• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W;622]Please... Be honest. Do you really think a second impeachment is good for the country?

vegas giants said:
Why is it hearsay? Why not call direct witness testimony?
Click to expand...
You remember the words of Johnnie Cochran the attorney for OJ Simpson?..."If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit."...That was just one example of hearsay evidence always allowed into a courtroom trial by a judge which may (or not) have contributed to the exoneration of Simpson at the trial.

Judges allow hearsay evidence at their own trials but won't allow hearsay evidence to determine the democratic nature of the 2020 presidential election?
 
ASHES said:
The 'American People' don't think that. A few losers that Trump lied to starting before the election were gullible enough to buy that crap. If you're skeptical of the results, that's your own fault for believing lying liars.
Click to expand...
I've already posted that authoritarians like you don't think like that.
 
That doesnt answer my question. Why not use direct testimony? If you have all these witnesses ....call them to the stand.


Unless you really dont have any witnesses
 
cabse5 said:
I've already posted that authoritarians like you don't think like that.
Click to expand...
Resorting to ad hom will not help your anaemic argument.
 
vegas giants said:
That doesnt answer my question. Why not use direct testimony? If you have all these witnesses ....call them to the stand.


Unless you really dont have any witnesses
Click to expand...
Or you could ensure the American people that American elections are free and fair (or not in the case of the 2020 election)...not ensuring the freeness and fairness of the 2020 election, that is.
 
cabse5 said:
Or you could ensure the American people that American elections are free an fair (or not in the case of the 2020 election)...not ensuring the freeness and fairness of the 2020 election, that is.
Click to expand...
If they were mot free and fair call witnesses and make your case.


If you have ZERO witnesses or other evidence....then you have no case
 
ASHES said:
Resorting to ad hom will not help your anaemic argument.
Click to expand...
Just pointing out my pleas fall on the deaf ears of authoritarians (who don't care about individuals' rights, for example).
 
vegas giants said:
If they were mot free and fair call witnesses and make your case.


If you have ZERO witnesses or other evidence....then you have no case
Click to expand...
Why didn't you say that at the investigation of the Trump campaign after the 2016 election??
 
cabse5 said:
Just pointing out my pleas fall on the deaf ears of authoritarians (who don't care about individuals' rights, for example).
Click to expand...
Whenever you lose an argument you just call people authoritarians and run away. Lol
 
cabse5 said:
Why didn't you say that at the investigation of the Trump campaign after the 2016 election??
Click to expand...
You mean the one where REPUBLICANS insisted on a special.prosecutor? Where 17 intelligence agencies said there was evidence of Russian involvement? You mean that election?
 
vegas giants said:
You mean the one where REPUBLICANS insisted on a special.prosecutor? Where 17 intelligence agencies said there was evidence of Russian involvement? You mean that election?
Click to expand...
You just need to read my posts sometimes. I've posted many times (don't know how many times on this thread) that all Americans need to be assured that all American elections are free and fair...And yes, I agreed to the investigation into the Trump campaign after the 2016 election until I was satisfied there was no claim of a non-free nor non-fair 2016 election.
 
Right. In 2016 there was evidence. There is no evidence now. Even Republicans now dont want to appoint a special prosecutor for this election.


There is nothing to investigate
 
vegas giants said:
Right. In 2016 there was evidence. There is no evidence now. Even Republicans now dont want to appoint a special prosecutor for this election.


There is nothing to investigate
Click to expand...
NO. There was hearsay.

Look as I've already pointed out to another, an authoritarian won't pay attention to this type of argument of assuring everyone that all elections are free and fair...Might as well extoll the virtues of the New York Yankees to a Mets fan.
 
vegas giants said:
Right. In 2016 there was evidence. There is no evidence now. Even Republicans now dont want to appoint a special prosecutor for this election.


There is nothing to investigate
Click to expand...
There was nothing to investigate after the 2016 either. Why the hypocrisy?
 
Last edited:
That was not hearsay as it wasn't evidence at all. It was part of his closing argument.
 
cabse5 said:
Intelligence based on what evidence, pray tell?
Click to expand...
Direct evidence that members of congress saw. You are not cleared to see it. Do you claim all 17 are lying?
 
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

Thats one sentence out of an hours long string of sentence urging violence against the country. Do I think you are being honest?

trixare4kids said:
Well, do you?
Click to expand...

Nope, you are not being honest about what Trump has done.
 
Last edited:
Buckeyes85 said:
That was not hearsay as it wasn't evidence at all. It was part of his closing argument.
Click to expand...
It wasn't stricken from the record so the jurors were allowed to consider the statement.
 
vegas giants said:
Direct evidence that members of congress saw. You are not cleared to see it. Do you claim all 17 are lying?
Click to expand...
I know that Schiff was lying.

I also know the only source that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election came from Crowdstrike.
 
cabse5 said:
Intelligence based on what evidence, pray tell?
Click to expand...
Why are you even disputing this? There is no question that the Russians did interfere in our election and did so to benefit Trump. Its not even debatable. The issue was whether team Trump colluded with the Russians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…