Does Mitch want to see Trump tried in a Court of Law?

I'd say he does. This could include many accusations Muller implied in his report but I take it to mostly mean mostly this lead up to January 6.


"President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he's in office," McConnell said during a speech on the Senate floor following Trump's acquittal. "He didn't get away with anything

Still going on about Mueller. LMAO.

Still going on about Mueller. LMAO. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Mueller was not the central topic. Bless your heart.

Mitch McConnell worked with President Trump to appoint 54 appellate court justices 174 federal judges and 3 supreme court judges. These are judges that will be around for decades stopping Democrats efforts to destroy America

When all is said and done, when the history books are written 20 years from now, Senator McConnell will be one of the brighter lights.


And have you noticed how many people with names starting with "Mc" have accomplished a lot ?

"Mueller, Mueller, Mueller"!!!


'Russia, russia, russia"


'Impeach, Impeach , Impeach'


'spend, spend spend'


A quick summary of teh DPST/ccp party and its 'agenda'

"Mueller, Mueller, Mueller"!!!


'Russia, russia, russia"


'Impeach, Impeach , Impeach'


'spend, spend spend'


A quick summary of teh DPST/ccp party and its 'agenda' Originally Posted by oeb11

I'll take that as a you don't have a fucking clue as to the question.

Mitch McConnell worked with President Trump to appoint 54 appellate court justices 174 federal judges and 3 supreme court judges. These are judges that will be around for decades stopping Democrats efforts to destroy America Originally Posted by NBruno

Those three SC choices dismissed Trumps voter graud case

And it appears Mitch wants one of those Federal Court judges to hear the case about Trump inciting riots and deaths.

Thank you for the waste of bandwidth - wtf.

Those three SC choices dismissed Trumps voter graud case Originally Posted by WTF

No court has ever allowed any evidence to be presented. It may take years for a case this big to unfold but it will come unraveled.

"Mueller, Mueller, Mueller"!!!


'Russia, russia, russia"


'Impeach, Impeach , Impeach'


'spend, spend spend'
Originally Posted by oeb11

"anonymous source, anonymous source, anonymous source"

"Marsha! Marsha! Marsha!"

only response is speculation and conjecture.

hopefully Trump runs again and wins again. The crying from the left has never been more pronounced.

What is means Stein, the Libturds and 3/4 of the so called republicans all want to stifle Trump . Why? Because Trump proved just how useless they really are? I bet you are one of the dipshits that believe in man made climate change.

It’s takes evidence not conjecture to try a case. Get a life

My fascination and interest in the law and our Constitution would love to see the difference between what we saw in an impeachment and compare it to to that same charge in a court of law but I'm not going to wish for it and I don't think Mitch would either even though he had some really harsh words for Trump.

While I accept that Trump has some degree of culpability, his is minuscule compared to the people that actually rioted. Just look at the number that did not engage. It was many times larger than those that did. More had common sense than those that didn't. Ignorance of the law won't be a great defense for those people.

I come down on the side of personal responsibility. How many times do we have to have it explained to people that there is no justification to follow an illegal order. We have hung people for doing that and will now incarcerate people for doing that and especially to some one not under orders. These idiots did this of their own free will, there was no actual consequence that necessitated their actions, not in reality anyway, IMHO. I understand that others think differently.

Then we could see and evaluate maybe a little better how impeachment should or shouldn't work. The idea that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply in an impeachment, just strikes me as wrong headed. Of course his lawyers should have been able to make a 1st Amendment case and the Senators take that into their deliberations. If you are going to charge a criminal act and they did, then by God you should have to use statutory language to make your case. If you just don't think the guy was a good President then no, no statutory language is needed, just take a damn vote if this is nothing more than a political exercise and you lose your rights because they call it impeachment instead of a criminal trial? No.

But that's just my opinion.

I think Mitch and I are "indifferent" as to whether he is charged as a private citizen. I have no vested interest in Donald J. Trump and I bet Mitch feels the same way.


And if Nancy Pelosi, when asked to comment on the summer riots, the burning of buildings, the looting, the beatings and know what she said? "People are going to do what people do". If that's a good enough answer for Pelosi and the Democrats, maybe Trump should have tried that.


But no, we all understand there are different rules for Democrats.