WH will not participate in impeachment hearings

Nov 2014
32,136
6,292
North Carolina
LOL @ "trial."

You really have no idea about how this works, do you?
If you don't think the impeachment process involves a trial. then you are the one who has no idea how this works.

So you may want to "LOL" at yourself instead.

Here is a link discussing the Senate Impeachment Trial (as said by the article) if you want to brush up on your knowledge before embarrassing yourself with these inept attempts at condescension.

 

raj

Oct 2018
6,107
8,823
Somewhere they can't find me.
If you don't think the impeachment process involves a trial. then you are the one who has no idea how this works.

So you may want to "LOL" at yourself instead.

Here is a link discussing the Senate Impeachment Trial (as said by the article) if you want to brush up on your knowledge before embarrassing yourself with these inept attempts at condescension.


What Trump refused to participate in was a Congressional hearing, not a trial.

But you've royally pwn'ed yourself. Good job! :yes:

You're dismissed.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: the bull59
Nov 2014
32,136
6,292
North Carolina
What Trump refused to participate in was a hearing, not a trial.

You've royally pwn'ed yourself. Good job! :yes:
Actually you're the one royally "pwn"ed" yourself, as you just said the impeachment process did not involve a trial (it does) but instead of admit your error you start moving the goal post to try and cover your mistake Pretty pathetic.

But to further correct your bullshit - my post was aimed at the process generally (not any single hearing) that a person should be availed the right to defend his or himself in any process, whether it is a trial or a hearing - and that this right should not be denied or given based on their willingness to cooperate. I've been pretty clear about about. You have no idea what you are babbling about.
 

raj

Oct 2018
6,107
8,823
Somewhere they can't find me.
Actually you're the one royally "pwn"ed" yourself, as you just said the impeachment process did not involve a trial (it does) but instead of admit your error you start moving the goal post to try and cover your mistake Pretty pathetic.

But to further correct your bullshit - my post was aimed at the process generally (not any single hearing) that a person should be availed the right to defend his or himself in any process, whether it is a trial or a hearing - and that this right should not be denied or given based on their willingness to cooperate. I've been pretty clear about about. You have no idea what you are babbling about.



Keep talking. :D
 
  • Love
Reactions: the bull59
Nov 2010
3,290
3,764
Massachusetts
I believe it is.

It may not be confirmed in law currently. But I believe every accuser should have the right to defend his or herself self, not only in criminal trials - but in any situation, and especially this one. I believe that is a fundamental and basic American right regardless of procedure or what Adam Schiff thinks.
As my father used to say, wish in one hand, then shit in the other, and see which hand fills up first.

Your beliefs mean shit.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: the bull59 and raj

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
78,828
49,030
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Rev. Hellh0und has been banned from this thread. Please do not respond or refer to his posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rev. Hellh0und

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
78,828
49,030
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
I believe it is.
Is what? A criminal prosecution?
It may not be confirmed in law currently. But I believe every accuser should have the right to defend his or herself self, not only in criminal trials - but in any situation, and especially this one.
That right already exists in non-criminal situations, of course - i.e., civil cases as well. And Trump has that right in the Senate trial. An impeachment investigation is just an investigation - and he has been invited to participate, and has declined.
 
Apr 2012
82,160
6,700
Jesus you are chockfull of GOOFY. Trump had more "rights" than either Nixon or Clinton.
His enablers on the appropriate committees had total access to the closed door sessions.
His enablers and their creepy attorney had equal time on statements and questioning in the open sessions.
He THEN had an invite to appear in person and/or send an attorney and declined.
Just please STOP with dumb process arguments and STOP regurgitating Putin propaganda about Ukraine.
You show you have no idea how the democrats controlled those hearings
 
Apr 2012
82,160
6,700
Again, the GOP had the option of not participating. They chose to do so, and use all of the time they were allotted, for obvious reasons.
The democrats showed it was a kangaroo court and stopped the GOP from fair participation