Lt. Col. Lindman

[zipman]

Wait, didn't your side say you cannot impeach the word of a military officer, what about this officer?

Criticizing and illegally overthrowing Glorious Leader are two different things, Cultural Appropriating Clown.

Hey, there's nothing I can do if right wingers want to try and smear a decorated officer with a distinguished record. It will just show service members how little the republicans value their service.

And no one is illegally overthrowing your Glorious Leader. Congress is using their constitutional right to oversight. I guess you don't really like the constitution.

 

[Rightguide]

Hey, there's nothing I can do if right wingers want to try and smear a decorated officer with a distinguished record. It will just show service members how little the republicans value their service.

And no one is illegally overthrowing your Glorious Leader. Congress is using their constitutional right to oversight. I guess you don't really like the constitution.

You people are a bunch of friggin' frauds. You demand candidates for the judiciary maintain the legal principle of Stare decisis (precedent) in the interpretation of the laws, but the authors of the "law" thumb their noses at the principle in their own proceedings. To Hell with principle, to Hell with history, says the lawless Democrats.

 

[bellisarius]

You people are a bunch of friggin' frauds. You demand candidates for the judiciary maintain the legal principle of Stare decisis (precedent) in the interpretation of the laws, but the authors of the "law" thumb their noses at the principle in their own proceedings. To Hell with principle, to Hell with history, says the lawless Democrats.

Democrats don't believe in the law, they believe that the ends justify the means.

 

[Rightguide]

Democrats don't believe in the law, they believe that the ends justify the means.

Damn right they do. Totalitarian tools.

 

[phrodeau]

You people are a bunch of friggin' frauds. You demand candidates for the judiciary maintain the legal principle of Stare decisis (precedent) in the interpretation of the laws, but the authors of the "law" thumb their noses at the principle in their own proceedings. To Hell with principle, to Hell with history, says the lawless Democrats.

Oh, were they trying to set up their personal property for an international summit? Or were they offering to pardon anyone illegally taking over private border property? I know, were they refusing to answer subpoenas, even when they claim to be completely innocent?

 

[Rightguide]

Oh, were they trying to set up their personal property for an international summit? Or were they offering to pardon anyone illegally taking over private border property? I know, were they refusing to answer subpoenas, even when they claim to be completely innocent?

Fuck your latest tour down the rabbit hole, what does all of that have to do with Congress rejecting precedent, denying due process to the President, and transparency to the American people?

 

[coati]

Fuck your latest tour down the rabbit hole, what does all of that have to do with Congress rejecting precedent, denying due process to the President, and transparency to the American people?

^^^More whining about not being in control of everything.

 

[phrodeau]

Fuck your latest tour down the rabbit hole, what does all of that have to do with Congress rejecting precedent, denying due process to the President, and transparency to the American people?

The ones denying due process were the ones storming into the closed hearings. The hearings were closed, because when you're investigating a crime, you need to keep suspects from learning what you're up to.