Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
Trials have witnesses and evidence, child. There was a cover-up.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
No, child. It didn't.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
All American Mom 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
Believe what you want, but Senators did hear from witnesses and had ample docs too. And so if the majority of Senators believe they heard all they need, and vote accordingly, then that's that. It isn't the job of the Senate to correct the flaws in the House's case. Too bad, kid.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
No witnesses were called at trial, and no documents were entered into the record. It's the Senate's job to hold a fair and impartial trial. They didn't. These are facts, child.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
All American Mom 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
5A rights are to protect the accused. denied Trump his due process in the House. Once in the Senate, if Trump's council didn't deem cross-examination of witness testimony essential to their defense, then that's their right to wave. The majority of Senators agreed.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
Due process applies to criminal trials, child. Impeachment is a political, not criminal, process.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
There have been 19 impeachment trials in the Senate in our history. Every single one of them included witness testimony and evidence. Except this one, because it was not a trial. It was a cover up. Again, these are facts.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
All American Mom 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
None before this trial incorporated VIDEO CLIPS of actual witness testimony. Again, these are the facts. The House Managers FAILED to make their case. It's just that simple, kiddo.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Patrick S. Tomlinson 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
Video clips are not witnesses, child. Witnesses can be questioned and cross-examined. Video clips cannot. The results of the House's investigation and the evidence they collected was ironclad. If there had been a trial, it would have resulted in a conviction. There wasn't one.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
All American Mom
Any cross-examination would have been for the benefit of the accused, Trump. His lawyers argued that there was no need to hear testimony but were fine either way. It was the Senators, the jurors, who believed they heard enough to make a determination and voted accordingly, kiddo.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More