GodLovesCats
Well-Known Member
- Mar 16, 2019
- 7,401
- 1,329
- 47
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
Well ... at least until next November ...
No, until noon on January 20, 2021 if he is not convicted.
Upvote
0
Well ... at least until next November ...
My ... your hopes are high ...And at least maybe for the next 4 years after that. And then maybe the President's son will run in 2024?
*Despite his criminality.
A non-conviction is not the same as being totally innocent. There’s no reason to believe a party-line vote in the senate to exonerate Trump wouldn’t equally be motivated by political considerations.
When you have jurors (i.e. Senators) who refuse to consider the evidence ... not convicted /= innocent ...Yeah, yeah, we've all heard it before about how a person who is not convicted is not the same as innocent. It's just a way of continuing to make a person prove their innocence even after going through the legal process, and thereby you ignore the legal process when it doesn't give you the results you desire.
I can’t help it if Trump can win in an actual court but never does in the court of public opinion.Yeah, yeah, we've all heard it before about how a person who is not convicted is not the same as innocent. It's just a way of continuing to make a person prove their innocence even after going through the legal process, and thereby you ignore the legal process when it doesn't give you the results you desire.
I can’t help it if Trump can win in an actual court but never does in the court of public opinion.
When you have jurors (i.e. Senators) who refuse to consider the evidence ... not convicted /= innocent ...
I'm glad Lindsey told us he was burying his head in the sand. That way, ... we have no illusions as to what's going on ...
Did the Republicans ever get to call in the witnesses they wanted to testify?
When you have jurors (i.e. Senators) who refuse to consider the evidence ... not convicted /= innocent ...
I'm glad Lindsey told us he was burying his head in the sand. That way, ... we have no illusions as to what's going on ...
Lindsey Graham Won’t Read Impeachment Hearing Transcripts: ‘This Is All B.S.’Got a source for that quote?
Did they ever request any who were relevant?
Relevant to what? Relevant to obtaining the goal of getting the president impeached? Relevance to serving one side of the story is the same as only allowing witnesses that testify for the accusers.
Relevant to determining whether or not Trump did anything improper.
Plenty good room in my Father's kingdom ...I consider myself an independent and I won't be voting for Dems at least (and probably not anyone else). I even voted for Hillary last time, despite not liking her. That should show just bad the current Democratic party is to me, where they've managed to be even more loathsome than she is. Or maybe.. they always were, and I shouldn't have even voted for her either.
Then witnesses called by the Republicans should have been allowed to be heard so that it could be determined. But since things were done as they were, Reps and Dems are going to vote along party lines because the hearings were done along party lines.
You didn’t answer my question. Did Republicans request any witnesses whose testimonies would have been relevant?
We'll never know since they weren't allowed to present their testimonies.
Huh? You don’t know if somebody’s testimony is going to be relevant until they start testifying? You call random witnesses and just let things play out? Lol, that’s a good way to waste a lot of time and get some unpleasant surprises. Why don’t you and I testify? Maybe we have something relevant to say.
Tell me again which political party got to determine who was relevant and who wasn't.