It is currently 09/22/20 3:52 pm
WELCOME to Voices or Choices!
If you have no posts, please register for a new account.
If you are a former member rejoining VoC and wish to be reunited with your existing posts,
please email your username to reunite@voicesorchoices.com.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next   Page 1 of 4   [ 79 posts ] New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 11:37 am • # 1 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
Another PRIMO commentary! ~ the circus is up and running ~ :ey ~ Sooz

As Trump’s impeachment trial begins, his legal team fires blanks
01/22/20 08:00 AM
By Steve Benen

[Video, The Rachel Maddow Show, 1/21/20, 9:25 PM ET, "Intentional lying in Senate trial puts lawyers' licenses at risk", accessible via end link]

The first day of Donald Trump’s impeachment trial was a unique opportunity for the president and his legal defense team. After having several weeks to prepare, and with the eyes of the nation upon them, Americans could finally see Team Trump bring its A game, making the best possible case for the president’s innocence.

It didn’t take long, however, before an awkward truth became obvious: Team Trump had no A game to bring. As Jonathan Allen explained in an analysis piece for NBC News, the president’s attorneys “failed him at the opening of his Senate impeachment trial on Tuesday.”

Quote:
Trump’s squad … chose not to defend his actions with a cogent explanation for them. Rather than rebutting hours of evidence presented by House Democratic impeachment managers, White House lawyers opted to repeat Trump’s attacks on the process and the disjointed set of rejoinders he’s delivered to Democrats in public.

“If you can’t even rise to the challenge of trying to defend your client,” NBC News legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said on NBC News Now, “it becomes painfully obvious that the emperor has no defense.”

The most glaring problem with yesterday’s proceedings was Trump’s lawyers’ willingness to brazenly lie, repeatedly, about matters large and small. They lied about the House process; they lied about Robert Mueller’s findings; they lied about House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.); they lied about the genesis of the impeachment inquiry itself.

It reached a point at which Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate’s longest serving member, tweeted during a break, “I would hope later today and in the days ahead, the President’s lawyers remember they are addressing the United States Senate, and personal insults and falsehoods will not serve them well.”

And while it made for an exasperating day – if Trump were innocent, his lawyers should probably have been able to tell the truth – the deceptions weren’t the only problematic part of the defense’s first day at trial.

At one point, Jay Sekulow, one of the president’s controversial personal attorneys, insisted that it should be up to the courts to mediate disputes between the executive and legislative branches, which is the opposite of the argument the Trump administration has argued in the courts for months. Sekulow also pointed to the president exerting executive privilege, which Trump hasn’t actually done.

Sekulow didn’t even get the legal basis of executive privilege right.

Much of the defense team’s presentations were a mishmash of conspiracy theories, insults, falsehoods, and an airing of grievances that didn’t go anywhere. The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin noted that the proceedings exposed the fact that the president “has no coherent defense – a notion bolstered by the lack of coherent lawyers and absence of serious arguments.”

Cynics will note that this display may have been embarrassing, but it will also likely prove to be inconsequential. It’s a Republican-led Senate, filled with members who are desperate to shield Trump from any kind of accountability, and if the defense team had spent the day peddling gibberish with finger puppets, there would still be 51 GOP senators who’d say, “That’s good enough for me.”

But to the extent that reality still has any meaning, the first day of Trump’s impeachment trial was a disaster for the White House. Given an opportunity to demonstrate the president’s innocence, his lawyers clumsily tried to change the subject, which probably ought to be seen as a bad sign for those concerned with Trump’s guilt.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... res-blanks


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 1:22 pm • # 2 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
The defence doesn't need relevant arguments/defence when the outcome was already decided before the trial.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 1:57 pm • # 3 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
True, oskar ~ I've already steeled myself that that there is little chance the DiC will get tossed out of office ~ but there's an election this year, and I want ALL of the corruption et al outed publicly and often everywhere, including the farce of this "trial', right up to election day ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 2:06 pm • # 4 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
sooz06 wrote:
True, oskar ~ I've already steeled myself that that there is little chance the DiC will get tossed out of office ~ but there's an election this year, and I want ALL of the corruption et al outed publicly and often everywhere, including the farce of this "trial', right up to election day ~

Sooz


IMO, the worst of it is that Roberts doesn't disqualify McConnel and Graham as jurors. That pretty much sums up the true "state of the union".
It pretty much says that the US is fooked as far as being a democracy with a valid constitution is concerned.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 2:15 pm • # 5 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
oskar576 wrote:
sooz06 wrote:
True, oskar ~ I've already steeled myself that that there is little chance the DiC will get tossed out of office ~ but there's an election this year, and I want ALL of the corruption et al outed publicly and often everywhere, including the farce of this "trial', right up to election day ~

Sooz


IMO, the worst of it is that Roberts doesn't disqualify McConnel and Graham as jurors. That pretty much sums up the true "state of the union".
It pretty much says that the US is fooked as far as being a democracy with a valid constitution is concerned.

