Media Bias

[punch it in]

Trump is actually doing shit that nobody agrees with. He actually did commit crimes. He has conned and lied his whole life. He does make racist remarks. It isn’t just that all us snowflakes ears are bleeding from his abrasive mouth. We all don’t just dislike the man - not his policies- but the man. It is such a cop out to say oh stop crying because you hate Trump. I don’t really give a fuck about Trump. Never did before 2016 anyway. He is a wreckless fool in way over his head. It IS a danger to democracy when you alienate your allies and cozy up to the dictators in the world.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Trump is actually doing shit that nobody agrees with. He actually did commit crimes. He has conned and lied his whole life. He does make racist remarks. It isn’t just that all us snowflakes ears are bleeding from his abrasive mouth. We all don’t just dislike the man - not his policies- but the man. It is such a cop out to say oh stop crying because you hate Trump. I don’t really give a fuck about Trump. Never did before 2016 anyway. He is a wreckless fool in way over his head. It IS a danger to democracy when you alienate your allies and cozy up to the dictators in the world.

So if he actually committed crime(s), why didn't your party include it in the impeachment articles?

Many conservatives dislike the man...its safe to say a majority. But guess what? You cant make up bullshit to remove him...

Remember when conservatives disliked Obama, did they make shit up to remove him? The scandals were a plenty.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

So if he actually committed crime(s), why didn't your party include it in the impeachment articles?

Many conservatives dislike the man...its safe to say a majority. But guess what? You cant make up bullshit to remove him...

Remember when conservatives disliked Obama, did they make shit up to remove him? The scandals were a plenty.

You need to have some one re-read the Mueller report to you, you seriously haven't a clue.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

So if he actually committed crime(s), why didn't your party include it in the impeachment articles?



Many conservatives dislike the man...its safe to say a majority. But guess what? You cant make up bullshit to remove him...



Remember when conservatives disliked Obama, did they make shit up to remove him? The scandals were a plenty.

They are included in the impeachment articles. I forget what the term is, but what he was impeached for basically encapsulates alot of other stuff.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by punch it in

They are included in the impeachment articles. I forget what the term is, but what he was impeached for basically encapsulates alot of other stuff.

Lol...basically just make up any shit you want

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Lol...basically just make up any shit you want

No, it's what the House says they are.......................





Innocent men have nothing to hide

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Lol...basically just make up any shit you want

No not at all. It is a common practice not to put someone on trial for multiple different things when they all coincide with one another. There is actually a term for it, And a reason why it is done.
Also you do realize how funny it sounds when a Trump supporter says what you just said right?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by punch it in

No not at all. It is a common practice not to put someone on trial for multiple different things when they all coincide with one another. There is actually a term for it, And a reason why it is done.
Also you do realize how funny it sounds when a Trump supporter says what you just said right?

I think you mean lesser included charges. Those charges are still brought against the person, but the components of the charges are included in the statute that is being charged. So if you charge murder you might include manslaughter so that if the jury doesnt find intent they can find him guilty of the lesser charge.

Not sure it is the same with the impeacment, because although the Democrats alleged bribery in documents, the House chose not to vote to include it either as its own article or as a part of 1 of the 2 articles of impeachment. And their rationale stated in questioning was, well the defense would argue against it.

For every flaw in the impeachment case, the house seemed to argue, well we had to do it that way or the president's team would have found a loophole and tried to use it. That is what defense lawyers do! And you can not deny a sitting president due process just because you don't want to have to close those loopholes so you can rush to the end.

Could you imagine in ANY court in the US a defense attorney agreeing to only present witnesses that the prosecution says the defense needs? Or a defense attorney waving attorney client privilege so that the prosecution can have the trial around their schedule??

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk