WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

No new witnesses and Mitt is a traitor.......

squeezer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
3,723
Reaction score
1,557
Yes when it's based on a fake sham, all orchestrated by the W. Blower and his and Shiffs buddies.
OFFS...

The whistle blower is irrelevant, along with Schiff and any of his buddies you might name. None of them were part of a poorly executed plan to extort the Ukrainian President into announcing an investigation into Trumps political rival.
 

mjc

Nosy Neighbor
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
8,053
Reaction score
3,471
OFFS...

The whistle blower is irrelevant, along with Schiff and any of his buddies you might name. None of them were part of a poorly executed plan to extort the Ukrainian President into announcing an investigation into Trumps political rival.
I have a question. If Biden hadn't been running would it be ok then?
 

Old Texan

Honorary Warden #377 Emeritus - R.I.P.
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
24,479
Reaction score
25,937
So voting to call witnesses at a TRIAL makes one a traitor now...
You Biff are completely ate up with Trump hatred to the point any iota open mindedness to what is happening is completely gone. That was no trial, it was the culmination of the biggest sham in the history of the USA. A complete and utter shit on the Constitution.

And the fact of whole deal is, the D's didn't want witnesses as they knew putting themselves under oath would turn into themselves facing perjury plus opening the Biden's to having to testify. Nope, today was just for show in this sham to "get" Big Don......

The remaining question is what will be the next act in this shit show???? How can you defend this nonsense?
 

Justfishing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
672
Reaction score
781
If you look at this as a basic criminal case. You have the prosecutor,the house, laying outthe evidence. They have had all thier chance to present evidence.

Nowi in a court of law you have a right to see who is ggiving evidence agaisnt you and mount a defense including how credible thw witness is.

Yet the so called most damning evidence is from an unknown whistle blower. Does not seem credible to most.

Now it goes to the senate. We are expected to have the senate allow more prosection witnesses that weren't part of the house's case?

By this time the houses case should be air tight and not need additional witnesses. It should be a chance for the defendant a chance to rebutt the charges.

This should be a chance for the defense to have witnesses. They didnt feel the need for a defense. Thus there is not a need for new prosecution witnesses.

So for those of you who think Trump needs to be removed. Compare this to Bill Clinton. Clinton lied under oath in a cival case WHILE he was president. Did you support his removal?

Where would you stand if hrc was elected. The clinton foundation has recieved over $100 m from the russians for what? This is money that personally enriched her and her family. If you dont support an investigation and prosecution then you are hypocites.
 

Old Texan

Honorary Warden #377 Emeritus - R.I.P.
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
24,479
Reaction score
25,937
OFFS...

The whistle blower is irrelevant, along with Schiff and any of his buddies you might name. None of them were part of a poorly executed plan to extort the Ukrainian President into announcing an investigation into Trumps political rival.
Good fucking grief!!!!!!! The investigation of Biden is warranted. In his own words, Joe bragged on with holding aid to get a Ukranian AG fired who had the goods on his worthless kid.....

Your sailing on a ship of fools Biffer......And it is taking on water big time.
 

Havalife

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
206
Reaction score
180

Bolton is a joke, he had nothing bad to say in August in an interview. Now the Dems think this guy is the one that can put Trump out of office. What a joke, they got nothing and never had anything on TRUMP 45, another waste of time and money.
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
10,859
Objectively here what is interesting to me is that without “direct first hand witnesses” Trump must be innocent of all charges. And any such witnesses with direct knowledge should not be allowed to testify.

What makes that most interesting to me is that is not only the position of trump supporters but of T & A a law enforcement official.

Based upon that standard OJ as well as the vast majority of accused and convicted criminals for murder and many other charges must be innocent as witnesses with direct first hand experience should be excluded from testifying by the accused.

As there are rarely direct witnesses as the Victims are dead and others should be precluded from testimony or allowed to invoke their fifth amendment rights and only second hand witnesses exist. And of course all those witnesses should be banned under the Trumpkin standard of rules of evidence.

It is an interesting standard and contrary to existing case law and the necessary standards for a lawful society.

But what the hell, maybe criminals would love the MAGA standards of relevant testimony.

And any effort to have such witness is treason.
 
Last edited:

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
Objectively here what is interesting to me is that without “direct first hand witnesses” Trump must be innocent of all charges. And any such witnesses should not be allowed to testify.

What makes that most interesting to me is that is not only the position of trump supporters but of T & A a law enforcement official.

Based upon that standard OJ as well as the vast majority of accused and convicted criminals for murder and many other charges must be innocent.

As there are rarely direct witnesses as the Victims are dead and only second hand witnesses exist.

It is an interesting standard and contrary to existing case law and the necessary standards for a lawful society.
Uhhhh… What?
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
10,859
Um.....doesn’t DNA play a significant role in determining innocence or guilt in murder cases? Kind of a leap from a phone call that’s been released to the public and a murder conviction, no?

DNA is not a first hand witness. It should be excluded under the T & A first hand knowledge standard.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
DNA is not a first hand witness. It should be excluded under the T & A first hand knowledge standard.
I'm really not even sure if you are trying to reference me with your T & A then Law Enforcement Officer... But I'll give it a shot.

