President Joe Biden

[espola]

again the result isn’t necessarily tied to the quality of the presentation.You are confusing this. The guy did a good job and embarrassed a bunch of Ivy League educated lawyers. True a spectacular performance should have turned even Romney. I’m not arguing the guy is Clarence Darrow. But for some tort lawyer he did a bang up job. For some Ivy League educated eggheads the managers did poorly.

You are presenting your conclusions without any evidence.

 

[Grace T.]

You are presenting your conclusions without any evidence.

I trust my eyes. Careful now how you answer. You’ll make it too easy.

 

[espola]

I trust my eyes. Careful now how you answer. You’ll make it too easy.

Do you care to explain the details of "The guy did a good job and embarrassed a bunch of Ivy League educated lawyers"?

 

[Desert Hound]

It's not so much of an accomplishment to win when the defense lawyer has regular meetings with members of the jury.

I suppose you are unaware that the Dems in the Senate meet regularly with the House members in charge of impeachment? Does that upset you?

And none of them are jurors by the way.

 

[espola]

I suppose you are unaware that the Dems in the Senate meet regularly with the House members in charge of impeachment? Does that upset you?

And none of them are jurors by the way.

Jurors ore those who in a procedure known as a trial, after hearing the evidence, they vote Guilty or Not Guilty.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

He did a very good job for an ambulance lawyer. He made the case the evidence didn’t support the single charge, was very effective in pointing out the d hypocrisy, was very effective in pointing out the ds messed with the evidence and held his own on the witness battle. Credit where credit is due.

politically he also served trumps outsider narrative by not being in the Harvard class. Increasingly the battle within the Republican Party (and bad news for Ted) is that it will be this outsiders class v the Ivy League insiders.

That’s what he said and you swallowed. Moscow Mitch did not, he opted out on a process excuse . . . the excuse he made sure was there.

 

[Grace T.]

Do you care to explain the details of "The guy did a good job and embarrassed a bunch of Ivy League educated lawyers"?

already did

 

[Grace T.]

That’s what he said and you swallowed. Moscow Mitch did not, he opted out on a process excuse . . . the excuse he made sure was there.

The ds didn’t prove incitement. Could have charged him with something else but they didn’t. Mitch was right on busker.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

He did a very good job for an ambulance lawyer. He made the case the evidence didn’t support the single charge, was very effective in pointing out the d hypocrisy, was very effective in pointing out the ds messed with the evidence and held his own on the witness battle. Credit where credit is due.

politically he also served trumps outsider narrative by not being in the Harvard class. Increasingly the battle within the Republican Party (and bad news for Ted) is that it will be this outsiders class v the Ivy League insiders.

There is a reason the Ivy Leaguers have been in charge and are the “insiders” and the ambulance chasers are advertising on TV.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

The ds didn’t prove incitement. Could have charged him with something else but they didn’t. Mitch was right on busker.

Yes, Mitch acknowledged that trump was guilty as sin and even laid out the ground work for future criminal and civil cases.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Do you care to explain the details of "The guy did a good job and embarrassed a bunch of Ivy League educated lawyers"?

The guy lied his add off and, as we already have seen play out thousands of times, the suckers swallowed in hook line and sinker.

 

[Desert Hound]

Jurors ore those who in a procedure known as a trial, after hearing the evidence, they vote Guilty or Not Guilty.

Jurors don't get to talk to the press, ask questions, etc etc. Senators do.

Regular jurors are not supposed to know each other - not so here. Regular jurors cannot overrule the judge - not so here. Regular jurors do not decide what evidence should be heard or the standards of evidence, nor do they decide on witnesses or what witnesses shall be called - not so here. Regular jurors do not decide when a trial is to be ended - not so here.

I notice you evaded the question about the Dems in the Senate conferring with the prosecutors...aka the House managers.

Or do you have different standards if an R or a D is involved?

 

[espola]

already did

You gave the conclusion without evidence.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

I trust my eyes. Careful now how you answer. You’ll make it too easy.

So a hunch based on a gut feeling, how trumpian of you.

 

[espola]

Jurors don't get to talk to the press, ask questions, etc etc. Senators do.

Regular jurors are not supposed to know each other - not so here. Regular jurors cannot overrule the judge - not so here. Regular jurors do not decide what evidence should be heard or the standards of evidence, nor do they decide on witnesses or what witnesses shall be called - not so here. Regular jurors do not decide when a trial is to be ended - not so here.

I notice you evaded the question about the Dems in the Senate conferring with the prosecutors...aka the House managers.

Or do you have different standards if an R or a D is involved?

The terms "jurors" and "jury" did not originate with me.

 

[espola]

So a hunch based on a gut feeling, how trumpian of you.

Nothing new.

 

[Grace T.]

So a hunch based on a gut feeling, how trumpian of you.

You gave the conclusion without evidence.

It’s all opinion. It’s funny you guys think evidence can prove it. I already laid out the substantiation for my opinion

 

[Grace T.]

Yes, Mitch acknowledged that trump was guilty as sin and even laid out the ground work for future criminal and civil cases.

He said trump wasn’t guilty if the charge leveled. Laid out other thing at his feet. All accurate. It’s hilarious you can’t comprehend that

 

[espola]

It’s all opinion. It’s funny you guys think evidence can prove it. I already laid out the substantiation for my opinion

You haven't presented anything except your opinion. There is no "substantiation".

 

[Grace T.]

You haven't presented anything except your opinion. There is no "substantiation".

Because it is an opinion. Duh

 

[espola]

He said trump wasn’t guilty if the charge leveled. Laid out other thing at his feet. All accurate. It’s hilarious you can’t comprehend that

Mitch stuck by the technicality of the Constitutionality question to explain his Not Guilty vote, then seemed to support a criminal indictment based on the same evidence presented in the impeachment trial.