That's EXACTLY why I'm so concerned with this next election ~ :ey

Sooz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 2:17 pm • # 6 
Hero Member

Joined: 10/20/15
Posts: 1698
That's because the Jury isn't selected, its already determined by the constitution.
The rules for criminal trials don't apply.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 2:28 pm • # 7 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 13808
indeed.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 2:49 pm • # 8 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
Cattleman wrote:
That's because the Jury isn't selected, its already determined by the constitution.
The rules for criminal trials don't apply.


And what does it say about "impartiality"?


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 3:53 pm • # 9 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
White House Lawyers Begin Yelling at Democrats During Late-Night Impeachment Trial — After Trump Starts Tweeting
By Sarah K. Burris

President Donald Trump woke up and began tweeting around midnight EST during the Senate impeachment trial over the amendments over the rules. That’s when a noticeable thing changed on the Senate floor: Trump’s team started yelling.

Nearing 1 a.m. EST Tuesday morning while the president was tweeting about impeachment, his team began attacking Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) personally. They called him a liar and accused him of attacking the president and demanded an apology. After nearly 12 hours this was the first time the White House got even remotely animated after a dull defense of the president.

It wasn’t lost on those watching the late-night proceedings. You can see the comments below:

CONTINUED>


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/22/20 9:12 pm • # 10 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
Adam Schiff just went viral undermining the entire Trump defense during the impeachment trial in the Senate.

https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrat ... live_video


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/23/20 2:23 am • # 11 
Hero Member

Joined: 10/20/15
Posts: 1698
oskar576 wrote:
Cattleman wrote:
That's because the Jury isn't selected, its already determined by the constitution.
The rules for criminal trials don't apply.


And what does it say about "impartiality"?


Absolutely nothing. Its not a criteria for jury selection in this case.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/23/20 7:51 am • # 12 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
Cattleman wrote:
oskar576 wrote:
Cattleman wrote:
That's because the Jury isn't selected, its already determined by the constitution.
The rules for criminal trials don't apply.

And what does it say about "impartiality"?

Absolutely nothing. Its not a criteria for jury selection in this case.

True. Not that little things like oaths matter to the GOP but the Senators have to swear that they will be impartial.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/23/20 11:18 am • # 13 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
Currently, the US is clearly unfit to lead anything and/or anyone.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/23/20 12:09 pm • # 14 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
Ridiculous and inexcusable! ~ why am I not surprised? ~ :ey ~ Sooz

Team Trump flubs quid-pro-argument in embarrassing fashion
01/23/20 08:41 AM
By Steve Benen

There was a curious moment in the first day of Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial in which one of the president’s attorneys, Jay Sekulow, chided House impeachment managers for using a curious phrase.

“ ‘Lawyer lawsuits’?” Sekulow asked incredulously. “ ‘Lawyer lawsuits’? … The managers are complaining about ‘lawyer lawsuits’? The Constitution allows lawyer lawsuits. It’s disrespecting the Constitution of the United States to even say that in this chamber – ‘lawyer lawsuits.’”

No one had any idea what he was talking about, but eventually it became clear that one of the House managers referenced “FOIA lawsuits” – in reference to the Freedom of Information Act – and Sekulow misunderstood. Nevertheless, the White House, true to form, refused to acknowledge the misstep, and said Sekulow’s mistake was actually correct.

It was a reminder that Trump’s legal team, led in part by a controversial attorney who leads a televangelist’s legal operation, may not fully be up to the task at hand.

Yesterday, the problem grew even more acute.

Quote:
In an exchange with reporters during the first break, Jay Sekulow, Trump’s personal lawyer, rebutted a reference by Schiff to a quid pro quo.

“You’ve noticed that Adam Schiff today talked about quid pro quo,” Sekulow said. “Notice what’s not in the articles of impeachment: allegations or accusations of quid pro quo. That’s because they didn’t exist. So, you know, there’s a lot of things to rebut.”

White House officials liked the line so much that it used its official Twitter account to promote Sekulow’s argument, which was most unfortunate.

