President Sonic T. Hedgehog: Episode XI: #TEAMSONIC2020

[Boyiee]

Guess I need to look up this Schiff shit since it's been talked about everywhere.

[guartz]

Can you answer this? Because everyone is not-suddenly noticing you are avoiding challenges to central arguments.

If you're sure you're not guilty, why redact documents, refuse to allow witnesses to testify, actively order them to defy subpoenas?

It's within his legal power to do so, seems like a good enough reason. Truth is, I don't know and neither do you. You just assume it's guilt.

[guartz]

Anyway here's Trump confessing to obstruction this morning.

https://mobile.twitter.com/repvaldem...011535364?s=21

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

haha, he was talking about the stuff that exonerated him. Nice clickbait though.

[guartz]

Dude, you can give all the facts until you are blue in the face and Guartz will display is 'Alternate Reality' vs. what is actually happening.

And yeah, what Schiff did was pretty badass. Have a friend who's dad has been a trial lawyer in California for 20+ years and a die hard republican...even he was impressed per my friend. Anecdotal, but still.

What facts? You dont have any facts, just opinions. The entire impeachment is that democrats are of the opinion trump did something illegal. Just like the testimonies, just people assuming stuff.

[Zealot]

haha, he was talking about the stuff that exonerated him. Nice clickbait though.

Except no, please stop and look at your life.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

What facts? You dont have any facts, just opinions. The entire impeachment is that democrats are of the opinion trump did something illegal. Just like the testimonies, just people assuming stuff.

I've rarely seen you this desperate.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[guartz]

I am a member of several national organizations for attorneys and the unanimous reaction yesterday was that Schiff's the high watermark for what a trial attorney should aspire to be. His preparation, presentation, and response to the opposition were, in the words of some, "enough to base an entire semester of trial prep class off of"

A former solicitor general, trial attorneys with 35+ years of experience, law professors, etc etc; even going through Twitter and looking at the reactions of every attorney I can find, essentially anyone who's ever practiced law was blown away by how masterfully Schiff presented the case.

Seeing a lot of negative reaction from Republican lawmakers and shills, so the narrative machine being in full force to try and minimize it also reinforces just how good it was.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I watched it, but maybe this glory was lost to a layman. In fact I thought the use of clips was a bit gimmicky.

[6souls]

It's within his legal power to do so, seems like a good enough reason. Truth is, I don't know and neither do you. You just assume it's guilt.

haha, he was talking about the stuff that exonerated him. Nice clickbait though.

What facts? You dont have any facts, just opinions. The entire impeachment is that democrats are of the opinion trump did something illegal. Just like the testimonies, just people assuming stuff.

[Tyrath]

Dude, you can give all the facts until you are blue in the face and Guartz will display is 'Alternate Reality' vs. what is actually happening.

And yeah, what Schiff did was pretty badass. Have a friend who's dad has been a trial lawyer in California for 20+ years and a die hard republican...even he was impressed per my friend. Anecdotal, but still.

Yeah well, guartz's friend's lawyer dad can beat up your friend's lawyer dad.

[guartz]

Except no, please stop and look at your life.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Its funny because I watched the full Q/A, and he also talks about why he didn't want John Bolton and others to testify. And yes, absolute terrible clickbait 9 second sound bite.

[kuronosan]

What facts? You dont have any facts, just opinions. The entire impeachment is that democrats are of the opinion trump did something illegal. Just like the testimonies, just people assuming stuff.

Why order people to defy subpoenas?

Why refuse to testify for your own defense, but then demand someone completely unrelated to your case be brought in to testify? It's like if OJ brought in, I dunno, Bruce Jenner at the time and said "Now interview this guy because I wouldn't have killed Nicole if Bruce hadn't punched a nazi." It has literally nothing to do with the case.

Why redact evidence that would exonerate you, then refuse to comply with court orders to turn it over?

Why continue to remark that a memo is a transcript, then refuse to release the full transcript?

