Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

Best part of today was calling the dems bluff on

Posted on: February 13, 2021 at 16:51:54 CT
4TigersinMichigan MU
Posts:
126862
Member For:
22.76 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
2
witnesses and making them back down.

Hard core liberals are ticked. They can no longer claim suppressing witnesses saved Trump. Mitch outplayed Schumer again.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Best part of today was calling the dems bluff on - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 2/13 16:51:54
     No witnesses, no documentary evidence, no physical evidence. - BH O'bonga MU - 2/13 17:42:51
          How much do you think Nancy paid out to some editors - Tigrrrr! MU - 2/13 17:45:36
     R v D. go team (nm) - pickle MU - 2/13 17:19:45
          Okay sovereign citizen(nm) - DollarSigns MU - 2/13 19:25:50
     It was hilarious seeing how fast they folded(nm) - DollarSigns MU - 2/13 16:59:15
     It was pointless to bring in witnesses since it was obvious - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 16:53:51
          Then why have the trial in the first place? Retarded(nm) - tigerNkc MU - 2/13 18:14:22
          HE'S GUILTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:27:08
          Oof. You’re not handling this theater well. (nm) - MIZ45 MU - 2/13 17:21:03
          But he didn't murder a 10 yr old - Sal MU - 2/13 17:03:48
               RE: But he didn't murder a 10 yr old - MOCO SON MU - 2/13 17:32:59
               Wouldn't matter. In Trump's own words, he could - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:12:40
                    and did he? and, so? and have Dem leaders promised - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:15:53
                    He didn't shoot anybody though (nm) - Sal MU - 2/13 17:13:19
                         No one said he did. Nm - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:15:35
                              why do you keep bringing it up? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:16:38
                                   Why did the defense team keep bringing up irrelevant - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:19:44
                                        What irrelevant crap? (nm) - Sal MU - 2/13 18:03:51
                                             anything they brought up, derp (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 18:05:57
                                                  Seems to be that way - Sal MU - 2/13 18:27:32
                                        another red herring. Is "failure to remove" in the Constitu - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:21:14
               this post of his tells you a lot, doesn't it? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:10:30
                    "He must've done SOMETHING!!!!" - Tigrrrr! MU - 2/13 17:12:09
          Then it was pointless for the House to impeach - Spanky KU - 2/13 17:02:41
          Then why bring the trial if the outcome was known? (nm) - Lerxst MU - 2/13 17:02:08
          Acquit???????? (nm) - ummmm MU - 2/13 16:57:44
               I noticed that too (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 16:58:29
                    Yes, they think they would be acquitting. Nm - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 16:59:44
                         hey, is "Failure to Remove" in the constitution? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:09:58
                              Remove is. Acquit isn't nm - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:11:08
                                   You realize remove isn’t the only option? - pickle MU - 2/13 18:44:07
                                   Is "failure to remove"? and btw, do you think there is - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:15:12
                                   How do you get to remove(nm) - tman MU - 2/13 17:12:41
                         your words bro (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:01:17
               By their terminology. Nm - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 16:58:22
                    What is your terminology?(nm) - tman MU - 2/13 16:59:05
                         Asked and already answered. Nm - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:00:24
                              Humor me?(nm) - tman MU - 2/13 17:05:37
                              nope, asked and averted (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:01:30
                                   See elsewhere on this board, or seek help in learning - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:04:47
                                        i read the board (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:06:42
                                             Called it no removal(nm) - tman MU - 2/13 17:07:59
                                                  is that in the constitution, those specific words? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:09:09
                                                       Nope. He can't deal with the outcome (nm) - tman MU - 2/13 17:10:43
          you misspelled "Democrats" and "convict", partisan hack (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 16:57:36
          RE: It was pointless to bring in witnesses since it was obvious - scan MU - 2/13 16:56:10
               Maybe his financial holdings should be reviewed, now that - SparkyStalcup MU - 2/13 17:02:14
                    he was pushing it because he has a financial stake - FACT!! - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:07:28
                         RE: he was pushing it because he has a financial stake - FACT!! - scan MU - 2/13 17:08:41
                    ahhh going back down that road I see (nm) - Sal MU - 2/13 17:04:59
                    RE: Maybe his financial holdings should be reviewed, now that - scan MU - 2/13 17:03:57
               all-time stupid, that was. HE HAS A FINANCIAL INTEREST - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 16:58:15
                    RE: all-time stupid, that was. HE HAS A FINANCIAL INTEREST - scan MU - 2/13 16:59:52
                         sparky is essentially FIJI level mundane, his next original - 90Tiger STL - 2/13 17:01:02
          Which is why clamoring for witnesses was so foolish - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 2/13 16:54:48




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard