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.
The call in itself could easily be seen as an attempt to influence the witness
If you were on trial your lawyer would shit himself if you were to try to call a prospective witness.
Nope. I’m being factual and legal. You are trying to substitute your assumptions for fact. You’re the actual joke. As usual.Are you kidding?
Farty ^ making up more “facts.”Honestly, many of them don't. They have absolutely no idea. You can see it here.
True.It gets very tiring addressing the constant barrage of uninformed Fox news watchers.
What did I say that was wrong?Whatever your username is, it doesn't change the fact that you are regurgitating marching orders handed down to you over a year ago, have watched none of the hearings, and are about as informed on any of it as a drunken ferret.
Time to change the nick
I referred them to the posts here for the evidence.Farty ^ making up more “facts.”
You are so full of shit! If Trump wanted to have someone testify, all he has to do is request it from the kangaroo court. After all, don't defendants call witnesses in other types of cases?Yes, it is the truth that Trump trying to contact the witness is the very definition of witness tampering.
Not to worry...
There will be plenty of time for your Friendly Witnesses, and for cross-examination, once the Grand Jury indicts...
Your response is Nonsensical. You misunderstand the thread title. Garbage in, garbage out.You are so full of shit! If Trump wanted to have someone testify, all he has to do is request it from the kangaroo court. After all, don't defendants call witnesses in other types of cases?
There were weapons at Jan 6th...and those with military training.We would have, maybe.....if Oswald was still alive and maybe he could tell us who was involved (hint no chance it was just him)
Well my hibilly mob is better than your ghetto mob, so I'll chalk that up as win
But again, coups need weapons and military involvment, which is not 1/6.
Not a trial, Simp.The call in itself could easily be seen as an attempt to influence the witness
If you were on trial your lawyer would shit himself if you were to try to call a prospective witness.
Are you kidding?
You are a one note symPHONY of dishonesty and stale lines. When you lie as you do so constantly, yiur lies don’t get any less dishonest just because you repeat them.I referred them to the posts here for the evidence.
They should start with yours. The embarrassing and stupid, false shit you say shows you know less than nothing about the hearings.
Like a good little lap doggie.
They can then make up their own minds.
So McCarthy blew it up and went home to cryWhen Pelousy dictated who —from the GOP side — couldn’t serve on the fake committee, I’d say she had the most to do with it. And at that point, refusing to play in her rigged show was a proper decision.
Nice try though, butchie.
Especially for women.Red states are already there.
I see a conflict of interest in Pelousy sticking her nose into the GOP business. And I frankly don’t believe that anybody else in Congress had anything to do with 1/6.So McCarthy blew it up and went home to cry
but…Pelosi?
So there should be members who are also material witnesses? You see no conflict of interest in that arrangement?
I’m sure he was just calling to confirm their tee time.Just to stir the pot a little with those pesky fact thingies:
The present claim appears to be that President Trump made a phone call to a prospective witness to the January 6 faux committee. Evidently, the recipient declined the call so there was effectively zero communication of any kind. The “witness” then called his or her lawyer. The lawyer then called the fake committee. Then Liz “revealed” this information like one of the fake committee’s periodic “bombshell” announcements.
It is now claimed by the liberal asswipe alarmists that the President’s attempt to communicate with a prospective “witness” amounts to “TAMPERING WITH A WITNESS.”
Sound the alarms!!
But, here’s the monkey wrench in the latest DNC and liberal “news” reporting. It’s called “the law.”
18 U.S. Code § 1512 - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
www.law.cornell.edu
Try though you may, under those initial facts, there is no way on Earth to properly accuse President Trump of any crime.
No communication at all. So, no intimidation. No threat. No basis to say that President Trump sought to alter the witness’ prospective testimony. Libtards here love to substitute their guesswork for “facts,” but that’s not how criminal claims get made or pursued.
They left shortly after Trump told them to, fool.More of Farty’s idiotic bullshit. If JFK had survived, of course we’d have tried to seek out the culpable party or parties and (assuming that the government or part of the government hadn’t been involved) we would likely have sought to arrest, indict and try the conspirators or the actor.
You leftard cultists still imagine that you have any evidence that Trump “controlled” the unarmed mob inside the Capitol building.
Damn.You stay right here and jerk each other off, while the real world keeps turning. How frustrating for you and your cult.
Hey retard. The unarmed mob has no power to continue. And anyway, yiur orejudice is in full display. You even try the predictable ploy of saying “see? They left when the President called on them to cease. Thus he must have been in control of them!” Your insatiable need to be a hack is incredible.They left shortly after Trump told them to, fool.
Same reason they came.
