Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Macanudo said:

Why doesn't a D Senator ask why Graham, Lee and Cruz were meeting with Trump's attorneys?  

this needs to be explained as well. they should absolutely call that shit out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

It’s surprising to me that the house managers aren’t citing the very real principle of res ipsa loquitur to answer the issue of how Trump’s words amount to incitement of insurrection.

What's that?

Oh it's Latin, isn't it?

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, B00M said:

Of course his defense can't just say when trump called for the NG. Must be damning.

He never did.   Never called for the NG.

 

The acting SecDef delayed it and never called for it.

 

An undersecretary of the Army finally ignored the chain of command and did it.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

What's that?

Oh it's Latin, isn't it?

It means- it speaks for itself. Throws the burden on the defense to show Trump's words didn't incite the violence at the Capitol. 

Posted

They can't impeach the President because he's not the President anymore, but they should have spent weeks and months developing evidence.  Love the stupidity.

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

It probably would have been better for the future of the country if the mob had managed to kill a senator

 

4 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

Ted Cruz is a piece of Shit

oh! oh! i know who to sacrifice!

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

this fucking lawyer loves the power trip of having the question read again. listen the first time, you shithead.

trying to run out the clock in a game the refs are giving to him

Posted
25 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

What's that?

Oh it's Latin, isn't it?

That's Latin, darlin', evidently @Bozo_Casanova here's an educated man. Now I really hate him. 

In answer to the question, I don't really think this is something to which res ipsa would apply.  You really need to prove the causal connection.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

That's Latin, darlin', evidently @Bozo_Casanova here's an educated man. Now I really hate him. 

In answer to the question, I don't really think this is something to which res ipsa would apply.  You really need to prove the causal connection.

 

I had a few casual connections in my day.

Wait, what?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Rubio is such a POS. He really slipped in there about impeaching and disqualifying a former SoS. Who could that be?!?!? 

Posted
43 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

He never did.   Never called for the NG.

 

The acting SecDef delayed it and never called for it.

 

An undersecretary of the Army finally ignored the chain of command and did it.

Seems pertinent.

Posted
44 minutes ago, deech said:

They can't impeach the President because he's not the President anymore, but they should have spent weeks and months developing evidence.  Love the stupidity.

This is the Racehorse Haynes tactic:

 

Say you sue me because you claim my dog bit you. Well now, this is my defense: My dog doesn't bite. And second, in the alternative, my dog was tied up that night. And third, I don't believe you really got bit. And fourth, I don't have a dog.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, YChang said:

Is the defense just to yell loudly about everything and anything except what's being asked?

It worked for LadyG in the Cavanaugh hearings.  It wasn't going well until he started yelling, then suddenly Dems backed down and Cavanaugh got confirmed.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

That's Latin, darlin', evidently @Bozo_Casanova here's an educated man. Now I really hate him. 

In answer to the question, I don't really think this is something to which res ipsa would apply.  You really need to prove the causal connection.

 

@Bozo_Casanovaand his smooth condescension is the big giveaway of his intellectual superiority to mere mortals like me. 

And to expand up your answer, res ipsa loquitur is more of a tort concept in the United States, not criminal (exceptions apply of course). But this is not a criminal trial, so . . . why not. 

Excellent issue spotting BC. 

Posted

Anyone else ever dream of a plume of Novichok A-234 wafting into a Republican Cloakroom filled with McCarthy, Scalise, Jordan, Gaetz, Nunes, Gohmert, MTG, Stefanik, GunTits, Cawthorn, Roy, Cruz, Hawley, Graham, McConnell, Cornyn, Thune, Ernst, Cotton, Blackburn, Scott, Lee, Johnson, Tuberville, Inhofe and Kennedy? 

No??? Just me???  Oh, no reason ... never mind.   Guess I just need to stop watching the impeachment proceedings ...



×
×
  • Create New...