Hutch Starskey
Diamond Member
- Mar 24, 2015
- 35,391
- 9,170
- 1,340
You can certainly hope so.there was no witness tampering.
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.
You can certainly hope so.there was no witness tampering.
The DOJ will have to prove it if it occurred.Well you have to prove witness tampering to convict.....IN A COURT OF LAW!
haha or you can hope so!! hahah. just like you hoped for russian hoax conspiracyYou can certainly hope so.
BuT wHY iSnT hE oN the CoMMitTeE
WTF?why haven’t they been called to a public hearing??
not some interiew behind close doors
You should’ve watched the hearings instead of begging other grown men to educate you.And exactly what have they revealed that wasn't already public knowledge and/or a crime by Trump?
Be specific and bring links to actual testimony, not what was leaked by Dimtard members of the Shit Show.
for s closed door interview…not a public hearingWTF?
They refused to comply with the subpoenas, dope.
Which they refused.for s closed door interview…not a public hearing
Yes in a COURT OF LAW!! Not a fake one-sided committee.The DOJ will have to prove it if it occurred.
So you admit nothing substantive has been exposed, or you would show it.You should’ve watched the hearings instead of begging other grown men to educate you.
WTF?
They refused to comply with the subpoenas, dope.
YupI’ll post this one last time for the short bus folks.
Section 1512 of Title 18 constitutes a broad prohibition against tampering with a witness, victim or informant. It proscribes conduct intended to illegitimately affect the presentation of evidence in Federal proceedings or the communication of information to Federal law enforcement officers. It applies to proceedings before Congress, executive departments, and administrative agencies, and to civil and criminal judicial proceedings, including grand jury proceedings. See 18 U.S.C. § 1515(a)(1). In addition, the section provides extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over the offenses created therein. See 18 U.S.C. § 1512(g); 128 Cong. Rec. H8469 (daily ed. Oct. 1, 1980); H. R. Rep. No. 1369, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 20-22 (1980).
So you believe 'Mr. Shortbus' who gets his jollies making fun of the mentally handicapped and doesn't know the difference between a 'select committee' and a real court of law.Yup
Witness tampering
You seem to be the only one who doesn't understand that lying to the committee carries the same penalty as perjury in a court, or that their subpoenas have the same force of law.So you believe 'Mr. Shortbus' who gets his jollies making fun of the mentally handicapped and doesn't know the difference between a 'select committee' and a real court of law.
You make no senseSo you believe 'Mr. Shortbus' who gets his jollies making fun of the mentally handicapped and doesn't know the difference between a 'select committee' and a real court of law.
Because Pelosi is a fucking NAZI.BuT wHY iSnT hE oN the CoMMitTeE
That's because their testimony will be behind closed doors where schiff for brains can say whatever he wants about it.WTF?
They refused to comply with the subpoenas, dope.
No one involved has said otherwise.Yes in a COURT OF LAW!! Not a fake one-sided committee.
I admit you’re not competent.So you admit nothing substantive has been exposed, or you would show it.
I accept your admission the Nazi Piglosi Shit TV Show is a bust.
LOLGood.
Screw the Stalin Committee.
Their star witness in emergency session just fizzled.
The committee has a whole MOUNTAIN of egg on its face.
What a farce.
They should fire that Hollywood guy, he's not doing a very good job.