Trump Should Accept Democrats Impeachment Hearings Offer!

[kyzr]

You're 0 for 3 trying to smear Dershowitz who was just being a good lawyer for his clients.

A good lawyers should have a sense of justice.
A sleazy lawyer gets his clients off on technicalities and emotional tricks.

Judges have a sense of justice, attorneys are all about "upholding the will of" and winning for their well paying clients.
Dershowitz always wins, and he says that impeachment for the Ukrainian call is wrong.
Trump should hire him and Turley, you can have Schiff and Nadler.

 

[Mike473]

Why should Trump bother with the House at this point? There is nothing he could say, no witness he could call, no evidence that he could present that would change the Democrats minds. The Dems have long ago concluded guilt. The only question is whether they have the guts to play that hand.

The move here is clear. Call the Dems bluff. No more participation. Trump's team should announce they are resting their case in the House and will start preparing for trial.

 

[JoeB131]

Judges have a sense of justice, attorneys are all about "upholding the will of" and winning for their well paying clients.
Dershowitz always wins, and he says that impeachment for the Ukrainian call is wrong.
Trump should hire him and Turley, you can have Schiff and Nadler.

Dershowitz doesn't always win.. a few of his poorer clients end up in prison...

With Luck, Trump will be joining them.

 

[MAGAman]

Dershowitz doesn't always win.. a few of his poorer clients end up in prison...

With Luck, Trump will be joining them.

Instead of impeachment, maybe Democrats can find someone that spoke to someone that felt like Trump committed a criminal act.

Oh, nevermind... Criminal courts arent allowed to be run by Fascists.

Here's an idea. Maybe Democrats should consider a better POTUS candidate, and live with the results of elections.

 

[JoeB131]

Instead of impeachment, maybe Democrats can find someone that spoke to someone that felt like Trump committed a criminal act.

Oh, nevermind... Criminal courts arent allowed to be run by Fascists.

Here's an idea. Maybe Democrats should consider a better POTUS candidate, and live with the results of elections.

We did run a better candidate, and she won by 3 million votes... but that's neither here nor there.

We've found people who've laid out Trump's criminal acts... He misappropriated funds congress had allocated in order to bribe/extort a foreign leader to slander a political opponent.

I find it funny that you guys think getting a blow job was an impeachable offense but this isn't.

 

[MAGAman]

We did run a better candidate, and she won by 3 million votes... but that's neither here nor there.

We've found people who've laid out Trump's criminal acts... He misappropriated funds congress had allocated in order to bribe/extort a foreign leader to slander a political opponent.

I find it funny that you guys think getting a blow job was an impeachable offense but this isn't.

1. Your lousy candidate lost because she was running for POTUS and not some imaginary popular vote election that Trump didn't enter.

2. There were no misappropriated funds. That is confirmed by each witness Shifft called, and the person you call a victim that said the crime never happened.

3. Clinton was impeached for perjury and Obstruction of justice by denying his sexual assault victim a fair trial.

At least you could pretend you care about reality.

 

[JoeB131]

1. Your lousy candidate lost because she was running for POTUS and not some imaginary popular vote election that Trump didn't enter.

Wow... the popular vote is "imaginary"? It strikes me if anything is "imaginary" it's the Electoral College.

2. There were no misappropriated funds. That is confirmed by each witness Shifft called, and the person you call a victim that said the crime never happened.

You mean the co-conspirator didn't admit his culpability... or how close he came to taking the bribe?

3. Clinton was impeached for perjury and Obstruction of justice by denying his sexual assault victim a fair trial.

She had a totally fair trial... and a judge found her claims were bullshit and didn't meet the standard for sexual harassment

She could not prove retaliation or a hostile work environment... even if what she claimed was true, which it probably wasn't.

 

[MAGAman]

1. Your lousy candidate lost because she was running for POTUS and not some imaginary popular vote election that Trump didn't enter.

Wow... the popular vote is "imaginary"? It strikes me if anything is "imaginary" it's the Electoral College.

2. There were no misappropriated funds. That is confirmed by each witness Shifft called, and the person you call a victim that said the crime never happened.

You mean the co-conspirator didn't admit his culpability... or how close he came to taking the bribe?

3. Clinton was impeached for perjury and Obstruction of justice by denying his sexual assault victim a fair trial.

She had a totally fair trial... and a judge found her claims were bullshit and didn't meet the standard for sexual harassment

She could not prove retaliation or a hostile work environment... even if what she claimed was true, which it probably wasn't.

