Ted Cruz Asks Impeachment Managers if Kamala Harris Incited Riots from Black Lives Matter Protests

originally posted by: xuenchen
So far, is there any solid proof Trump actually incited rioting ??? 😃

It's all standard hearsay and out of context -- out of timing 2nd hand opinions 😃

MSM having trouble 😃

No - and there never was.
They had to doctor MSM video and tweets to try and rig the impeachment trial - but they'd never try to rig an election ... of course not....

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Snarl

Ah! Gotta love the whataboutism.

Whataboutism, as a form of debate tactic, is acceptable in delineating inequity in cause and effect. As an excuse for ones behavior it falls flat on its face. We are all responsible for our own actions.

In court, however, it is not whataboutism. It is precedent.

Precedent: an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.

A good portion of our judicial system is predicated upon precedent. In a legal setting it is not whataboutism and cannot be dismissed or invalidated.

a reply to: UKTruth

Let's call a spade a spade. The house managers did not "doctor" evidence. They knowingly FALSIFIED evidence. That is a crime and they should be held accountable.

Awe, the former senator that no one even considered for the presidential nominee of her party is now VP. Yay!!! Hopefully this be only 4 years and America can actually have some govern that they wanted.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: RazorV66

Actually precedent can be used in legal matters, just in case you didn’t know that.

This case is unprecedented. This case will set precedent.

No, it won't because it was thrown out by the senate. Hahahaha

a reply to: Alien Abduct

Precedent has been set. A loser lame duck president can now incite a last minute violent insurrection, in order to try and overturn the election they lost. As long as the Senate agrees to try the case after Jan 20th, Congress can just say, "He did it, but there's nothing we can do about it.".

a reply to: Sookiechacha

If they don't convict Trump, how can they indict and convict Harris, or anyone else?

Well because in Trumps case in no way shape or form did he incite violence. There is plenty of case law that pinpoints the specifics of what constitutes inciting violence and in no way does Trumps case even come close to satisfying any standard of inciting violence....which of course is why the senate threw out the B.S. less than flimsy case.

However in Harris's and others case there is plenty of material to work with.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Precedent has been set. A loser lame duck president can now incite a last minute violent insurrection, in order to try and overturn the election they lost. As long as the Senate agrees to try the case after Jan 20th, Congress can just say, "He did it, but there's nothing we can do about it.".

LoL sure buddy. See my post above.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Halfswede

Look, if they want to bring impeachment or criminal charges against Kamala Harris, then, let them do so. This trial is Donald Trump's trial, not Kamala Harris' trial, not Hillary Clinton's trial.

Trying a criminal while pointing to the perceived crimes of others is no defense. It's whataboutism.

And he was aquitted

Innocent. Not guilty. Evidence was fake. Fabricated. NOT TRUE.

Why that upsets you, we’ll never know

a reply to: Alien Abduct

That's not what the Senate record shows. Leader McConnell publicly stated, on the congressional record, that Trump did it, that he was guilty of inciting a violent insurrection on the Capitol in order to overturn an election that he lost, and that he did based on lies and conspiracy theories. McConnell stated, for the record, that in his authoritative opinion, it was too late to try him because Trump was no longer the sitting president.

Documented history.

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Innocent. Not guilty. Evidence was fake. Fabricated. NOT TRUE.

Both Trump's attorney and Leader McConnel said that Trump could be arrested and tried for the crimes indicted through his impeachment. Too bad they can't do anything about them. It's out of their hands.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Innocent. Not guilty. Evidence was fake. Fabricated. NOT TRUE.

Both Trump's attorney and Leader McConnel said that Trump could be arrested and tried for the crimes indicted through his impeachment. Too bad they can't do anything about them. It's out of their hands.

He’s innocent

You’re upset about that

He did not incite any violence. You’re upset about that

The dEmocrat party faked evidence. Which you approve of.
But they were caught out faking evidence and you’re upset about that

AQUITTED!

TWICE

INNOCENT OF ALL CHARGES!

BOTH TIMES!!

2024 is not far away either

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Leader McConnell publicly stated, on the congressional record, that Trump did it

So this makes it true? Hahaha! McConnell isn't jury and judge bubba. Just because he says something doesn't make it so. LoL

Fortunately there is checks and balances. Just for this sort of fabrication of a case hahaha.

Acquitted. Period. Have a good day!

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Snarl

Ah! Gotta love the whataboutism.

It's not a "whataboutism..." But I find it ironic how you, and all anti-Trumpers, don't want to admit when your leaders actually do incite violence. But when President Trump says something you INVENT in your minds "he must have said this" when in fact his speech does not incite violence AT ALL.

But that's what you anti-Trumpers have become. You love REAL criminals and crime, but you have been so brainwashed into hating President Trump that your immediate response is to deny what he actually said, and instead you make up in your minds "what you think he thinks." But in truth what "you think President Trump thinks" is in reality nothing but projection. In other words, he is not the problem. YOU ARE.