Why say no character witnesses have been called, then when you call witnesses and they implicate you say that you haven't been given the chance to defend yourself? Then, when given the chance to defend yourself, say you aren't obligated to?

These aren't things totally innocent people do. You cannot prove someone committed a crime without evidence, and you cannot prove you didn't when the evidence is enough for a trial and you refuse to substantiate your claims that you are innocent beyond "because I'm innocent until proven guilty".

Nope.

[Kalmado]

[guartz]

Why order people to defy subpoenas?

Why refuse to testify for your own defense, but then demand someone completely unrelated to your case be brought in to testify? It's like if OJ brought in, I dunno, Bruce Jenner at the time and said "Now interview this guy because I wouldn't have killed Nicole if Bruce hadn't punched a nazi." It has literally nothing to do with the case.

Why redact evidence that would exonerate you, then refuse to comply with court orders to turn it over?

Why continue to remark that a memo is a transcript, then refuse to release the full transcript?

Why say no character witnesses have been called, then when you call witnesses and they implicate you say that you haven't been given the chance to defend yourself? Then, when given the chance to defend yourself, say you aren't obligated to?

These aren't things totally innocent people do. You cannot prove someone committed a crime without evidence, and you cannot prove you didn't when the evidence is enough for a trial and you refuse to substantiate your claims that you are innocent beyond "because I'm innocent until proven guilty".

Nope.

from the man himself

starts about 28min in


edit:

also Biden's kid is not unrelated.

[Boyiee]

Ah, ye olde YouTube response.

[kuronosan]

So again.

Why withhold evidence? Why defy subpoenas? Why refuse to testify?

All if you're innocent?

[guartz]

So again.

Why withhold evidence? Why defy subpoenas? Why refuse to testify?

All if you're innocent?

You want my personal opinion? President's words didn't do it for ya?


Hah, well I got another video for that



Fun fact:
How many people were convicted on actual Russian collusion vs process crimes during Mueller probe?

All of them were convicted via process crimes.

[guartz]

I mean, isn't all this academic? According to you guys house has a slam dunk case, obviously guilty. Don't really need more witnesses with overwhelming evidence.

oh wait, no. Hold on. House got shit. Impeachment was a total failure and it's because Trump didn't cooperate. Sum it up right?

[Boyiee]

Hey man, no one clicks any of the videos you link.

If you are discussing something, debating with someone, replying to someone, quoting someone, posting your position, opinion, or point, do it with your own words, fingers and keys.

Don't reply with videos. Don't reply with articles.

Don't reply with someone else speaking for you, don't reply with someone else saying what you would have said or thought.

Just reply yourself or don't reply at all.

[guartz]

Hey man, no one clicks any of the videos you link.

If you are discussing something, debating with someone, replying to someone, quoting someone, posting your position, opinion, or point, do it with your own words, fingers and keys.

Don't reply with videos. Don't reply with articles.

Don't reply with someone else speaking for you, don't reply with someone else saying what you would have said or thought.

Just reply yourself or don't reply at all.

eh it's sort of like a damned if you do damned if you don't situation you are presenting me with. If I don't reply with links or videos people say I'm just making shit up I know this because it happened before. Like I get it, you guys don't like me holy shit.

[Boyiee]

eh it's sort of like a damned if you do damned if you don't situation you are presenting me with. If I don't reply with links or videos people say I'm just making shit up I know this because it happened before. Like I get it, you guys don't like me holy shit.

I disagree and I feel a lot of people would as well. People won't agree with your opinions like you don't agree with theirs, but you spamming thread with videos as your replies aren't getting you anywhere since they aren't being watched. Those videos aren't your opinion anyway, they are someone else's no matter how much you feel they reflect how you feel and think.

Posting a link is fine, summarizing and paraphrasing is fine. Using their words as yours verbatim isn't and is why you come off as disliked. Reputable sources, reputable content, then you are just a difference of opinion that can be talked to like a human and not a wall of videos and quotes.