Speculations over Trump's dementia surface...

[Cuddles]

Are you saying the current impeachment investigation is based on the word of a single person who only can only offer hearsay? I admit to not looking into the latest impeachment sham closely, but damn!

I'm saying the complete opposite in fact

 

[Bugenhagen]

My concerns, as mentioned in an earlier post, are based upon laws and customs not being consistently or evenly applied. A biased media is the cause of this. Another concern I have is the Democrats are inappropriately trying to use “Whistleblower protections” to prevent normal rights afforded to a defendant.

I can imagine some situations where the Identity of a Whistleblower should be withheld for a reasonable period of time, but I have not seen a reasonable argument in support of this here. There is no credible evidence the accuser’s life is in danger or that keeping their identity secret is absolutely required to preserve other evidence. Further, the subject matter of the investigation does not rise to the level of a “impending and potentially debilitating national security risk” that should be necessary to justify risking the diminishment of a defendant’s rights.

Now back to the accuser. The accuser is not the only one who has rights. Again, the accused has rights as well. The people who elected the accused also have rights. What makes this case even more ridiculous, is the idea there was not anything out of the norm, measured by historical standards, concerning Trump’s conduct. The accusers knowledge, experience, and apparent availability are key to a credible investigation. Good God, given the antics of the Left recently, there is a need for credibility of our political process right now. The right to face one’s accuser and cross examine him should not be infringed, especially when a opposing political party has multiple levels of politically based interest in the outcome. The Democrats really needed some Republican support before preceding with impeachment. Do you see this now? This impeachment hearing seems more about maintaining the status quo for establishment politicians (Or their sons) than about finding out the cause of a real and significant illegal action that caused significant harm to the United States.

As far as witness protection is concerned, for all of Trump’s opponents and all the lawsuits he has been in, there is yet to be credible evidence that any Trump directed physical harm has come to any witnesses that were against him.

We need a return to ethics, legal principles, and the Constitution in order to have a representative Government again.

The person who filed the report is a whistle blower. That is all there is.

You should sue your mom for the apparent damage she did to your brain in the womb.

We don't need to argue what a you think the law SHOULD be in your world.

 

[Bugenhagen]

Wallet's got nothing so.. I'm off to watch The Good Place (near the end now).

 

[maximumpossiblesuffering]

The person who filed the report is a whistle blower. That is all there is.

You should sue your mom for the apparent damage she did to your brain in the womb.

We don't need to argue what a you think the law SHOULD be in your world.

In your world, false accusers should be effectively given immunity against their potentially false statements? How does a ghost swear to tell the truth under penalties of perjury?

Edit: To swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God?

 

[Tony Stark]

Since we no longer need to cross examine key witnesses in your world, how about the Epstein video tapes being shown publicly?

For the greater good?

After all, is there not a more compelling reason to loosen Amendment six provisions in order to expose compromised and blackmailed pedophile politicians who may still be in the position of making legislative or even prosecutorial decisions?

Close your eyes and pretend it’s Trump.

Muh!

Mutiple people have been cross examined .The whistleblower is irrelevant at this point.

 

[Wallet]

Mutiple people have been cross examined .The whistleblower is irrelevant at this point.

There’s an old adage, “it’s what you can prove in court.” So far this whole inquiry has put nothing forward that would be admissible in a courtroom other than someone’s opinions and the veracity and motivation of those are questionable.

The accused has the right to meet the accuser. Without that the whole thing stinks of partisan politics, lies and fabrication.

 

[Cuddles]

There’s an old adage, “it’s what you can prove in court.” So far this whole inquiry has put nothing forward that would be admissible in a courtroom other than someone’s opinions and the veracity and motivation of those are questionable.

The accused has the right to meet the accuser. Without that the whole thing stinks of partisan politics, lies and fabrication.

let's be honest, people that report a crime to 911 that they witness have the option to remain anonymous. The prosecution without any evidence available will try their damnedest to get the anonymous witness to testify. That's not the case here, there were a dozen other witnesses closer to the crime testifying.

 

[Wallet]

Wallet's got nothing so.. I'm off to watch The Good Place (near the end now).

Someone, Mr. Anon, usually under supervision leaks/writes something that’s reported in the media. It’s not vetted, but who cares, it fits the OMB narrative (or better yet, Mr Anon is protected from cross examination and proof of accusations). Other media outlets report the report. The reported report is used as evidence. Under testimony witnesses cite said reported report as source of knowledge and the circle of unsubstantiated gossip continues ad nauseam.

The whole thing was an orchestrated political kabuki drama, compiled solely for talking points.

 

[Wallet]

let's be honest, people that report a crime to 911 that they witness have the option to remain anonymous. The prosecution without any evidence available will try their damnedest to get the anonymous witness to testify. That's not the case here, there were a dozen other witnesses closer to the crime testifying.

They testified nothing? Everyone’s opinion was what they wanted to believe, Mean Old Trump said this and that, but when they were asked specifically did you hear President Trump say squat..... the answer was NO.

Everyone’s sick of the bullshit.... but please continue. You’re just digging the hole deeper.

 

[Cuddles]

They testified nothing? Everyone’s opinion was what they wanted to believe, Mean Old Trump said this and that, but when they were asked specifically did you hear President Trump say squat..... the answer was NO.

Everyone’s sick of the bullshit.... but please continue. You’re just digging the hole deeper.

and that's fine, you're welcome to remain blind and deaf to what's been testified, but the whistle blower said nothing different than what's been confirmed by those who've testified, so the calls to "out" the whistle blower is gnashing of teeth and would provide nothing new.