1. No Einstien. The popular vote POTUS ELECTION is imaginary.

2. No. I mean nobody witnessed any of the crimes you whine about, including the person you said was a victim. The Democrats' star witness admitted under oath that Trump explicitly told him no quid pro quo. In America feeling someone did something wrong isn't a crime.

3. Clinton settled the lawsuit with Jones, paying her over $1/3Million, which was a long of money then. Hardly the vindication you're grasping for.

 

[JoeB131]

1. No Einstien. The popular vote POTUS ELECTION is imaginary.

Last time I checked, 65 million real people voted for Hillary... the question is, why do we still use this 18th century anachronism?

2. No. I mean nobody witnessed any of the crimes you whine about, including the person you said was a victim. The Democrats' star witness admitted under oath that Trump explicitly told him no quid pro quo. In America feeling someone did something wrong isn't a crime.

You can keep saying that... but let's say that in 2012, Obama had shook down the French President to reopen an investigation into the car accident Mitt Romney was involved in in France... and he was caught on tape doing it... you'd be screaming bloody murder.

3. Clinton settled the lawsuit with Jones, paying her over $1/3Million, which was a long of money then. Hardly the vindication you're grasping for.

Actually, it was less than she asked for, and a lot less than what it would have cost to keep litigating the issue. She had to drop her insistance on an apology for what didn't happen.

 

[kyzr]

1. The Electoral College isn't going anywhere, period.
2. Trump committed no crimes, this impeachment sham is a partisan ploy that will backfire during the senate trial
3. Paula Jones? Really? Ugh. Put her next to Stormy and see which one makes your putter flutter.

 

[MAGAman]

1. No Einstien. The popular vote POTUS ELECTION is imaginary.

Last time I checked, 65 million real people voted for Hillary... the question is, why do we still use this 18th century anachronism?

2. No. I mean nobody witnessed any of the crimes you whine about, including the person you said was a victim. The Democrats' star witness admitted under oath that Trump explicitly told him no quid pro quo. In America feeling someone did something wrong isn't a crime.

You can keep saying that... but let's say that in 2012, Obama had shook down the French President to reopen an investigation into the car accident Mitt Romney was involved in in France... and he was caught on tape doing it... you'd be screaming bloody murder.

3. Clinton settled the lawsuit with Jones, paying her over $1/3Million, which was a long of money then. Hardly the vindication you're grasping for.

Actually, it was less than she asked for, and a lot less than what it would have cost to keep litigating the issue. She had to drop her insistance on an apology for what didn't happen.

1 Lat time I checked this is America. We're a Republic. Hillary should have known this.

2. "What if" Obama didn't do it either? The transcript exonerates Trump, and nobody witnessed the coup plotters allegations, including your alleged victim Zielinski that repeatedly called you a liar.

3. You're actually saying Clinton won when he paid Jones $375,000.00. Hahaha.. Now that's just funny.

 

[JoeB131]

1 Lat time I checked this is America. We're a Republic. Hillary should have known this.

Hey, guy, you can have a Republic and STILL have honest elections without using an anachronism like the Electoral College.

In fact, no other country has anything like it, and most countries look at us like we are stupid when we "elect" a guy like Bush or Trump.. They know they are morons. We know they are morons.

2. "What if" Obama didn't do it either? The transcript exonerates Trump, and nobody witnessed the coup plotters allegations, including your alleged victim Zielinski that repeatedly called you a liar.

I'm sorry, even the transcript, which everyone says was altered, makes him look guilty.

3. You're actually saying Clinton won when he paid Jones $375,000.00. Hahaha.. Now that's just funny.

She was asking for 2 million and an apology... The court dismissed the case. And when all was said and done, Paula Jones was broke and taking her clothes off for Penthouse and boxing Tonya Harding for money.

 

[MAGAman]

1 Lat time I checked this is America. We're a Republic. Hillary should have known this.

Hey, guy, you can have a Republic and STILL have honest elections without using an anachronism like the Electoral College.

In fact, no other country has anything like it, and most countries look at us like we are stupid when we "elect" a guy like Bush or Trump.. They know they are morons. We know they are morons.

2. "What if" Obama didn't do it either? The transcript exonerates Trump, and nobody witnessed the coup plotters allegations, including your alleged victim Zielinski that repeatedly called you a liar.

I'm sorry, even the transcript, which everyone says was altered, makes him look guilty.

