Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

1…2728303233…164

Comments

  • #872
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,749 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    anyone know why the senators cant ask questions directly?

    I’m assuming it’s a rule that’s been in the senate since Robert Todd Lincoln was a young fella.


  • #873
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    anyone know why the senators cant ask questions directly?

    May be a simple way to control, as the Senators are not allowed enter into any debate, at this point.


  • #874
    duploelabs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Lovely leading question by Bernie.

    Puts it up to the defense to toe the line about a stolen election or tell the truth and risk the wrath of trump


  • #875
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,749 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    The lawyer for trump is a bad mood and not answering the questions.


  • #876
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,462 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    anyone know why the senators cant ask questions directly?

    Because some of them are under the table telling the defense what to say and it would be obvious if they were to ask a question from that position.


  • Advertisement
  • #877
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    ted cruz's question should be good. he has his eye on 2024


  • #878
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    ted cruz's question should be good. he has his eye on 2024

    maybe not


  • #879
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,749 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Funny how the question from cruz( who met with these lawyers) this guy has a prepared answer.


  • #880
    circadian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,875 ✭✭✭circadian


    This defence is unbelievably bad. Like someone said, they make Lionel Hutz look good.


  • #881
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Cassidy asking a Q, this should be good. It's against Trump.


  • Advertisement
  • #882
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    circadian wrote: »
    This defence is unbelievably bad. Like someone said, they make Lionel Hutz look good.

    he's not the most energetic or engaging in fairness. but he cant prove a negative

    its up to the prosecution to prove that trump incited a riot.


  • #883
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    he's not the most energetic or engaging in fairness. but he cant prove a negative

    its up to the prosecution to prove that trump incited a riot.

    Think Raskin answered that well for you.


  • #884
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    i like jamie raskin, had a very hard time over the last few months.


  • #885
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,749 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Water John wrote: »
    Cassidy asking a Q, this should be good. It's against Trump.

    And it was. And the trump lawyer got pissy about it. Getting annoyed and saying “but the democrats...” isn’t answering the serious questions your client has.


  • #886
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,749 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    i like jamie raskin, had a very hard time over the last few months.

    I do too. I loved his answer to the one about democrats objecting to electors and he was able to list off the one he made and what the issue with Florida was and also the then VP Biden didn’t entertain it.


  • #887
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    And it was. And the trump lawyer got pissy about it. Getting annoyed and saying “but the democrats...” isn’t answering the serious questions your client has.

    yeah, he needs to give up with the whataboutery.

    like, that video of the dems is completely irrelevant. at worst it demonstrates that he did incite the riot, but what about the dems, they did the same thing? why not impeach those?

    irrelevant, not the question in hand should have been his answer or position.


  • #888
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Good Question from Senator Guganthall (unsure about spelling)


  • #889
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Good Question from Senator Guganthall (unsure about spelling)

    Bluementhal maybe?


  • #890
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    i'd say trump is going mad. yer man going on about the higher standard politicians should be afforded vs firefighters.

    just stick with the constitution mate.


  • #891
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    i'd say trump is going mad. yer man going on about the higher standard politicians should be afforded vs firefighters.

    just stick with the constitution mate.

    They won't get paid.


  • Advertisement
  • #892
    Headshot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,089 ✭✭✭✭Headshot


    I suspect if Trumps lawyers just came out and said yup he did it, no bones about it

    The GOP would still vote against the impeachment


  • #893
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    lol...can the house mangers answer the question, that was the question.

    raskin...i dont know what the question was but let me just say....


  • #894
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Headshot wrote: »
    I suspect if Trumps lawyers just came out and said yup he did it, no bones about it

    The GOP would still vote against the impeachment

    and if all evidence (which has yet to be presented) that trump actually incited a riot, how would the dems vote?

    its nearly pointless.


  • #895
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Water John wrote: »
    They won't get paid.

    they all want their air time


  • #896
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,462 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Raskin way ahead of anyone else in this phase of the proceedings. Able to quote prior case specifically, the defense attorney needs the question read again repeatedly.


  • #897
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Hillary has somehow entered the debate!


  • #898
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Raskin way ahead of anyone else in this phase of the proceedings. Able to quote prior case specifically, the defense attorney needs the question read again repeatedly.

    way more articulate, but he's yet to prove that trump incited a riot.

    i feel sorry for patrick leahy


  • #899
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,462 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    way more articulate, but he's yet to prove that trump incited a riot.

    i feel sorry for patrick leahy

    It's beyond a reasonable doubt for me.


  • #900
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,632 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    way more articulate, but he's yet to prove that trump incited a riot.

    i feel sorry for patrick leahy

    Again you're making the mistake of applying the criminal law test. This is not a criminal case. As Raskin said it's about common sense.

    BTW it's beyond reasonable doubt for me too, but the bar here is not even that high.


  • Advertisement
  • #901
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,239 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Water John wrote: »
    Again you're making the mistake of applying the criminal law test. This is not a criminal case. As Raskin said it's about common sense.

    is that the test? criminal law is beyond reasonable doubt, civil is on the balance of probability.

    i think trump knew exactly what he was doing, but you're into thought crimes at that stage, so you still need evidence.

    has there been any?


Advertisement