anonymoose
Classical Liberal
No, it definitely is not.
Her testimony was about a conversation...not about what happened with the moron in the car.
I believe her. That conversation should be enough to convict Trump of lunging.
No, it definitely is not.
Her testimony was about a conversation...not about what happened with the moron in the car.
I believe her. That conversation should be enough to convict Trump of lunging.
I don’t get it. If there is no law against lunging why are so many here making a big deal of the possibility he lunged based on a conversation?Anyway, as you so heavy-handedly suggested, there is no law that he cannot lunge...or yell and scream at his Secret Service detail. And since he is an absolutely classless boor, it would not surprise anyone that he did it.
So you think Hutchinson was lying and Trump won’t get convicted of lunging?
I don’t get it. If there is no law against lunging why are so many here making a big deal of the possibility he lunged based on a conversation?
I agree with you that he’s a classless boor. Can he be convicted of being a classless boor?
No, Trump cannot be convicted of being a classless boor.
The lunge is not entirely UNIMPORTANT, though, because it strengths the case that Trump was anxious to lead the insurrectionists down to the Capitol...and to stop the counting of the Electoral College ballots. That was their plan...to stop the counting so that Trump could remain in office, after a free, fair election had thrown him out.
I think most people discussing the issue realize that.
Possibly. Let’s say Trump goes to trial. He could argue that he wanted to go to the capitol to peacefully protest. We’ll never know since he didn’t go. And since he wasn’t there he wasn’t part of the insurrection.No, Trump cannot be convicted of being a classless boor.
The lunge is not entirely UNIMPORTANT, though, because it strengths the case that Trump was anxious to lead the insurrectionists down to the Capitol...and to stop the counting of the Electoral College ballots. That was their plan...to stop the counting so that Trump could remain in office, after a free, fair election had thrown him out.
I think most people discussing the issue realize that.
I believe her. That conversation should be enough to convict Trump of lunging.
lol.
no it doesn't.
even your lies are meaningless.
Wow. The sarcasm of my post went right over your head.LOL. When you say things like this do you feel your IQ dropping? This is like Dan Rather saying, "It is something he WOULD have said though!" in defense of just reporting made up nonsense on See B.S. News.
Possibly. Let’s say Trump goes to trial. He could argue that he wanted to go to the capitol to peacefully protest. We’ll never know since he didn’t go. And since he wasn’t there he wasn’t part of the insurrection.
I get that the goal is to prevent Trump from ever being president again. I don’t want that. There’s too many decent Republicans waiting in the wings. I just think the anti-trumpist’s are chasing windmills. And they always have since before he was inaugurated.
What doesn't?
There are no lies, so your comment is meaningless. Par for a Trumper.
It strengthens the case, like I said.
If that is not important to you, fine with me.
Wow. The sarcasm of my post went right over your head.
no it doesn't.
hearsay lunges don't strenghthen anything, dum-dum.
It strengthens the case, like I said.
If that is not important to you, fine with me.
The sarcasm in my post went over your head.
We understand where you are coming from. My question was when you post that sentence did you feel your IQ drop to the level of the folks you were aiming it at? I'm sorry you got butthurt, it was not my intention.
LOL. When you say things like this do you feel your IQ dropping? This is like Dan Rather saying, "It is something he WOULD have said though!" in defense of just reporting made up nonsense on See B.S. News.
it's a lie that even a hearsay lunge means something meaningful.
no it doesn't.
hearsay lunges don't strenghthen anything, dum-dum.