Suppose - just suppose - all the Jan 6th witnesses have told the truth

[Seymour Flops]

Suppose they all told the truth under oath when speaking to the committee. It's a stretch to assume that, given how much coaching was done behind closed doors before they were allowed to speak publicly, and how impossible some of the testimony is. But suppose.

What have they said that proves anything other than that Trump was mad about the election that he believed was stolen, that he was looking for legal maneuvers to stop it from being certified and that he wanted his supporters to protest on the day it was to be certified?

Other than those which are clearly not crimes, what has the committee found on Trump?

 

[rightwinger]

What have they said that proves anything other than that Trump was mad about the election that he believed was stolen, that he was looking for legal maneuvers to stop it from being certified and that he wanted his supporters to protest on the day it was to be certified?

They proved that …

Trump was repeatedly told the election was not stolen
That he illegally tried to influence local electors to change the vote
That he supported an illegal scheme to substitute state electors
That he repeatedly was told the Vice President doesn’t have the authority to overturn the states
That he told the TRUMP Mob that Pence did have the authority and let the country down
That he was informed that the mob was armed
That he replied they were no danger to him and sent them to the Capitol

 

[Seymour Flops]

They proved that …

Trump was repeatedly told the election was not stolen
That he illegally tried to influence local electors to change the vote
That he supported an illegal scheme to substitute state electors
That he repeatedly was told the Vice President doesn’t have the authority to overturn the states
That he told the TRUMP Mob that Pence did have the authority and let the country down
That he was informed that the mob was armed
That he replied they were no danger to him and sent them to the Capitol

So no crimes, just disagreements.

Can't criminalize disagreement quite yet.

 

[rightwinger]

So no crimes, just disagreements.

Can't criminalize disagreement quite yet.

We shall see…..

Georgia is still investigating election tampering
Does not look good

 

[WEATHER53]

The only truth to come out of these witch hunts is that Trump once sat on a bed in a business suit with his daughter and that TDS causes very real delusions.

 

[WEATHER53]

So no crimes, just disagreements.

Can't criminalize disagreement quite yet.

100% correct
Governed by emotions any disagreement is categorized as a physical attack which necessitates legal recourse for the hurt emotions of a disagreement

 

[rightwinger]

The only truth to come out of these witch hunts is that Trump once sat on a bed in a business suit with his daughter and that TDS causes very real delusions.

Keep telling yourself that

Denial is your best friend

 

[WEATHER53]

Keep telling yourself that

Denial is your best friend

Keep telling yourself that is a mental midget phrase from those who cannot formulate discussion not rebuke
Rightwringer is a good name for you, you are wrung out.

 

[Independent thinker]

Suppose they all told the truth under oath when speaking to the committee. It's a stretch to assume that, given how much coaching was done behind closed doors before they were allowed to speak publicly, and how impossible some of the testimony is. But suppose.

What have they said that proves anything other than that Trump was mad about the election that he believed was stolen, that he was looking for legal maneuvers to stop it from being certified and that he wanted his supporters to protest on the day it was to be certified?

Other than those which are clearly not crimes, what has the committee found on Trump?

He lunged for the steering wheel. They can prove it with multiple hearsay testimonies. But, given your supposition that it is actually true, I haven't yet looked up the criminal code on this to see what the major sentence is for this heinous crime.

 

[BackAgain]

They proved that …

Trump was repeatedly told the election was not stolen

Which is of no value. I keep telling you that libs are emotionally driven and unthinking. Does that mean you now “know” it?

That he illegally tried to influence local electors to change the vote

Wrong. He asked some to find him votes. And there’s nothing illegal in such request if it’s based on denying legal effect to improperly cast votes.

That he supported an illegal scheme to substitute state electors

He did? Or did he simply seek to find out about substituting a slate of electors that conformed with what he thought were the actual votes?

That he repeatedly was told the Vice President doesn’t have the authority to overturn the states

And I agree that the VP probably doesn’t have such authority. But that doesn’t mean I’m right or that Trump was wrong. Indeed, if you weren’t so blinded by your partisan inability to think clearly, even you might wonder if the Constitutional direction to count and certify the electoral college vote might not implicitly entail the authority to refuse where there is good reason to say the election was fraudulently interfered with.

That he told the TRUMP Mob that Pence did have the authority and let the country down

Really? Quote that with link. And even if it is a direct quote, his statement still isn’t illegal and it would constitute any evidence of any crime.

That he was informed that the mob was arme

So what? Irrelevant.

That he replied they were no danger to him and sent them to the Capitol

He was right probably that they posed no threat to him. And that’s what he was saying: that their possibly being armed was no good basis for the secret service to refuse to take him to the Capitol.

And you have zero evidence that Trump “sent” anyone to the Capitol. And even if he had, that’s still not a crime.

 

[22lcidw]

Keep telling yourself that

Denial is your best friend

As long as Repubs are not allowed to give a counter and bring their own witnesses to the so-called hearings, it does not make a difference.

 

[rightwinger]

Which is of no value. I keep telling you that libs are emotionally driven and unthinking. Does that mean you now “know” it?


Wrong. He asked some to find him votes. And there’s nothing illegal in such request if it’s based on denying legal effect to improperly cast votes.

He did? Or did he simply seek to find out about substituting a slate of electors that conformed with what he thought were the actual votes?

And I agree that the VP probably doesn’t have such authority. But that doesn’t mean I’m right or that Trump was wrong. Indeed, if you weren’t so blinded by your partisan inability to think clearly, even you might wonder if the Constitutional direction to count and certify the electoral college vote might not implicitly entail the authority to refuse where there is good reason to say the election was fraudulently interfered with.

Really? Quote that with link. And even if it is a direct quote, his statement still isn’t illegal and it would constitute any evidence of any crime.

So what? Irrelevant.


He was right probably that they posed no threat to him. And that’s what he was saying: that their possibly being armed was no good basis for the secret service to refuse to take him to the Capitol.

And you have zero evidence that Trump “sent” anyone to the Capitol. And even if he had, that’s still not a crime.

 

[rightwinger]

As long as Repubs are not allowed to give a counter and bring their own witnesses to the so-called hearings, it does not make a difference.

Republicans were invited to participate

Maybe they should have

 

[BackAgain]

^ when lying libtards can’t address points, this is all they have. Granted, it ain’t much. But really, what do you expect?

 

[rightwinger]

^ when lying libtards can’t address points, this is all they have. Granted, it ain’t much. But really, what do you expect?

I find your denial amusing

 

[BackAgain]

I find your denial amusing

I find your delusion hysterical. But your inability to defend your claims is self-evident, Leftwhiner.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He lunged for the steering wheel. They can prove it with multiple hearsay testimonies. But, given your supposition that it is actually true, I haven't yet looked up the criminal code on this to see what the major sentence is for this heinous crime.

Yeah. I know pretty much what would happen to me if I lunged for a wheel that a Secret Service Agent was steering, but apparently Trump overpowered his. Assuming it is all true, which I do in this thread.

 

[Seymour Flops]

We shall see…..

Georgia is still investigating election tampering
Does not look good

"We shall see . . . " is all you got?

So you fully admit that the TDS Committee has nothing yet?

 

[rightwinger]

"We shall see . . . " is all you got?

So you fully admit that the TDS Committee has nothing yet?

The investigation on election tampering is ongoing
Doesnt look good for the Crybaby Loser