there is. we need to steal your Governor for President.We'll keep him for 2 years ( he's up for re-election ) and then for the good of the country, we'll release him from his commitment.
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
We'll have to wait and see how today's hearings do in the ratings but the fact this is happening on a Monday morning at 10 am, will kill those numbers and add those that saw the first day and realized this was all stuff they had heard before and will not tune in again like after a first debate when numbers usually fall..These aren't anywhere near the same thing. Just more false equivalencies from you.
But since I did watch, I'll give you my review. If the purpose of the hearing is to make a criminal case against Trump, proving he is a narcissistic asshole detached from reality "on this particular issue", score one for the Dem's but proof of being a narcissistic asshole, detached from reality will get you nothing in a fair trial in a court of law which is what they are shooting for. And the whole "detached from reality" well, that would favor Trump's defense. "He didn't understand what might result from his words and actions since others have used similar words without this result, ladies and gentlemen of the jury". Never tried a case in a courtroom but one wouldn't really have to, to know that the prosecution should never paint a defendant as "detached from reality", that's a defense move.They were saying if he believed what he was saying. That was showing he knew he was lying.
Today's hearing was more of the same as the "primetime" hearing, trying to convince anybody listening, that Trump was told by his closest advisers and even family members, that the election was not stolen as Bill Barr, the new hero of the left who a few short years ago wanted him prosecuted and hanged for treason,New hero? Not quite, asshole. He told the truth this time. He had misrepresented things for Trump in the past and him telling the truth doesn't make up for those times. Not finding any evidence of fraud isn't an opinion. It's a fact. The terms he used to describe Trump's claims of fraud were opinions. Again, finding no evidence to back Trump's claims is fact, not opinion. told us but here's the thing and it's just an opinion/ observation, anybody tuning in, interested in all this political stuff, would have already heard all this, I certainly had. I didn't hear a single thing I didn't already know. "But what about those that didn't know all this before"? Then they probably aren't watching this if they weren't interested before and following this story.You aren't interested in the story. You don't care about new information since you've made your mind up.
I think the general consensus of any fair minded person who follows politics closely enough to be interested in watching this, is that no minds are being changed by what has been presented so far. None of this "testimony" is relevant to whether Trump committed a provable crime beyond any reasonable doubt.And you're fair minded? No fucking way.
I wish I had the future schedule of when they are going to present a case of an actual criminal case against Trump, like "today we will present a witness that Trump or his appointed representative, who met with and conspired with the leader of the Proud Boys and hear is the video and audio evidence of that meeting.
Now that would get my interest but of course such evidence doesn't exist or we would have heard about it long before now. No, all they have, that I'm aware of at this point, is that they keep repeating that Trump "motivated" the crowd to riot. But then that pesky one short sentence in the tweet Liz Cheney decided to open this one sided presentation with, was left out of the reading, "now go home with love and peace" the last line said. Would any good prosecutor present as evidence in the case you are trying to make, a tweet in it's entirety for the jury to read and leave out the last line of that tweet, which completely contradicts the narrative that you are trying to prove, that Trump encouraged them to go into the Capitol when he actually told them to "go home with love and peace"? Not until 6 that night, after the riot was over.
Everybody with even half a brain realized what Cheney had done and it became a source of discussion, surely not what she was going for I would think. Anyone with half a brain can see what you're trying to do.
Then there was the repeated "if there are no objections" from Thompson the Chairman of the committee who wanted all Americans to know with his opening statement, that he was born in Mississippi, a part of our country steeped in slavery.......that there is nobody to object since Pelosi would not allow anybody from the Republican side, that would/ might object, because they weren't allowed on the committee.
STFU. The republicans they wanted to put on the committee were just like you. They had made their minds up and let everybody know that. There were a bunch of republicans who condemned Trump but then walked their condemnations back when Trump threatened them with primary challenges.
It's unbelievable how many republicans put their own asses and Trump before America
Sure, they found 2 Republicans that voted to impeach Trump, that literally hate Trump, so much for an un-biased, fair committee, who already made up their minds about Trump's alleged involvement in the riot's. Each of these two Republicans had already made speeches to that effect and they were suppose to represent "the other side of the argument"? Please, this is a show trial with no chance of cross examining a witness that they might have "different" questions for. So Chairman Thompson, you can stop asking if anybody will object, they won't.What have you heard to object to? You just described the republicans they kept off the committee.
Plus you conveniently forget republicans shot down a 911 type investigation.
So, how'd those hearings go today? A complete waste of time going over one thought and one thought only, was Trump told by his closest advisers and family, that the election was not stolen, he didn't have the evidence to prove what he was saying as Barr repeatedly told him, and Trump did not win the election but continued to lie about it.
See why I say your opinion/analysis means little to nothing. You think you know everything about this when your mind is made up.
OK, is that relevant as to whether he conspired with the rioters? What is the legal standard that describes "motivating" people to do something illegal? Rather big 1st Amendment hurdle to jump there. I don't think you can prosecute a President for saying what he thought to be true, even though some of the closest people around him told him was not true. As I said in another thread, you have Chuck Shumer on TV, calling out the name of Justice Kavanaugh, telling him he will "reap the worldwind" if he votes against what Shumer wants and he will "pay the price". Months later a man tries to kill Kabvanaugh, perhaps motivated by Shumer's words.Not even close to the same thing.
So if we are going to prosecute Trump for "motivating" people to commit a criminal act, we would have to prosecute Shumer for the same thing. But I guess the Democrats can't qite wrap their brains around "equal justice under the law". Originally Posted by HedonistForever
I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Originally Posted by txpilot3And if you don't support Trump, they will call you every name, except a child of God. Trump is their God and they are his Apostles. They never coherently defend Trump, all they got is ''you have TDS'', or ''nobody cares/watched the Hearings''.
I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Any politician that puts an "R" behind his name and has not PUBLICLY denounced Trump for all the lying, the attempted take down of the government has absolutely no ethics, no morals and certainly no integrity. Unfortunately, there are too many ignorant idiots in this country that share his values. So....this country is going to be just "another shit hole county" using Trump's vocabulary. Originally Posted by txpilot3
I see you never learned how to be concise... Originally Posted by texassapper
81 million votes LMAO!
Possible that there were that many ballots, but if you think 81 million different, eligible people actually voted for this clusterfuck of an administration you might want to look into Risperidone. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme
I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Any politician that puts an "R" behind his name and has not PUBLICLY denounced Trump for all the lying, the attempted take down of the government has absolutely no ethics, no morals and certainly no integrity. Unfortunately, there are too many ignorant idiots in this country that share his values. So....this country is going to be just "another shit hole county" using Trump's vocabulary. Originally Posted by txpilot3You don't know what a Felony is.
****eyeroll**** I'm so sick of hearing about the "hearings." All you posters who think this is the holy grail of information against Trump - get back to me when it's in an "actual"courtroom with an "actual" prosecutor. The people you are listing to have NO arrest powers. Until then - this is just a shit show for political reasons. The dems are so fucking stupid. Originally Posted by Austin EllenSays the dumb whore.