Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I found it very funny that the high-priced Republican lawyer brought his impeachment file to Congress in a bashed up reuseable grocery bag. Doesn't this guy own a briefcase? It made him look so unprofessional.
Is that all you could focus on?
So a witness is now asking questions and sitting in judgment! What a fucking JOKE!
THIS IS A SHAM CIRCLE JERK! More dishonesty and lies are all they have...
Yep! ALL OPINIONS AND NO FACTS.... Just more of the same bull shit from demonazi'sSo a witness is now asking questions and sitting in judgment! What a fucking JOKE!
THIS IS A SHAM CIRCLE JERK! More dishonesty and lies are all they have...
Yep...
All this is is a bunch of yahoos giving their opinions with nothing to back it up.
You wanted a quilty verdict the minute he was elected, before he was even sworn in. So trying to say that there is a reason is a joke.I do want a guilty verdict, because I believe the President is guilty and caught red handed and no one, despite all kinds of deflection to other topics, can explain what the Pres was up to, if not what the Dems are saying he was.Oh, I know there are two sides.
No. You don't.
You completely support the idea of the minority being suppressed in this process. You want there to be only one side. One guilty verdict.
I have no idea what all the procedural arguments are every time someone takes a breath. I just think it's interesting that when Schiff told them to pipe down, they did. With Nadler? Not so much.
Reminiscent of Schiff's House Intel Committee Hearings and their parade of highly--opinionated NON-witnesses (who witnessed nothing) who could name 1 crime or any 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' committed by the President, Nadler's House Judiciary Hearings will start out with testimony from a 'Constitutional Scholar' who witnessed NOTHING but who will give the OPINION that President Trump 'committed impeachable offenses such as obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress and bribery' - again, NONE of which was proven in the House Intel Committee's failed Inquisition.
* FOOTNOTES:
1. The House Judiciary Committee is led by D-Nadler, the career Democrat politician and obviously inept lawyer / legal expert not qualified for the position of House Judiciary Committee Chairman, based on the fact that not long ago Nadler demanded the US AG - the leading Law Enforcer in the U.S.- BREAK THE LAW and then led the successful Democrat effort to CENSURE the US AG for REFUSING TIO BREAK THE LAW ... a law Nadler helped pass as a Senator.
-- Nadler sabotaged his own Impeachment hearings years ago, as now being reported, by declaring Impeaching a President so close to an election was an attempt to strip the Constitutional choice / right to vote from the American people.
2. 'Constitutional Scholar': Barak Obama was a self-claimed 'Constitutional Scholar; yet, during his Presidency he set a new record for criminal non-compliance with the FOIA & Federal Records Act, was held in Contempt of Court for intentionally ignoring Judges' court orders, and lost more USSC Constitutional Challenges than any modern-day President - he was found to have violated the US Constitution as President several times, such as when he was ruled to have made Un-Constitutional Recess appointments. Obama even declared publicly that he did not have the Constitutional and legal authority to affect change in existing US Immigration Law...right before he did so any way by by-passing Congress to impose his own personal 'DACA' EDICT.
So when Democrats and their surrogate propaganda / Fake News-pushing MSM tell you how 'Constitutional Scholars' have declared (their own biased opinion) President Trump broke laws (something Schiff and his Senate circus could not provide evidence of) just remember Obama was a self-proclaimed 'Constitutional Scholar', too, and lost more Constitutional arguments before the USSC than any other modern President and violated the Constitution - admittedly- just as much.
When a DEMOCRAT calls someone a 'Constitutional Scholar' it means NOTHING!
It is only fitting THIS is how Nadler and the triggered Trump-hating Democrats on Nadler's committee, committed to Impeaching the President, starts off their hearings in this way.
Democratic witness: Trump's obstruction 'worse than the misconduct of any prior president'
.
Don't pretend to have any idea who I am or what I want now or what I wanted then. I'm not your cut out paper doll of a stereotypical Democrat. Shut the fuck up.You wanted a quilty verdict the minute he was elected, before he was even sworn in. So trying to say that there is a reason is a joke.I do want a guilty verdict, because I believe the President is guilty and caught red handed and no one, despite all kinds of deflection to other topics, can explain what the Pres was up to, if not what the Dems are saying he was.Oh, I know there are two sides.
No. You don't.
You completely support the idea of the minority being suppressed in this process. You want there to be only one side. One guilty verdict.
I have no idea what all the procedural arguments are every time someone takes a breath. I just think it's interesting that when Schiff told them to pipe down, they did. With Nadler? Not so much.
God this Goldman is turning very pale and is stumbling.....Yep! ALL OPINIONS AND NO FACTS.... Just more of the same bull shit from demonazi'sSo a witness is now asking questions and sitting in judgment! What a fucking JOKE!
THIS IS A SHAM CIRCLE JERK! More dishonesty and lies are all they have...
Yep...
All this is is a bunch of yahoos giving their opinions with nothing to back it up.
You made it clear that you wanted Adolph Schiffler, Nazi Nadler to remove Trump and Pence under False Pretenses and a Hoax never ending Impeachment Process and Install Propaganda Pelosi as Emperor.Don't pretend to have any idea who I am or what I want now or what I wanted then. I'm not your cut out paper doll of a stereotypical Democrat. Shut the fuck up.You wanted a quilty verdict the minute he was elected, before he was even sworn in. So trying to say that there is a reason is a joke.I do want a guilty verdict, because I believe the President is guilty and caught red handed and no one, despite all kinds of deflection to other topics, can explain what the Pres was up to, if not what the Dems are saying he was.Oh, I know there are two sides.
No. You don't.
You completely support the idea of the minority being suppressed in this process. You want there to be only one side. One guilty verdict.
I have no idea what all the procedural arguments are every time someone takes a breath. I just think it's interesting that when Schiff told them to pipe down, they did. With Nadler? Not so much.
My God Look at Goldman absolutely shrivel like a 3 year old in cold water...manCollins is Eviscerating Goldman and The Dem's whole Lying Case of FICTION. Goldman looks lost and looks like an idiot,.
The democrat narrative just took a lethal hit... Priceless..My God Look at Goldman absolutely shrivel like a 3 year old in cold water...manCollins is Eviscerating Goldman and The Dem's whole Lying Case of FICTION. Goldman looks lost and looks like an idiot,.
My God Look at Goldman absolutely shrivel like a 3 year old in cold water...manCollins is Eviscerating Goldman and The Dem's whole Lying Case of FICTION. Goldman looks lost and looks like an idiot,.
Correct...Durham made a statement that Horowitz doesn't know what is going on...LOL
This phone record bull S is going to land a few in serious hurt.The democrat narrative just took a lethal hit... Priceless..My God Look at Goldman absolutely shrivel like a 3 year old in cold water...manCollins is Eviscerating Goldman and The Dem's whole Lying Case of FICTION. Goldman looks lost and looks like an idiot,.
oops
