If they proved their case why do they need more witnesses? How come they didn’t allow republican witnesses when it was in front of the house?
-
-
Odgovor korisnicima @afriedduck @ChrisGadsden9 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Since the GOP was openly refusing to consider the case in good faith, more witnesses would have satisfied their supposed concerns and exposed the public to more of Trump's corruption. Also, you know the Repubs are lying to you? They think you're dumb.http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/impeachment-hearings-even-the-gops-witnesses-are-hurting-trump …
3 proslijeđena tweeta 7 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @upsidedwnworld @Barbiemacs1 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Well it's not on video... It has not been boasted such as like Biden. Nothing happened to Joe. Why all of a sudden is Trump worse? Anyone? What is the precedent here?
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @EvoNZguru @Barbiemacs1 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
The prosecutor Biden bragged about getting rid of was protecting Burisma from legal action by British anti-corruption units at the time.https://theintercept.com/2019/09/25/i-wrote-about-the-bidens-and-ukraine-years-ago-then-the-right-wing-spin-machine-turned-the-story-upside-down/ …
1 reply 1 proslijeđeni tweet 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @upsidedwnworld @EvoNZguru i sljedećem broju korisnika:
But he still did brag about threatening to withhold aid. Can mess around in details maybe make an argument it was justified, but the action was still there. And it’s always there, across party lines, when they give billions of dollars in aid or weapons deal there are strings
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @afriedduck @EvoNZguru i sljedećem broju korisnika:
He bragged about it because he was so committed to stopping corruption that he did it even when it meant putting a company his son worked for at risk. He's bragging about showing strength and determination against corruption. What is objectionable?!?
1 proslijeđeni tweet 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @upsidedwnworld @afriedduck i sljedećem broju korisnika:
It's hard to believe that you can't see a difference between making aid conditional on ousting a corrupt prosecutor who is protecting rich criminals and making aid conditional on helping to construct a smear campaign against a political opponent. These are not comparable acts.
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @upsidedwnworld @EvoNZguru i sljedećem broju korisnika:
So you can ask for something if it’s for a good reason? Who decides if it’s a good reason?
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @afriedduck @EvoNZguru i sljedećem broju korisnika:
This is like saying, "so sometimes it's ok to spray a car with a firehose but sometimes it's not? Who decides when it's ok and when it's not?" Like preschoolers can easily understand why the same action can be good or bad depending on circumstances. But I'm to believe you can't?
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @upsidedwnworld @afriedduck i sljedećem broju korisnika:
It's the butt hurt leftist narrative. They are the ones who are turning things upside down. Lol Dividing the law.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 0 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
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.
Shrewd as serpents, innocent as doves