While it’s true that articles of impeachment do not literally use the exact Latin phrase, “quid pro quo,” the first article accuses Trump of pressuring Ukraine into targeting his domestic opponents and “conditioning official United States Government acts of significant value to Ukraine on its public announcement of the investigations. President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit.”

In other words, the articles of impeachment accuse the president of a quid pro quo, which is what Schiff accurately referenced yesterday.

Honestly, Sekulow’s argument to reporters yesterday would’ve generated derisive laughter at a high-school debate tournament.

New York’s Jon Chait added, “It’s probably inevitable, given the nature of the defendant and the charges against him, that Trump’s lawyers will bungle the facts and the law. But is it really necessary for the president of the United States to employ a lead attorney who is unable to understand words?”

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/team-trump-flubs-quid-pro-argument-embarrassing-fashion


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/23/20 2:56 pm • # 15 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
Having already told 16,000+ confirmed lies [many repeatedly], is anyone surprised the DiC would lie now? ~ :ey ~ Sooz

Trump’s complaints about the impeachment process go off the rails
01/23/20 12:48 PM
By Steve Benen

Donald Trump, unable to present much of a defense of his actions, continues to whine incessantly about the impeachment process, which wouldn’t be especially notable were it not for a nagging detail: his complaints are getting a little weird.

Take this morning’s tweet, for example.

Quote:
“The Democrat House would not give us lawyers, or not one witness, but now demand that the Republican Senate produce the witnesses that the House never sought, or even asked for? They had their chance, but pretended to rush. Most unfair & corrupt hearing in Congressional history!”

Let’s take each of the claims one at a time.

* “The Democrat House would not give us lawyers.” Actually, the House Democratic majority specifically extended multiple invitations to White House attorneys to participate in the impeachment process. Trump’s lawyers turned down those invitations and refused to play a role in the House proceedings.

There are some subjective questions in the president’s scandal, but this isn’t one them. It’s not even an obscure detail: the headline in the Washington Post last month read, “White House rejects House Democrats’ invitation to participate in impeachment process as Trump focuses on friendly Senate.” It really wasn’t that long ago; Trump has no excuse for not knowing this.

* “Not one witness.” Actually, not only did witnesses requested by Republicans testify, but the Democratic majority also invited White House attorneys to ask questions of witnesses.

* Democrats want the Senate to “produce the witnesses that the House never sought, or even asked for.” Actually, at issue are witnesses Democrats did ask for, but the White House blocked their testimony.

* “Most unfair.” To date, Trump has not pointed to any specific aspect of the House impeachment proceedings that, in reality, was unfair.

* “Corrupt hearing.” To date, Trump has not pointed to any specific aspect of the House impeachment proceedings that, in reality, was corrupt.

Or put another way, Trump’s tweet this morning included five claims, each of which are the opposite of the truth.

It’s worth emphasizing that the president and his team have had months to come up with real-world examples of the House utilizing an improper process. To date, they’ve found nothing coherent to complain about.

As regular readers know, Republicans originally argued that the House impeachment process was unfair because there’d been no formal vote on the House floor to authorize the inquiry. After the House did, in fact, hold such a vote, Republicans shifted their focus, complaining that the process is unfair because there were no public impeachment committee hearings.

After the House did, in fact, hold extensive public impeachment committee hearings, Republicans shifted again, insisting that the process is unfair because Trump and his team were not given an opportunity to present a defense. After Trump and his team were invited to present a defense, Republicans shifted again, insisting that the process is unfair because, well, just because.

I’m sure some will take this argument seriously, but I’m less sure why.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-complaints-about-the-impeachment-process-go-the-rails#break


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/24/20 7:12 am • # 16 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
Last time I looked, jury tampering was a crime ....

Trump Administration Warned GOP Senators ‘Your Head Will Be On A Pike’ If They Vote Against Him, ‘CBS’ Reports
According to a CBS News report, Republican senators have been handed an ominous warning from the Trump administration.


https://www.inquisitr.com/5852525/trump ... d-on-pike/

The CBS report is here

=========================================


Quote:
Daniel Flatley @DanielPFlatley

White House liaison Eric Ueland just walked by a pen of reporters and said “I can’t wait for the revenge.”

https://twitter.com/DanielPFlatley/stat ... 21635?s=20


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/24/20 10:09 am • # 17 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
As far as impeachment goes... none of it matters.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/24/20 3:26 pm • # 18 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 01/22/09
Posts: 8977
Reading through the news this morning I came across two quotes that give an idea of what the Dems are up against in the trial.