3. You're actually saying Clinton won when he paid Jones $375,000.00. Hahaha.. Now that's just funny.

She was asking for 2 million and an apology... The court dismissed the case. And when all was said and done, Paula Jones was broke and taking her clothes off for Penthouse and boxing Tonya Harding for money.

Bottom line. Bill Clinton paid over $1/3Million to Jones to get Jones to drop the lawsuit. Period. If Clinton were winning, he could have drawn it out for years while getting hummers in the Oval Office.

You can spin until you drill yourself 20 feet deep down into the ground, but you can't make that a Clinton victory.

 

[JoeB131]

Bottom line. Bill Clinton paid over $1/3Million to Jones to get Jones to drop the lawsuit. Period. If Clinton were winning, he could have drawn it out for years while getting hummers in the Oval Office.

Why would he do that? Why would he spend 10 times that to eventually get it dismissed.

Let's be clear on what happened here. Judge Weber-Wright dismissed it as having no merit because Jones had not proven that seeing Clinton's dick caused her any harm. I mean, she knows what a dick looks like. Clinton was not her direct supervisor and she suffered no setbacks or retaliation in her career as Jr. Possum Catcher, or whatever it was she did.

The SLIM read that she had was that after the dismissal, SCOTUS had ruled in the Ellwerth case that the mere perception of retaliation might constitute grounds. That would means years of appeal proving it wasn't the case here.

Final point... none of that money came out of Clinton's pocket. His insurance companies paid it. ON the other hand, he would be on the hook for any legal fees up until it was finally dismissed on appeal.

Then again, you guys look at a $10,000 fine and think that the $70 Million Ken Starr spent sniffing panties was money well spent.

 

[MAGAman]

Why would he do that? Why would he spend 10 times that to eventually get it dismissed.

Let's be clear on what happened here. Judge Weber-Wright dismissed it as having no merit because Jones had not proven that seeing Clinton's dick caused her any harm. I mean, she knows what a dick looks like. Clinton was not her direct supervisor and she suffered no setbacks or retaliation in her career as Jr. Possum Catcher, or whatever it was she did.

The SLIM read that she had was that after the dismissal, SCOTUS had ruled in the Ellwerth case that the mere perception of retaliation might constitute grounds. That would means years of appeal proving it wasn't the case here.

Final point... none of that money came out of Clinton's pocket. His insurance companies paid it. ON the other hand, he would be on the hook for any legal fees up until it was finally dismissed on appeal.

Then again, you guys look at a $10,000 fine and think that the $70 Million Ken Starr spent sniffing panties was money well spent.

So you're actually saying Clinton paying $375,000.00 proves he won? Ok. Run with that.

I guess your standard for victory is a lot lower than mine.

I suppose you also think Clinton being disbarred for perjury proves he didn't lie?

 

[JoeB131]

So you're actually saying Clinton paying $375,000.00 proves he won? Ok. Run with that.

I guess your standard for victory is a lot lower than mine.

I suppose you also think Clinton being disbarred for perjury proves he didn't lie?

He wasn't disbarred.... his license (which he wasn't using) was suspended for five years. Of course, he hadn't practiced law in something like 20 years at that point.

 

[MAGAman]

He wasn't disbarred.... his license (which he wasn't using) was suspended for five years. Of course, he hadn't practiced law in something like 20 years at that point.

OK.

I'll accept that his suspension happened instead of disbarment because the difference isn't important to me.

Still... if that's your measure of victory, you're a loser.

 

[JoeB131]

OK.

I'll accept that his suspension happened instead of disbarment because the difference isn't important to me.

Still... if that's your measure of victory, you're a loser.

Sure it was.... He didn't have to admit to her lies, he went on to finish his term and become rich, that bitch is still sucking dick on the Right Wing Greivence Circuit with the other two liars, Broadderick and Willey...

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Generally agree with your analysis.
1. Professors Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz are on the record as saying that the Ukraine call is NOT an impeachable offense.
2. Barr already said that there was no indictable "obstruction of justice" in the Mueller report. No matter how hard the team of Hillary donators want it.
3. Trump needs someone to promote the "Executive Privilege" argument against congressional overreach. Probably Barr again.
4. I'd even like to see the USSC weigh in on the validity of any "articles of impeachment" before a senate trial, just not sure how to get it before them? Maybe a letter from Barr and the President?

Ukraine call was the bait to get Trump to obstruct Congress. They will use Obstruction of Congress as their reason to impeach Trump...

Mark it and know that was their plan the whole time.