***Official Impeachment Proceedings***

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
88,299
17,585
113
Disagreeing and being dumb are not mutually exclusive.

Do you really not get that?

I was looking at the muscles around her eyes.

My thin slice is she is dumb/crazy and pushy.

She relies heavily on automatic thinking.
They're not mutually exclusive, but you and your ilk rarely seem to remember that

It's the knee-jerk response when you see someone you disagree with

That's the plural you, btw
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
68,233
22,984
113
62
Vagina Point
They're not mutually exclusive, but you and your ilk rarely seem to remember that

It's the knee-jerk response when you see someone you disagree with

That's the plural you, btw
Yes, but not the singular me.

And that is all I got.

I was judging her intelligence by her facial expression and you attributed it to me judging her intelligence by the fact that she was a trump fan.

That is your error in this instance.

*I made my intuitive judgement knowing that my thin slice could be wrong.

But you improve intuitive decision making by making assessments and testing.

That is how you were made to think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: afoaf

sirfun

Duke status
Apr 26, 2008
17,545
6,881
113
U.S.A.
  • Haha
Reactions: afoaf

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,204
22,752
113
the fact that you had to go to "The Daily Newspaper of Torah Jewery" means, yes,
it probably is fake news.

lol hamodia.com
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,204
22,752
113
the fact that you had to go to "The Daily Newspaper of Torah Jewery" means, yes,
it probably is fake news.

lol hamodia.com
and of course, GromsDad is posting articles from the dregs of the internet
because every other news outlet had already corrected the record around
this bullshit Feinstein headline.

always America's biggest dummy....

 
  • Like
Reactions: CutnSnip and mundus

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
House needs to start over and bring these NEW witnesses they want to testify there. Senate does not do the House job of presenting NEW witnesses. They can call for previously testifying witnesses, to provide clarity or details. But even during Clintons case, witnesses brought into the Senate had previously testified in the House hearings. NEW witnesses were not brought forward in the Senate hearing. Discovery is done in the House. The Senate hears the evidence they provide and makes judgements on it there. Otherwise, why have the Senate make the final judgement? The House Dems thought they could be prosecutor, jury and judge. Doesn't work that way in our Constitution. This whole process is bastardizing/weaponizing the impeachment process, and a very dangerous precedent for future presidents. I don't care which side you're on.

As I said a week or 2 back, House coulda, woulda, shoulda'd this whole charade to get it done without proper protocols. House Dems need to go back and get their witnesses there, even if it means going to trial to get them, like all previous impeachments. This was their only chance, and they're blowing it.

Keep your hopes up for Bolton, by all means. It's gonna be the bombshell # 5679 game changer. I just know it.:ROFLMAO:
 

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
68,681
20,891
113
The Bar
Maybe if Trump had a better track record of paying his legal fees, he wouldn't have to settle for Norman Kane as his lawyer. Similar defendant and supporters, albeit less unhinged, though:


Too bad Roberts isn't as solid a judge as the one in the movie.
 

Phi1

Phil Edwards status
May 21, 2002
6,855
3,324
113
Hell Cajon, Ca
House needs to start over and bring these NEW witnesses they want to testify there. Senate does not do the House job of presenting NEW witnesses. They can call for previously testifying witnesses, to provide clarity or details. But even during Clintons case, witnesses brought into the Senate had previously testified in the House hearings. NEW witnesses were not brought forward in the Senate hearing. Discovery is done in the House. The Senate hears the evidence they provide and makes judgements on it there. Otherwise, why have the Senate make the final judgement? The House Dems thought they could be prosecutor, jury and judge. Doesn't work that way in our Constitution. This whole process is bastardizing/weaponizing the impeachment process, and a very dangerous precedent for future presidents. I don't care which side you're on.

As I said a week or 2 back, House coulda, woulda, shoulda'd this whole charade to get it done without proper protocols. House Dems need to go back and get their witnesses there, even if it means going to trial to get them, like all previous impeachments. This was their only chance, and they're blowing it.

Keep your hopes up for Bolton, by all means. It's gonna be the bombshell # 5679 game changer. I just know it.:ROFLMAO:
Clinton was 2 years into his second term while he was facing impeachment.

Dems are arguing that time is not on their side because of the pending election and that POTUS was tampering with it.