The first was from a Republican Senator who said he hadn't and didn't think many of his fellow Senators hadn't paid much attention to the House Hearings nor have they read any of the evidence since the Articles of |Impeachment came down. They're going to acquit Grabem no matter what.

The second was from a woman heading a conservative PAC which is busy lobbying the moderate Republican Senators to make sure they don't do anything impartial. Like the Senator she said she didn't know much about this Ukrainian stuff. She just knows she want to blow Grabem.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/24/20 3:45 pm • # 19 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 9148
jimwilliam wrote:
Reading through the news this morning I came across two quotes that give an idea of what the Dems are up against in the trial.

The first was from a Republican Senator who said he hadn't and didn't think many of his fellow Senators hadn't paid much attention to the House Hearings nor have they read any of the evidence since the Articles of |Impeachment came down. They're going to acquit Grabem no matter what.

The second was from a woman heading a conservative PAC which is busy lobbying the moderate Republican Senators to make sure they don't do anything impartial. Like the Senator she said she didn't know much about this Ukrainian stuff. She just knows she want to blow Grabem.


And they're counting on voter apathy (plus a lot of cheating) to do the rest. It might even work.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/25/20 10:02 am • # 20 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 4504
Watching some of Trump's lawyers make their case that money was not withheld from Ukraine until they began an investigation into the Bidens.

What they never explain is why then was the money was withheld?


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/25/20 10:32 am • # 21 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
"We'll drop the articles of impeachment and move on to 25th amendment."

Lindsey Graham May Have Hit a New Low With His Latest Defense of Trump's Ukraine Extortion Scheme

Evan Brechtel

After hours of evidence presented by the House Impeachment managers in the Senate trial against President Donald Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) strayed even further into the abyss of fanaticism as he defended the President to reporters.

Graham, a Trump critic turned ally, didn't attempt to refute any of the myriad evidence laid out by Democrats, but instead dismissed the claims that Trump did anything wrong when he withheld congressionally approved aid from Ukraine in exchange for an investigation into his political rival.

Graham said:

Quote:
"All I can tell you is that from the President's point of view, he did nothing wrong in his mind."



Graham then defended the President for asking a foreign power to investigate American citizens, claiming former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter shouldn't be above scrutiny.

He did not address why the solicitation of a foreign power to investigate them was a better route to the truth than using the numerous investigative entities at the President's disposal, nor did he address how any supposed wrongdoing from the Bidens would exonerate Trump's actions.

Graham's claim that Trump did nothing wrong "in his mind" was a further slip into the rejection of extensive evidence that, in reality, Trump certainly did something wrong.

People were sure to let Graham know.

Quote:
Gregory Hatfield @gregoryh325

"Trump did nothing wrong in his mind"--Lindsay Graham.

This is what it has come to. GOP defense of Trump is that he doesn't know the difference between right & wrong. So ANYTHING he does is OK.

No other American would get away with this defense. No one is above the law.

Quote:
Francis Megahy @FrancisMegahy

So according to the new-and-nuts Lindsey Graham, the criterion for guilt in a trial is whether or not the defendant believes "his own mind" that he did anything wrong". The man is deranged! https://twitter.com/Dragonfly_Drama/sta ... 0643528706

Quote:
Monika Beyer @Dragonfly_Drama

Poor Lindsey.

Lindsey Graham screeches at reporters over impeachment: Trump ‘did nothing wrong in his mind’

Quote:
Tea Pain @TeaPainUSA

"Trump did nothing wrong in his mind?"

This can be said of every psychopath serial killer.

https://t.co/y2AUNSVYIy

Quote:
Shelby Kent-Stewart @ShelbyKStewart

Using Lindsey's logic, Jeffrey Dahmer did nothing wrong in his mind either. He was simply looking for a new food source.

Lindsey Graham screeches at reporters over impeachment: Trump ‘did nothing wrong in his mind’

Quote:
David @Swags_D17

Did nothing wrong in his mind you say?

Perfect! We'll drop the articles of impeachment and move on to 25th amendment. You in Lyndsey?

Quote:
J'en ai marre @Woofkoof

Is @LindseyGrahamSC suggesting that @realDonaldTrump is criminally insane? I would tend to agree, yet he seems to know how to hide his crimes, so insanity is not a potentially effective defense.

It appears Trump did nothing wrong in Graham's mind either.

