Trump - 4 more years of this at least...

[TheDemonLord]

Obviously you have no idea what 'hear say' is. Although that hardly comes as a surprise.

That is the guy who led the vote to acquit Trump admitting Trump was as guilty as sin. He was acquited on a technicality - which may or may not exist. There is no sane argument to support your view, but that won't stop you trying.

Person Y: "Person X Said something to me". Or in this case McConnell saying that Trump admitted to him it was planned = Hear Say.

He was acquitted cause it was blatantly clear that the charge was bogus.

And the fact the Democrats had to fabricate evidence is all the objective proof you need of this.

[pritch]

Person Y: "Person X Said something to me". Or in this case McConnell saying that Trump admitted to him it was planned = Hear Say.

He was acquitted cause it was blatantly clear that the charge was bogus.

And the fact the Democrats had to fabricate evidence is all the objective proof you need of this.

Seriously. There is no part of that connects with reality.

I've listened to lawyers discussing 'hear say', their deifiition is different to yours. McConnell quoting Trump is not hear say. Someone else quoting McConnell saying what Trump had said would be.

He was voted guilty 57-43. Apparently the charge wasn't bogus to the majority of Senators.

You might find support for your view that evidence was fabricated on some of the weirder corners of the 'Net. Otherwise you're clutching at a very small straw.

[TheDemonLord]

Seriously. There is no part of that connects with reality.

I've listened to lawyers discussing 'hear say', their deifiition is different to yours. McConnell quoting Trump is not hear say. Someone else quoting McConnell saying what Trump had said would be.

Really?

"Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted."

(Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a))

Oof.

In case you are wondering, McConnell would be the Declerant, and since Trump is not McConnell, that would make anything Trump says to be a Statement not made by the Declerant.

And since the statement is to prove whether or not the 'insurrection' was planned....

Perhaps you need to listen harder to your lawyers?

He was voted guilty 57-43. Apparently the charge wasn't bogus to the majority of Senators.

So, in the context of an Impeachment, that's not Guilty.

You might find support for your view that evidence was fabricated on some of the weirder corners of the 'Net. Otherwise you're clutching at a very small straw.

There are 2 bits of evidence that were manipulated.

1: The video of Trump's speech where it was deliberately cut before the part where he says 'Peacefully and make your voices heard' - Now, this is deceptive and scummy but it's not outright fabrication (but it does just go to show how piss weak the case was)

2: Digitally altering Tweets - this is where I take an absolutist approach - Once someone has been found to be doctoring evidence - they're done. End of.

[husaberg]

Seriously. There is no part of that connects with reality.

I've listened to lawyers discussing 'hear say', their deifiition is different to yours. McConnell quoting Trump is not hear say. Someone else quoting McConnell saying what Trump had said would be.

He was voted guilty 57-43. Apparently the charge wasn't bogus to the majority of Senators.

You might find support for your view that evidence was fabricated on some of the weirder corners of the 'Net. Otherwise you're clutching at a very small straw.

That gish galloping horse should be captive bolted..........
What he misses is Mitch was not making a statement as a person it was in the judgment of an impeachment proceeding.

[F5 Dave]

Its why I unsubscribed to this thread. There are such weak arguments from the trump stable it is pointless dribble.

[husaberg]

Its why I unsubscribed to this thread. There are such weak arguments from the trump stable it is pointless dribble.

The neighs have it

[TheDemonLord]

Its why I unsubscribed to this thread. There are such weak arguments from the trump stable it is pointless dribble.

Except for, y'know, 2 Acquittals, so clearly the arguments were stronger than the arguments against.

[pete376403]

More worries for trump https://www.ft.com/content/010958df-...f-47341fc1f2b9

[pete376403]

Except for, y'know, 2 Acquittals, so clearly the arguments were stronger than the arguments against.

You write 'aquittals" as though these were fair trials before an impartial jury. Naked self interest was the juries over-riding consideration, rather than any desire to see justice done. But, them's the rules.

[TheDemonLord]

You write 'aquittals" as though these were fair trials before an impartial jury. Naked self interest was the juries over-riding consideration, rather than any desire to see justice done. But, them's the rules.

I completely agree, the Democrats were entirely biased.

[Viking01]

I completely agree, the Democrats were entirely biased.

And the Republicans ? ... 8-)

[pritch]

McConnell says he did it? Well, why didn't the Democrats submit that at the Impeachment trial and case closed!

