Tiberius Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 Allen Dershowitz? Ken Starr? Those are the guys that defended Jeffery Epstein! No wonder Alex Acosta got a job with Trump. He was owed a favor
RochesterRob Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 41 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Allen Dershowitz? Ken Starr? Those are the guys that defended Jeffery Epstein! No wonder Alex Acosta got a job with Trump. He was owed a favor All kinds of posts bright and early on a Monday morning. Trying to get back on board at the cubicle farm? 3
/dev/null Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 37 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: All kinds of posts bright and early on a Monday morning. Trying to get back on board at the cubicle farm? And on a Federal holiday. He's trying to impress someone. Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm. 1 1
RochesterRob Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, /dev/null said: And on a Federal holiday. He's trying to impress someone. Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm. He could afford to buy Campbell's Chunky Soup TWICE per week on that kind of money.
Tiberius Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 7 minutes ago, /dev/null said: And on a Federal holiday. He's trying to impress someone. Maybe there's an opening for Commissar of the People's Committee of his Soviet Row 3A at the cube farm. You are so stupid
B-Man Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 Back to the thread...... Impeachment only unfair against Democrats. Charles Schumer’s 1999 letter about impeachment comes back to bite him Original Article On Feb. 11, 1999 — one day before President Bill Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial before the Senate — Sen. Charles Schumer penned a passionate letter, outlining why the process had taken an unfair toll on the nation. He noted that the president believed he had not crossed a line, and praised the large threshold needed to get a conviction in the Senate. He also cheered the American people for opposing impeachment. . 1 2
Deranged Rhino Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 Full response from 45's legal team (171 pages) https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Trial-Memorandum-of-President-Donald-J.-Trump.pdf 4
snafu Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, B-Man said: Back to the thread...... Impeachment only unfair against Democrats. Charles Schumer’s 1999 letter about impeachment comes back to bite him Original Article On Feb. 11, 1999 — one day before President Bill Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial before the Senate — Sen. Charles Schumer penned a passionate letter, outlining why the process had taken an unfair toll on the nation. He noted that the president believed he had not crossed a line, and praised the large threshold needed to get a conviction in the Senate. He also cheered the American people for opposing impeachment. . That's different because ... shuddup! 1 1
Warren Zevon Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 Many Democrats, many Republicans, and Trump's new lawyer Alan Dershowitz had different views on impeachment when Clinton was tried.
wnyguy Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 5 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: Many Democrats, many Republicans, and Trump's new lawyer Alan Dershowitz had different views on impeachment when Clinton was tried. Perhaps it's because Clinton actually committed a crime? 1
Warren Zevon Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, wnyguy said: Perhaps it's because Clinton actually committed a crime? In 1998 Alan Dershowitz said there does not need to be a crime for impeachment, though. That is Trump's current lawyer who is arguing the opposite today. Perhaps it's because people choose the side that most closely aligns with their personal interests. Edited January 20, 2020 by Gary Busey
wnyguy Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: In 1998 Alan Dershowitz said there does not need to be a crime for impeachment, though. That is Trump's current lawyer who is arguing the opposite today. Perhaps it's because people choose the side that most closely aligns with their personal interests. Well, obviously true on that point, but Dershowitz is nothing more than a hired gun who will say whatever the one paying him wants him to say. It really bothers me, personally, that Dershowitz is even on Trumps law team. Edited January 20, 2020 by wnyguy 1
Nanker Posted January 20, 2020 Author Posted January 20, 2020 Alan Dershowitz is a brilliant Constitutional scholar. This "Impeachment" of Trump is as unconstitutional as a kangaroo court and a lynch-mob. 1
3rdnlng Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, wnyguy said: Well, obviously true on that point, but Dershowitz is nothing more than a hired gun who will say whatever the one paying him wants him to say. It really bothers me, personally, that Dershowitz is even on this Trumps law team. Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? 1
wnyguy Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Nanker said: Alan Dershowitz is a brilliant Constitutional scholar. This "Impeachment" of Trump is as unconstitutional as a kangaroo court and a lynch-mob. I agree with you about this impeachment fiasco, but to me the presence of Dershowitz sullies the whole thing for Trump. Edited January 20, 2020 by wnyguy 1
snafu Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? They could have used pretty much any honest Constitutional Scholar -- or any good attorney at all for that matter. I wouldn't have chosen Dershowitz. Then again, I'm not in a position to choose. 1
wnyguy Posted January 20, 2020 Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Dershowitz is not exactly on Trump's team. His job is not to argue a case but to pontificate regarding the constitutionality of this particular impeachment. Dershowitz is a liberal but has decried the unconstitutional aspects of this impeachment from the start and has received personal backlash from it from liberals. Why not listen to what he actually says rather than skewer him now for it? Because if I want to rake Clinton and the other politicians and Hollywood elite over the coals regarding their involvement in the whole Jeffrey Epstein crimes I have to include Dershowitz in that. 1 1
Recommended Posts