Like I've explained a millions times already to your other Trump Haters, this case would not have passed a prelim in any court I've been in. And trying to compare this to a murder case is really stupid considering for there to be murder, the victim has to die. Well guess what super sleuth, the alleged victims in this particular case are alive and well. In fact, so alive and well that they have explained over and over again that the Quid Pro Quo didn't exist.

Maybe it's time to put the bottle down for the night, or just log off for a bit. I'm sure your boy flake could use a hug right now.
 
Last edited:

Racey

Maxwell Smart-Ass
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
14,816
Reaction score
18,802
The Dems had the power to call any of these witnessed earlier on when they were controlling the show, they didn't, too bad so sad. Saying they need to hear from them now is laughable, why didn't they call them in December? Because this is nothing more than a political side show, a bluff hand that the Dems played way too early in the game and lost big on.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
The Dems had the power to call any of these witnessed earlier on when they were controlling the show, they didn't, too bad so sad. Saying they need to hear from them now is laughable, why didn't they call them in December? Because this is nothing more than a political side show, a bluff hand that the Dems played way too early in the game and lost big on.
Same play book they tried against Kavanaugh. Last minute requests of further investigation just to stir up the village idiots. Working like a charm in here so I'm assuming we should see some action from the tolerant side starting Monday.
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
You had 17 witnesses, why do you need more? Republicans had 0 (ZERO) and were not allowed to even speak. Get over it Portland, your team LOST again. WINNING WINNING WINNING Damn us AMERICANS love winning.
Just not true. Like your President, your best argument is a bunch of lies. History will judge those Senators who voted to help Trump in his coverup.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/02/01/impeachment-mad-republicans-cuomo-closing-argument-cpt-vpx.cnn
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
The Dems had the power to call any of these witnessed earlier on when they were controlling the show, they didn't, too bad so sad. Saying they need to hear from them now is laughable, why didn't they call them in December? Because this is nothing more than a political side show, a bluff hand that the Dems played way too early in the game and lost big on.
They did- and Trump obstructed Congress by blocking that testimony.
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
I'm really not even sure if you are trying to reference me with your T & A then Law Enforcement Officer... But I'll give it a shot.

Like I've explained a millions times already to your other Trump Haters, this case would not have passed a prelim in any court I've been in. And trying to compare this to a murder case is really stupid considering for there to be murder, the victim has to die. Well guess what super sleuth, the alleged victims in this particular case are alive and well. In fact, so alive and well that they have explained over and over again that the Quid Pro Quo didn't exist.

Maybe it's time to put the bottle down for the night, or just log off for a bit. I'm sure your boy flake could use a hug right now.
Is there also a crime called ATTEMPTED murder?
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
Is there also a crime called ATTEMPTED murder?
Yes. And if that attempted murder victim said.. "Don't know what you are talking about. We were hanging out having a good ol time, and he never tried to kill me" I'm assuming you would still try to charge them.

Your condition really is getting worse. Please turn in all your guns before they harm someone.
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
10,859
The Dems had the power to call any of these witnessed earlier on when they were controlling the show, they didn't, too bad so sad. Saying they need to hear from them now is laughable, why didn't they call them in December? Because this is nothing more than a political side show, a bluff hand that the Dems played way too early in the game and lost big on.

And they did and it went to court this week.

And the Trump justice department stated that the president has the right to prevent them to defy the subpoena.

And when the judge asked the DOJ lawyer what would them be the remedy.....the trump DOJ said impeachment.

That is the fact. And that is why we are here now.

Impeachment is the direct result of the trump administrations legal strategy as they knew the republican senate would fear for their reelection.

Trumps deep state reigns. Just as previous administrations deep state worked equally well.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
And they did and it went to court this week.

And the Trump justice department stated that the president has the right to prevent them to defy the subpoena.

And when the judge asked the DOJ lawyer what would them be the remedy.....the trump DOJ said impeachment.

That is the fact. And that is why we are here now.
Well gee, if that is now going to be the case you will go with, then I guess the Libturds running the show should have waited for a ruling before they rushed their investigation through.... No.... actually showing up prepared for a case is just crazy talk.

Oh well, anyways, do you think Flake will vote for Trump or Biden?
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
Yes. And if that attempted murder victim said.. "Don't know what you are talking about. We were hanging out having a good ol time, and he never tried to kill me" I'm assuming you would still try to charge them.

Your condition really is getting worse. Please turn in all your guns before they harm someone.
You ever have a DV where the wife is covered in bruises but denies her husband was using her for a punching bag?
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
10,859
I'm really not even sure if you are trying to reference me with your T & A then Law Enforcement Officer... But I'll give it a shot.

Like I've explained a millions times already to your other Trump Haters, this case would not have passed a prelim in any court I've been in. And trying to compare this to a murder case is really stupid considering for there to be murder, the victim has to die. Well guess what super sleuth, the alleged victims in this particular case are alive and well. In fact, so alive and well that they have explained over and over again that the Quid Pro Quo didn't exist.

Maybe it's time to put the bottle down for the night, or just log off for a bit. I'm sure your boy flake could use a hug right now.

Maybe we should meet in person.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
You ever have a DV where the wife is covered in bruises but denies her husband was using her for a punching bag?
Oh, you mean a case actually built off of tangible real life evidence, instead of interpretations of what someone was thinking. Yes I have, several. Can you say the same?
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
10,859
Well this should be fun.

I've actually attended RDP functions. Met some nice people. So sure, I'll gladly meet up with you someday. But I gotta ask, what do you think is going to happen when we meet?

Look forward to it. Should be fun.
 

Racey

Maxwell Smart-Ass
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
14,816
Reaction score
18,802
And they did and it went to court this week.

And the Trump justice department stated that the president has the right to prevent them to defy the subpoena.

And when the judge asked the DOJ lawyer what would them be the remedy.....the trump DOJ said impeachment.

That is the fact. And that is why we are here now.

Impeachment is the direct result of the trump administrations legal strategy as they knew the republican senate would fear for their reelection.

Trumps deep state reigns. Just as previous administrations deep state worked equally well.

No why we are here now is because of a house vote that took place in December, not what doj lawyers said In court this week.

Cart behind the horse, not in front. Unless the Dems were consulting Ms Cleo back during their vote....
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
A crime, no. An impeachable offense, yes.
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
I gotta ask. Do you really think utilizing our court system and the rules surrounding Presidential Privileges is a crime? That really is scary to hear.
Now I gotta ask you, in your experience when someone hides behind the 5th Amendment or claims spousal or some other privilege, do you generally interpret that as evidence of their innocence?
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
11,288
Now I gotta ask you, in your experience when someone hides behind the 5th Amendment or claims spousal or some other privilege, do you generally interpret that as evidence of their innocence?
It can go either way. I do not automatically assume it is guilt or innocence. But we can play hypotheticals all day long and we will have the same results. Facts are really simple, the Libturds have wanted to impeach Trump from the moment he won the nomination. They have wasted almost his entire first term trying to find a way to get him out, and they have failed again and again. Maybe it's time to suck it up and accept that Trump won the election and move on.
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
“Four White House officials, including the top lawyer on the National Security Council, defied subpoenas from House investigators demanding they appear for depositions Monday.

Although the White House did not flatly assert executive privilege as the reason, it came extremely close, Kitrosser said.

“They are probably trying to have it both ways and trying to avoid the legal and political ramifications of claiming executive privilege while getting the advantage of it,” she said.

Politically, an executive privilege claim could cross a line leading to more support for impeachment. Legally it’s more or less the last attempt a president could make to prevent disclosure of evidence or testimony.

The NSC lawyer, John Eisenberg, is “absolutely immune” from congressional testimony as a senior adviser to the president, Eisenberg’s attorney said in a letter. The letter involved separation of powers arguments in making that claim, contending his testimony is comparable to the president himself being forced before the inquiry.

Two other officials, Robert Blair and Michael Ellis, declined to testify unless they were allowed an executive branch lawyer present. The Justice Department issued a legal opinion Monday supporting that position, and the White House put out a statement.”
 

Grandpa mac

Now politics is kinda boring ;)
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
4,085
Reaction score
583
It can go either way. I do not automatically assume it is guilt or innocence. But we can play hypotheticals all day long and we will have the same results. Facts are really simple, the Libturds have wanted to impeach Trump from the moment he won the nomination. They have wasted almost his entire first term trying to find a way to get him out, and they have failed again and again. Maybe it's time to suck it up and accept that Trump won the election and move on.
Another question I gotta ask you, when was the last trial you were involved in where the prosecution wasn’t allowed to introduce a single witness or document?
 

spectras only

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
10,192
Reaction score
6,027
Watched Dershowitz and Tobin on CNN the other day. Tobin [ ex student of Dershowitzt ] trying to school his former teacher Derschowitz on constitutional rules.:rolleyes:o_O:D:D:D
According to Grandpa, accused [ Trump ] doesn't have the right to face his accuser EC , to defend himself.;)Case closed!
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin: 'Trump won' and 'that's how history will remember' this impeachment
Get a box of tissues Granpa:D:D:D
 
Last edited:

yz450mm

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
1,927
Reaction score
2,276
The "prosecution" had their chance, that's why it's at the Senate level. If they have not made their case to date, then too bad, so sad.

But since you're online and I know we have your attention, perhaps you can answer a few questions...

Who are you, and why are you here?

Do you own a boat, enjoy boating, or want to own a boat? (none of us are buying the sailboat picture, so cut the bullshit and give us a real answer)

Do you have any association to S. Rice?

Do you have any association with past or present law enforcement operations?

You talk a really big game, I'm just curious to see if you have anything of substance to back it up.

Cheers!







Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

FreeBird236

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
9,213
Reaction score
5,480
Another question I gotta ask you, when was the last trial you were involved in where the prosecution wasn’t allowed to introduce a single witness or document?
You are pretty dense, it only becomes a trial when it fits your needs. It is a congressional impeachment where the witnesses are brought in during the house portion, there is precedent for this. Your democrat side ran a one sided sham and are incompetent, get over it.
 
Top