marvin martian
Diamond Member
- Sep 29, 2020
- 36,511
- 54,005
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.
If you want the facts, they should have called Pelosi as a witness, and the sergeant of arms....oh wait, he died mysteriously.
Just what I thought... the BOMBSHELL was Trump yelled and got angry and said some stuff.
Geraldo Rivera again
This goes on the tangent of what people had on them who attended his speechTrump was told before he began his speech that there were armed people arriving for his speech. The committee then played the Capitol Police transmissions stating they were finding all manner of arms on the attendees.
Trump then asked for the magnetometers which scanned for weapons and which kept the armed attendees from getting too close be disabled. He stated they were not there to hurt him.
Meaning he knew those people were armed for the march on the Capitol.
And no one has been prohibited from testifying, dipshit. Though some Trump lickspittles have REFUSED to tesify.
All caught up now, idiot?
Go back to the poster to whom I was responding to. My post was on topic with responding to him.
It is the truthI doubt that.
Baseless.... Let me know when this reaches a court of law.. Until then, this is bull shit claims that are unsupported by cooberating evidence.LOL
Baseless claims?? He paid her a lot of money during the run up to an election just to not talk about it publicly. Nobody does that over a false claim.
The Republicans and Trump had their chance to put loyal Trump lickspittles on the committee. They chose not to.So that's how we do hearings in the USA now? Hope if you go to court the same happens to you.
There was no evidence of that presented. A lot of hearsay was presented without cooberating evidence.
They are worried they will be charged for their crimes.Why won't Trump and his defenders testify then to give their side?
Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.
The dismissals would make a wee bit more sense if there weren't a parade of Republicans and Trump appointees talking up there.The Republicans and Trump had their chance to put loyal Trump lickspittles on the committee. They chose not to.
And now they have the audacity to whine about no loyalists being on the committee!
Only the dumbest of tards like yourself is drinking their piss.
A "fact-finding" committee is supposed to operate under legal rules of evidence... This is nothing more than a giant cluster fuck witch trial.It will happen but not by the Select Committee nor Grand Juries; both are investigative.
When indictments are issued, and a jury becomes the trier of facts, during the trial you will get what you want. In fact, more:
- Direct Examination
- Cross Examination
- Redirect
- Recross.
How...ironic.There was no evidence of that presented. A lot of hearsay was presented without cooberating evidence.
That was hearsay. She wasn't in the care with him at the time.LOL
No, the bombshell was learning there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump knew there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump wanted them let into the Ellipse without having their weapons confiscated because he knew they weren't coming after him ... and that he then summoned them to the Capitol.
Trump was told before he began his speech that there were armed people arriving for his speech. The committee then played the Capitol Police transmissions stating they were finding all manner of arms on the attendees.
Trump then asked for the magnetometers which scanned for weapons and which kept the armed attendees from getting too close be disabled. He stated they were not there to hurt him.
Meaning he knew those people were armed for the march on the Capitol.
And no one has been prohibited from testifying, dipshit. Though some Trump lickspittles have REFUSED to tesify.
All caught up now, idiot?