Nancy Did It

[BWK]

Oh fuck you troll…

Great counter losing argument there shit head. Looks like you're still running from my arguments. LOL!

 

[j-mac]

I never once asked you why he hasn’t testified yet let alone badger you about it.

I asked why we should take his statement seriously.

Why shouldn’t we?

 

[BWK]

Oh fuck you troll…

Do you know what a subpoena is DA?

 

[BWK]

Why shouldn’t we?

Because his buddy contradicted his story and his own when he went under oath. Got any more stupid questions?

 

[j-mac]

Do you know what a subpoena is DA?

According to dems, a congressional subpoena is a useless piece of paper unless THEY issue it.

 

[Faun]

That rates a big who the fuck cares about your opinion. You are a hater and a lowlife.

You asked, FruitLoops, so you're who the fuck cares.

 

[BWK]

According to dems, a congressional subpoena is a useless piece of paper unless THEY issue it.

And you got that straight out of your ass right? When in the history of law enforcement was a subpoena useless? Answer, never. Try again loser.

 

[BWK]

According to dems, a congressional subpoena is a useless piece of paper unless THEY issue it.

I asked you wtf it is?

 

[Marener]

Why shouldn’t we?

Because it’s hearsay. Because it’s vague. Because it contradicts multiple other accounts. Because it comes from a Trump loyalist.

All reasons to be skeptical.

All reasons I’ve listed numerous times.

 

[Lastamender]

I've shown you those results in thd past. You choose to ignore polls that don't comport with your delusions.

Like the evidence of fraud that is really there?

 

[Lastamender]

Because it’s hearsay. Because it’s vague. Because it contradicts multiple other accounts. Because it comes from a Trump loyalist.

All reasons to be skeptical.

All reasons I’ve listed numerous times.

Many more reasons to think the election was fraudulent.

 

[j-mac]

And you got that straight out of your ass right? When in the history of law enforcement was a subpoena useless? Answer, never. Try again loser.

Obama Official Won’t Testify to Congress (Published 2014)

In a letter to the chairman of a House committee that had subpoenaed the director of political strategy last week, the president’s top lawyer said Tuesday that the director had immunity as a member of the executive branch.

www.nytimes.com

 

[j-mac]

I asked you wtf it is?

And I told you.

 

[j-mac]

Because it’s hearsay. Because it’s vague. Because it contradicts multiple other accounts. Because it comes from a Trump loyalist.

All reasons to be skeptical.

All reasons I’ve listed numerous times.

But Cassidy is perfectly fine to believe…can’t have it both ways.

 

[Marener]

But Cassidy is perfectly fine to believe…can’t have it both ways.

Why do you get to have it both ways?

 

[Faun]

Like the evidence of fraud that is really there?

That you still haven't proven even after 20 months and counting.

 

[Faun]

But Cassidy is perfectly fine to believe…can’t have it both ways.

Nothing she testified to has been proven false.

 

[j-mac]

Why do you get to have it both ways?

I’m not…I’d like to see him testify, but in the public setting…Not behind closed doors where the producer has a chance to chop shit up for your consumption.

 

[j-mac]

Nothing she testified to has been proven false.

Nothing she said is of any value at all because it’s not admissible in a court

 

[j-mac]

Nothing she testified to has been proven false.

Aw hell, it may take twenty years.