You claiming that the BLM protests were because the dems said the word 'fight' a lot?
That's one of the most ridiculous things you've posted here, and that's saying something.
Impeachment Trial
- Thread starter Fun For All
- Start date
You claiming that the BLM protests were because the dems said the word 'fight' a lot?
That's one of the most ridiculous things you've posted here, and that's saying something.
That is like saying let that murderer go free because the person he killed is already dead. He instigated a violent attempt to overthrow the government and overturn an election ( based on lies). That needs to be recognized and Trump needs to be held accountable. He should be banned from holding political office in the future. The only idiots here are the Repuglican Senators who don't care about violent sedition and will vote to acquit the orange turd, which may enable his divisive bullshit con act to be reborn so he can attempt once again to destroy democracy and all the institutions that support it. At least we still have lots of chances to see Trump get a criminal record ( or has he already secretly pre- pardoned himself, which sounds absurd, but I bet the Repugs will run with that if they can)
Really? Did you forget Kamala raising bail money to post for the rioters arrested by the authorities while burning down cities? That's even worst than simply encouraging violence- that's aiding and abetting.
he will not be convicted but this should stop trump ever winning another election
I don't remember Kamala doing that and if she did it's not 'aiding and abetting'...
You really think protests against systematic racism is the same as protests trying to overturn an election?
Show us who was accused of arson and looting that was bailed out by Kamala.
shakenbake
Senior Turgid Member
shakenbake
Senior Turgid Member
He would still claim that the election was rigged if he didn’t win it, a la 2016. With a possible repeat of 2020 insurrection.
U sued to be a pretty good trial lawyer. Although lawyers can only work with what they have after watching the defense I find it hard not to conclude that this is the worst case lawyer negligence or ineptitude I have ever witnessed and i have seen a lot.
Absolutely, if you're not going to see the evidence, how can you reach a verdict?
Witnesses are going to be called, let the good times roll.
Think about how screwed up someone has to be to believe this.
Is this actually true, though?
I don't trust a random internet meme without something else to back it up.
Isn't that the point though? I am genuinely surprised they did as good a job as they did. I thought they would lean even more into Trump was justified, you have no right to challenge his will. When you know that the GOP isn't going to vote against you, the point is to make the vote as humiliating for them as possible to demonstrate your power over them.
Exactly. McCarthy went and groveled for Trump's mailing list after that. Hell, he voted against the election that night.
Why should Trump bother mounting a defense to give the GOP Senators cover when it is clear they will happily eat shit and support him anyway?
Haha...this was good stuff.
www.mediaite.com
WATCH: Senate Chamber Openly Laughs at Trump Defense Lawyer van der Veen Call for Depositions in his 'Phil-E-Delphia' Office
Mike van der Veen elicited a big laugh from Senate Democrats sitting before him during the second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump.
That is done in the courts, not in the legislature. The appropriate prosecutors need to initiate that. Regardless of what goes on in the Senate, that option is still available. It is not an either/or.
Questions about criminal proceedings:
1. Is Trump immune from prosecution for crap he does while president?
2. Is he protected by the Brandenberger ruling for almost, but not quite telling the mob to storm the Capitol?
The big news now in a big twist is:
Trump impeachment trial: Senate backs call for documents, witnesses (usatoday.com)
A GoP congresswoman (who voted for impeachment in Congress) with evidence of the details of the trump/McCarthy conversation wants to testify to that and the senate voted 55-45 to allow.
The significance is that it proves that trump knew what was going on with the mob in the Capitol and he did nothing. He knew that Pence was in danger and did nothing. The trump defence lawyer lied when he said that at no point did trump know what was going on in the Capitol. It puts McCarthy square in the middle. He either confirms the conversation which implicates trump, or he lies under oath when someone has evidence. Evidently he told a number of people about his conversation with trump.
This might be the modern day John Dean moment.
Trump impeachment trial: Senate backs call for documents, witnesses (usatoday.com)
A GoP congresswoman (who voted for impeachment in Congress) with evidence of the details of the trump/McCarthy conversation wants to testify to that and the senate voted 55-45 to allow.
The significance is that it proves that trump knew what was going on with the mob in the Capitol and he did nothing. He knew that Pence was in danger and did nothing. The trump defence lawyer lied when he said that at no point did trump know what was going on in the Capitol. It puts McCarthy square in the middle. He either confirms the conversation which implicates trump, or he lies under oath when someone has evidence. Evidently he told a number of people about his conversation with trump.
This might be the modern day John Dean moment.
Last edited:
Similar threads
