackhawk]

Schiff suggesting someone is a liar that's some major irony.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

After Dershowitz smashes the leftist commie narrative, Adam Schiff calls him a liar.

And there you have it. Stick a fork in it when you have to do that in desperation.

Discuss: Schiff hurts, not helps The Impeachment COUP!

Dershowitz hasn't smashed anything but what was left of his once great reputation. Everything he is currently arguing against, he was for during the Clinton impeachment. Dersch has defended every heinous criminal in recent history including OJ and Jeffrey Epstein. He's become a desperate attention-seeking whore who will make up any phony consitutional argument necessary to get some crook off. He has even admitted that other constitutional scholars disagree with his arguments.

And Tree, an Impeachment is the direct opposite of a coup. A coup is an illegal removal of a President. An impeachment is a constitutionally mandated remedy for a lawless President, harming the nation.

None of which exists.

You continue to ignore the fact that you wanted to impeach him and have spent the last three years looking for an excuse.

It's all over the place.

You really deny that ?

She is a Canadian. She is basically trolling.

I don't really care that she is a Canadian.....but the fact that she is a Leftist, they don't come more Leftists than her.......grrrrrrrrrr.....I do care about that.

I despise that fact actually.

What you despise is that I come here and consistently expose your lies, your fallacies, and your utter failure to display any of the characteristics of genuine Christians.

Your constant lying is a problem Tree. You come here and post that you''re a righteous man, and then you slander other posters, lies about your President, and blather meaningless scripture. The level of demonization and anger you spew, utter puts the lie to the idea that you're a Christian.

Judge not lest you be judged. Tree.

How are Terrance and Phillip?

 

[Crepitus]

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

No, it's not. He did none of those things. Anything he's accused of doing, the Dumbama administration already did.

Lol, your denial is strong, but useless.

He did do those things. Even the republicans are not really denying it anymore. The new defense is that they weren't illegal.

So riddle me this: Why are they illegal when Trump does it, but not illegal or impeachable when DumBama did it?

Who? And when? Examples?

 

[Crepitus]

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

The concept that Trump was doing it for that reason is not only un-provable, but a lie by the commies. The phone call took place on July 25th. That was almost a year away from the Democrat party's decision on who their nominee would be.

In order to properly make that claim, the Democrats would have to do one or all of three things: Show us this crystal ball of theirs that predicted the win of Joe Biden; show us how they planned to rig the primary once again by putting Biden as the winner, and then prove that Trump was aware of these predictions.

Now, please show me this law that a US President seeking help from a foreign leader into providing evidence of wrongdoing by the past administration is unlawful.

You're good at regurgitating talking points. That's almost word for word what the defense was saying at times over the last couple of days.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Schiff, Nadler and Schumer have made their mark in our history as the most crooked cretins in American politics.
This Coupeachment is an obscene greed for power and a total disregard for ethics and honesty.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

The concept that Trump was doing it for that reason is not only un-provable, but a lie by the commies. The phone call took place on July 25th. That was almost a year away from the Democrat party's decision on who their nominee would be.

In order to properly make that claim, the Democrats would have to do one or all of three things: Show us this crystal ball of theirs that predicted the win of Joe Biden; show us how they planned to rig the primary once again by putting Biden as the winner, and then prove that Trump was aware of these predictions.

Now, please show me this law that a US President seeking help from a foreign leader into providing evidence of wrongdoing by the past administration is unlawful.

You're good at regurgitating talking points. That's almost word for word what the defense was saying at times over the last couple of days.

And we are all correct.

 

[Crepitus]

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

The concept that Trump was doing it for that reason is not only un-provable, but a lie by the commies. The phone call took place on July 25th. That was almost a year away from the Democrat party's decision on who their nominee would be.

In order to properly make that claim, the Democrats would have to do one or all of three things: Show us this crystal ball of theirs that predicted the win of Joe Biden; show us how they planned to rig the primary once again by putting Biden as the winner, and then prove that Trump was aware of these predictions.

Now, please show me this law that a US President seeking help from a foreign leader into providing evidence of wrongdoing by the past administration is unlawful.

You're good at regurgitating talking points. That's almost word for word what the defense was saying at times over the last couple of days.

And we are all correct.

Lol, no.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Schiff is killing Dershowitz. Dershowitz’s opinion is an out-lier.

Schiff couldn't out-argue my dead grandmother.

He out argued Dershowitz. What does that say about Dershowitz then?

Of course he didn't. That's absurd.

 

[liarintheWH]

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

And interference with the election process isn't that? It's pretty clearly laid out that seeking help.from foreigners is against the law.

The concept that Trump was doing it for that reason is not only un-provable, but a lie by the commies. The phone call took place on July 25th. That was almost a year away from the Democrat party's decision on who their nominee would be.

In order to properly make that claim, the Democrats would have to do one or all of three things: Show us this crystal ball of theirs that predicted the win of Joe Biden; show us how they planned to rig the primary once again by putting Biden as the winner, and then prove that Trump was aware of these predictions.

Now, please show me this law that a US President seeking help from a foreign leader into providing evidence of wrongdoing by the past administration is unlawful.

You're good at regurgitating talking points. That's almost word for word what the defense was saying at times over the last couple of days.

And we are all correct.

Lol, no.

Fuck, you’re corny.

 

[mudwhistle]

Well given the fact his testimony was entirely about the Constitution, what part did you disagree with? Better still, did you even watch his entire testimony?

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

Obviously.....now Obama actually committed treason and bribery....but he gets a pass because he's a Democrat.

 

[rightwinger]

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

No, it's not. He did none of those things. Anything he's accused of doing, the Dumbama administration already did.

If this is not impeachable, nothing short of shooting someone on Fifth Avenue is

Even that, Republicans would argue that if the President did it, it must be in the national interest

 

[rightwinger]

He tried to say that we long as tRump did it to get elected it wasn't illegal. Basically he said politicians cannot break the law no matter what they do.

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

Obviously.....now Obama actually committed treason and bribery....but he gets a pass because he's a Democrat.

<sob>. But........But......
What about OweBama?

 

[easyt65]

After Dershowitz smashes the leftist commie narrative, Adam Schiff calls him a liar.

And there you have it. Stick a fork in it when you have to do that in desperation.

Discuss: Schiff hurts, not helps The Impeachment COUP!

Schiff decries Dershowitz’s ‘absurdist’ Trump legal defense in Senate impeachment preview

Schiff has ZERO credibility and is just lashing out after being exposed further as a liar and traitor.

 

[mudwhistle]

No, what he said is that "if" Trump did that (and there is no evidence he did) that it still falls out of the definition of impeachment.

Because why?

Because impeachment is for those who commit high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery or treason. That's why.

Which is Trump

Obviously.....now Obama actually committed treason and bribery....but he gets a pass because he's a Democrat.

<sob>. But........But......
What about OweBama?

Exactly.

I'm sure Trump is tired of Democrats accusing him of stuff they never complained about when Obama was doing it.

This is according to the Clinton playbook: Deny, deny, deny, and make counter accusations.
Best way to inoculate yourself is to either act like you're fighting against corrupt acts or claim your opponents are guilty of that which you have already done. This puts them on the defensive.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Schiff Infers Dershowitz Is A Liar

Or a loon. I'm sure Roberts does as well.
I'd love to hear what Roberts thinks of these arguments. He's got to be screaming in his head.