There have been 19 impeachment trials in the Senate in our history. Every single one of them included witness testimony and evidence. Except this one, because it was not a trial. It was a cover up. Again, these are facts.
-
-
Odgovor korisnicima @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
None before this trial incorporated VIDEO CLIPS of actual witness testimony. Again, these are the facts. The House Managers FAILED to make their case. It's just that simple, kiddo.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 3 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
Video clips are not witnesses, child. Witnesses can be questioned and cross-examined. Video clips cannot. The results of the House's investigation and the evidence they collected was ironclad. If there had been a trial, it would have resulted in a conviction. There wasn't one.
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 37 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
Any cross-examination would have been for the benefit of the accused, Trump. His lawyers argued that there was no need to hear testimony but were fine either way. It was the Senators, the jurors, who believed they heard enough to make a determination and voted accordingly, kiddo.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 2 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
No child. It was 51 Senators who voted to cover up Trump's crimes and refuse to hold a legitimate trial. 12 times.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 29 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
No, it was 51 Senators, who listened to House Managers blather on and on for hours on end about Trump supposed abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. In the end, their case was nothing close to CLEAR AND CONVINCING let alone beyond a shadow of doubt. Sorry, kiddo.
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
No one disputed their findings, in reality. Trump's legal team didn't even mount a defense of his cr8mes. Indeed most GOP senators who have spoken on the matter agree that he did it, but voted to acquit anyway. Because there was no trial, child.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 26 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
Sorry, kiddo, again, Trump was not charged with any high crimes or misdemeanors. The House Managers' case was built on the assumption that Trump acted solely for personal gain. And they failed to prove it.
#AcquitTrumpNow1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cindyaelliott @GOPLeader
Yes, child. He was. Bribery is even specifically spelled out as a "high crime and misdemeanor" in the Constitution. And his actions don't need to be solely for personal gain to be impeachable. The House proved, beyond any doubt, that his personal political gain was a factor.
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 16 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @stealthygeek @GOPLeader
To suggest that ALL politicians don't act to some extent for personal political gain would be totally ignorant. The House also failed to prove that concerns over Hunter Biden's board position were unwarranted especially since they've NEVER BEEN LOOKED INTO.
10 replies 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
Hunter Biden didn’t withhold aid from an ally. He didn’t lock babies in cages. He didn’t praise white supremacists. He didn’t badger gold star families. He didn’t say he could shoot someone on 5th street and he didn’t get impeached. Trump did.
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.