SOURCE


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/25/20 2:37 pm • # 22 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
#VOTETHEMALLOUT2020 TRENDS AS TRUMP'S REPUBLICAN ALLIES STAND FIRM BEHIND THE PRESIDENT DURING IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
BY DAVID BRENNAN

Twitter users have been sharing their anger at the Republican Party as senators battle over President Donald Trump's impeachment trial, which is expected to end with acquittal.

Users were posting messages with the hashtag #VoteThemAllOut2020 on Thursday as senators prepared to resume proceedings in the president's impeachment trial.

Several prominent Republican senators—including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham—have characterized the impeachment push as partisan electioneering, designed to smear the president ahead of the November election.

Both have openly admitted their desire to quickly acquit the president, ideally before he is due to deliver his State of the Union address on February 4. Trump has dismissed the trial as a "hoax" and maintained he did nothing wrong.

For all his divisive rhetoric and actions, Trump remains hugely popular with the Republican base. Gallup polling puts the president's approval rating at 89 percent among Republican members, and at just 7 percent among Democrats.

Republican lawmakers are thus hesitant to turn against the president, fearful that a highly motivated Trump-supporting base would make them pay at the ballot box.

Republican Senate leaders have so far stood firm behind the president, blocking Democratic attempts to secure amendments to proceedings including allowing new witnesses to testify in front of jurors.

Among the most coveted potential witnesses is former National Security Advisor John Bolton, who has said he is willing to appear if called. Republicans have suggested they would allow it if Hunter Biden is also called.

Hunter is the son of 2020 candidate Joe Biden, and debunked corruption allegations against the pair are at the crux of Trump's purported efforts to extort the Ukrainian government into announcing an investigation of Joe Biden which would impact the 2020 election.

Trump said on Wednesday that he did not think Bolton would be able to testify as an appearance would raise national security concerns.

But a Reuters/Ipsos poll of 1,108 people shows that most Americans do want new witnesses to be able to testify. Around 72 percent believe the trial "should allow witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the impeachment charges to testify," with 84 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Republicans supportive.

Seventy percent of respondents—including 80 percent of Democrats and 73 percent of Republicans—said senators should "act as impartial jurors" during the proceedings.

Among those backing #VoteThemAllOut was author and radio broadcaster Grant Stern. He called on users to "do your duty" if "the Republican Senators cannot stay awake during a trial over which they're presiding as judges" or if they allow an "unfair trial without documents and witnesses."

Author Jack Wallen said voters should "rid the country of complicit criminals." He added, "The @GOP have proven the only thing they care about is themselves in power. This November we can save the country."

https://www.newsweek.com/votethemallout ... al-1483706


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/25/20 8:46 pm • # 23 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
Impeachment: Democrats undoing 2016 election, say Trump lawyers

President Trump's lawyers have begun defending him at his impeachment trial, accusing Democrats of seeking to overturn the result of the 2016 election.

"The president did absolutely nothing wrong," White House Counsel Pat Cipollone said.

Mr Trump's defence will last three days and follows the Democrats' prosecution case which ended on Friday.

The president faces two charges linked to his dealings with Ukraine.

The charges, or articles of impeachment, accuse him of ....

MORE>


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/25/20 8:49 pm • # 24 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 12/27/16
Posts: 6420
“HEAD ON A PIKE”: IT SURE SOUNDS LIKE THE WHITE HOUSE THREATENED TO DECAPITATE SENATORS WHO VOTE AGAINST TRUMP
This isn’t concerning at all, not in the slightest.

BY BESS LEVIN

On Saturday, after Rep. Adam Schiff and his fellow Democratic impeachment managers wrap up their opening statements, lawyers for Donald Trump are expected to begin their defense of the president against charges that he abused his power and obstructed Congress. The following week the Senate will debate the matter of calling witnesses, a key issue for which Democrats need four Republicans to come over to their side. At present, the GOP is confident that its colleagues across the aisle don’t have the necessary votes, with the key undecided lawmaker, Lamar Alexander, expected to ultimately stay loyal to Mitch McConnell. Given the stakes, though—if Democrats do convince four Republicans to come over to their side, it could mean hearing from people like John Bolton, who know where all the Ukraine bodies are buried—the White House is apparently leaving nothing to chance. And by leaving nothing to chance, we mean threatening anyone who crosses Trump.

According to a report from CBS News ...

CONTINUED


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/27/20 12:54 am • # 25 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 13808
actually, the most logical outcome is that the 2016 election won't be undone at all.

what Trump is really saying is that he is guilty as hell. which we all know, of course.

and that is terrible for the GOP.

it is Trump who is undoing the GOP, not Democrats.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next   Page 1 of 4   [ 79 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group