You posted that. I answered your question. You started throwing out red herrings.

Forget hear say. That's bullshit.

Bogus charges? The majority of the Senate found him guilty. The others voted to acquit on the basis of a technicality. The technicality was what was bogus.

If all else fails allege doctored evidence. More bollocks.



Have you considered how are you going to adjust to reality when Trump is found guilty of one or other of his multiple crimes?

Be it one of the multiple fraud investigations conducted by the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). Or the investigations by the New York Attorney General. There is no pardon option for the latter.

His electoral law violations, either as "unindicted co conspirator number 1" paying off a porn star and a Playboy bunny for their silence during the election. Remember Cohen was jailed for his part in that effort and he was only complying with Trump's instructions. Then there's the hour long Georgia phone call we've all heard.

His part in the deliberate sabotage of the US Postal Service.

There's also the multiple underage sex allegations. Ghislaine Maxell doesn't have Trump or Barr to protect her now, she's probably singing like a canary.

There's his lying about a pandemic, which he knew to be deadly. Half a million dead and counting.

Finally (although probably not) there's the events of January 6. The investigation into that hasn't started yet, next time it won't be a poitical exercise, it will be in a court of law.



Then there's the Dominion voting machine company. The going rate is 1.3 Billion dollars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onjEieXFYgs

[TheDemonLord]

You posted that. I answered your question. You started throwing out red herrings.

Forget hear say. That's bullshit.

Forget hear-say? Oh, I'm sorry - now that I've posted the correct definition, from the federal rules document you want to drop it and move on?

Poor Form. But I'll oblige, I'm charitable like that.

Bogus charges? The majority of the Senate found him guilty. The others voted to acquit on the basis of a technicality. The technicality was what was bogus.

And yet, an Impeachment requires a SuperMajority. So, unless you can produce me a SuperMajority, then no, he was not found Guilty. As I alluded to previously - the Voting was entirely Partisan, with the Republicans who crossed the floor being the spineless Neo-conservative types that were in direct ideological opposition to Trump and his brand of Conservatism.

If all else fails allege doctored evidence. More bollocks.

They literally photoshopped the evidence they submitted. I'm sorry, but this is simply a line you do not cross. Ever.

Anything after that point, as far as I am concerned is Null and void. That your hatred of Trump is able to override the doctoring of Evidence (no matter how 'small' or 'inconsequential' you may think it is) concerning.

Especially given that was no need to doctor it - simply prt scr.

Have you considered how are you going to adjust to reality when Trump is found guilty of one or other of his multiple crimes?

Be it one of the multiple fraud investigations conducted by the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). Or the investigations by the New York Attorney General. There is no pardon option for the latter.

His electoral law violations, either as "unindicted co conspirator number 1" paying off a porn star and a Playboy bunny for their silence during the election. Remember Cohen was jailed for his part in that effort and he was only complying with Trump's instructions. Then there's the hour long Georgia phone call we've all heard.

His part in the deliberate sabotage of the US Postal Service.

There's also the multiple underage sex allegations. Ghislaine Maxell doesn't have Trump or Barr to protect her now, she's probably singing like a canary.

There's his lying about a pandemic, which he knew to be deadly. Half a million dead and counting.

Finally (although probably not) there's the events of January 6. The investigation into that hasn't started yet, next time it won't be a poitical exercise, it will be in a court of law.

Then there's the Dominion voting machine company...

I could address each of these individually and point out where the actual facts vs the alleged 'facts' do not line up, but it'd simply be repeating:

"Here's what Trump actually said/did" vs "Here's the selectively edited version published by the Media to make Trump look bad".

I'm going to paraphrase one of my preferred sources on this - who is as much a Trump fan as I am, which sums up my opinion:

Given he's probably the most investigated President ever and the obsessive vindictive digging for dirt by the Left ever since he won the Election and his multiple years in Big Business - I'd have expected at least something criminal to show up, and yet there has been nothing that has resulted in any successful proceedings against him.

[sugilite:Me]

They literally photoshopped the evidence they submitted. I'm sorry, but this is simply a line you do not cross. Ever.

Anything after that point, as far as I am concerned is Null and void.

Unless if course it is Trump doing it - then your "free pass for trump' kicks like a mule

[pritch]

A few days ago a monument to Trump's success as a businessman was demolished. The Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City NJ. Who else bankpupts a casino?

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/pol...emolition.html