How about this... Quote President Trump's entire speech and go ahead and show us how he incited violence. Don't try to change what he actually said like your pal Schiff did with the made up conversation with the Ukrainian President...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Alien Abduct

That's not what the Senate record shows. Leader McConnell publicly stated, on the congressional record, that Trump did it, that he was guilty of inciting a violent insurrection on the Capitol in order to overturn an election that he lost, and that he did based on lies and conspiracy theories. McConnell stated, for the record, that in his authoritative opinion, it was too late to try him because Trump was no longer the sitting president.

Documented history.

Instead of claiming what a RINO sell out claims, or what you think they claimed, how about you put your money where your mouth is, or in this case put your money where your fingers are, and quote the entire speech of President Trump and then show us where he incited violence...

Stop going around in circles saying what other people said, or what you think they said and quote President Trump's speech pointing out how he incited violence.

I am starting to think that ALL anti-Trumpers need English, and reading comprehension, classes again...

originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: UKTruth

Let's call a spade a spade. The house managers did not "doctor" evidence. They knowingly FALSIFIED evidence. That is a crime and they should be held accountable.

Unfortunately, it is not a crime.
However, they slandered a private citizen in front of the world with knowingly false representation.
They each should be held liable for that - I would hope that they would now be sued.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Precedent has been set. A loser lame duck president can now incite a last minute violent insurrection, in order to try and overturn the election they lost. As long as the Senate agrees to try the case after Jan 20th, Congress can just say, "He did it, but there's nothing we can do about it.".

The precedent had been set by your party of morons whom work for China. Since day one they claimed "President Trump is an illegitimate president, and it was the Russians whom voted for him..." Yet even knowing today that your leaders LIED EVEN TO YOU, you still believe every lie they tell you about President Trump because they conditioned you to not use logic and reason, but instead to use made up claims to hate the best POTUS we have had in 100 years +.

For the entirety of President Trump's administration you, never-Trumpers, and your leaders have in fact done EVERYTHING you claim/claimed President Trump has done or said...

Your leaders incited violence against Trump supporters, alongside your lying media which labeled all Trump supporters as "nazis, white supremacists, and now we are terrorists" simply for being your political opposition.

In fact, you never-Trumpers are so brainwashed and unable to understand what you have been doing in helping your FASCIST leaders do, that in your minds you are not fascist/dictators when that's what you have turned into.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

So this makes it true?

It makes it history. It makes it an important part of an historical congressional record.

Historians won't be studying what Alien Abduct said in an Above Top Secret thread, they'll be studying the historic record, the congressional record, and what the party of president being impeached said about the outcome of their president's impeachment and trial.

Here's a little bit.

“The leader of the free world cannot spend weeks thundering that shadowy forces are stealing our country and then feign surprise when people believe him and do reckless things.

“Sadly, many politicians sometimes make overheated comments or use metaphors that unhinged listeners might take literally.

“This was different.

“This was an intensifying crescendo of conspiracy theories, orchestrated by an outgoing president who seemed determined to either overturn the voters’ decision or else torch our institutions on the way out.
“The unconscionable behaviour did not end when the violence began.

“Whatever our ex-president claims he thought might happen that day… whatever reaction he says he meant to produce… by that afternoon, he was watching the same live television as the rest of the world.

“A mob was assaulting the Capitol in his name. These criminals were carrying his banners, hanging his flags, and screaming their loyalty to him.

“It was obvious that only President Trump could end this.

“Former aides publicly begged him to do so. Loyal allies frantically called the Administration.

“But the president did not act swiftly. He did not do his job. He didn’t take steps so federal law could be faithfully executed, and order restored.

“Instead, according to public reports, he watched television happily as the chaos unfolded. He kept pressing his scheme to overturn the election!

“Even after it was clear to any reasonable observer that Vice President Pence was in danger… even as the mob carrying Trump banners was beating cops and breaching perimeters… the president sent a further tweet attacking his vice president.
“Predictably and foreseeably under the circumstances, members of the mob seemed to interpret this as further inspiration to lawlessness and violence.

74 million Americans did not engineer the campaign of disinformation and rage that provoked it.

“One person did.

Transcript

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Precedent has been set. A loser lame duck president can now incite a last minute violent insurrection, in order to try and overturn the election they lost. As long as the Senate agrees to try the case after Jan 20th, Congress can just say, "He did it, but there's nothing we can do about it.".

Post Trump's speech and then quote where he incited violence.

You won't because you can't because he didn't.

In Trumps case in no way shape or form did he incite violence. There is plenty of case law that pinpoints the specifics of what constitutes inciting violence and in no way does Trumps case even come close to satisfying any standard of inciting violence....which of course is why the senate threw out the B.S. less than flimsy case.

However in Harris's and others case there is plenty of material to work with.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I don't have to prove anything. The House impeachment managers did it.