Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DynamiteCop!

The god king has been acquitted on count one

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Look at this idiot trying to downplay these Democrat rats getting fucked by their own blind hate for the umpteenth time lol

 

We don't give a fuck you illegal ass commie

 

:lawl:

Wow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right-wingers won't be able to watch this.

 

Because they won't have a response to this:

 

 

 

There's the line. Which side are you on?

 

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

 

I agree with that, 100%. And its rather, really, really easy to agree with.

 

If you don't agree with it. Then say so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Right-wingers won't be able to watch this.

 

Because they won't have a response to this:

 

There's the line. Which side are you on?

 

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

 

I agree with that, 100%. And its rather, really, really easy to agree with.

 

If you don't agree with it. Then say so.

Romney is just ass blasted that he's never going to be president so he's starving for relevance in relation to and trying to tear one down. 

 

:mj:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Romney is just ass blasted that he's never going to be president so he's starving for relevance in relation to and trying to tear one down. 

 

:mj:

So you are okay with those crimes being committed by a sitting President.


Thanks for confirming this.

 

Sorry............we're not talking about Romney.............we're talking about those very simple words that he said.

 

You condone such crimes.

 

You don't actually uphold actual American values, not protect the basic concepts of democracy.

 

Which means you're not an actual American.

 

Like I said...........they won't have a response to that video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jehurey said:

So you are okay with those crimes being committed by a sitting President.


Thanks for confirming this.

 

Sorry............we're not talking about Romney.............we're talking about those very simple words that he said.

 

You condone such crimes.

 

You don't actually uphold actual American values, not protect the basic concepts of democracy.

 

Which means you're not an actual American.

 

Like I said...........they won't have a response to that video.

They're not crimes shitface. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

They're not crimes shitface. 

They are.

 

And once again..............you're not responding to the video and the simple quote that I made.

 

And you're never going to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jehurey said:

So you are okay with those crimes being committed by a sitting President.


Thanks for confirming this.

 

Sorry............we're not talking about Romney.............we're talking about those very simple words that he said.

 

You condone such crimes.

 

You don't actually uphold actual American values, not protect the basic concepts of democracy.

 

Which means you're not an actual American.

 

Like I said...........they won't have a response to that video.

Acquittal means a person was found not guilty therefore no crimes were committed. It's over, he was innocent, he maintained his innocence throughout, he continues to be innocent. 

 

Shoot yourself in the head with the guns you're trying to ban. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Acquittal means a person was found not guilty therefore no crimes were committed. It's over, he was innocent, he maintained his innocence throughout, he continues to be innocent. 

 

Shoot yourself in the head with the guns you're trying to ban. 

No...........those are votes.

 

AN actual acquittal from a jury requires UNANIMOUS votes.

 

Did you forget that.

 

Romney voted to convict.

 

He gave his verdict.
 

Quote


"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

 

Its very simple.............do you agree with that simple proclamation, or not?

 

Watch, as you avoid responding to this. Again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jehurey said:

No...........those are votes.

 

AN actual acquittal from a jury requires UNANIMOUS votes.

 

Did you forget that.

 

Romney voted to convict.

 

He gave his verdict.
 

Its very simple.............do you agree with that simple proclamation, or not?

 

Watch, as you avoid responding to this. Again.

You are absolutely retarded, acquittal is acquittal regardless of the method or tribunal. This isn't a criminal court where it much be unanimous to convict, it's a 2/3 requirement, anything short of 67 guilty votes renders the accused not guilty of the commission of a crime.

 

He's been aquitted, he's been found not guilty by the body of the Senate, no crime was committed, It's over.

 

@Cookester15 If he keeps this up get rid of him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

You are absolutely retarded, acquittal is acquittal regardless of the method or tribunal. This isn't a criminal court where it much be unanimous to convict, it's a 2/3 requirement, anything short of 67 guilty votes renders the accused not guilty of the commission of a crime.

 

He's been aquitted, he's been found not guilty by the body of the Senate, no crime was committed, It's over.

 

@Cookester15 If he keeps this up get rid of him.  

No............he received votes.

 

He has 100 different verdicts.

 

And he's the only president in which there was bi-partisan support to convict him...........that is the only time that has ever happened in the history of this country.....no other Impeached President has ever had bi-partisan conviction votes from and a conviction vote from someone in THEIR OWN PARTY.

 

Once again..............you are avoiding the statement:

 

Quote

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

Do you agree with the statement.............or do you condone it?

 

That's a very simple Yes or No question. Why are you avoiding it?

Edited by jehurey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jehurey said:

No............he received votes.

 

He has 100 different verdicts.

 

And he's the only president in which there was bi-partisan support to convict him...........that is the only time that has ever happened in the history of this country.....no other Impeached President has ever had bi-partisan conviction votes from and a conviction vote from someone in THEIR OWN PARTY.

 

Once again..............you are avoiding the statement:

 

Do you agree with the statement.............or do you condone it?

 

That's a very simple Yes or No question. Why are you avoiding it?

 

You're the dumbest piece of shit on the face of the earth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

 

You're the dumbest piece of shit on the face of the earth. 

So, like I said.

 

You were given this simple statement:

 

Quote

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

And you avoided it...............about 6 different times.

 

Just like I thought.  You can't even say that if a president "corrupts an election to keep oneself in office" that you would consider it a violation of the oath of office.

 

You condone it, is pretty much what you are saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

He's mad and he's trying to gaslight all of us. 

He just infinitely moves goalposts, he should absolutely be banned for it. The guy doesn't live in any form of grounded reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

He's mad and he's trying to gaslight all of us. 

No.

 

Me listing obvious statements that 100% of Americans should agree on.............is not gaslighting.

 

Quote

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

What is you response to this statement.

 

DO you agree that this is a crime, or are you condoning it?

 

Its a very simple question. There's only two answers.

 

Are you going to avoid it, again?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jehurey said:

No.

 

Me listing obvious statements that 100% of Americans should agree on.............is not gaslighting.

 

What is you response to this statement.

 

DO you agree that this is a crime, or are you condoning it?

 

Its a very simple question. There's only two answers.

 

Are you going to avoid it, again?????

It's not a crime, next. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

He just infinitely moves goalposts, he should absolutely be banned for it. The guy doesn't live in any form of grounded reality. 

No.

 

The goalposts has always been the same the entire time.

 

I came in here with this goalpost:

Quote

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

I still am asking you the same question:

 

Quote

"What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abuse and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine."

And you're still avoiding it.

 

Just like I predicted from the very beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

It's not a crime, next. 

So a president CAN corrupt an election to keep himself in office???????

 

You just said that, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×