Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/5/2019 8:30:24 AM (updated 12/5/2019 8:40:55 AM)

So we start the next phase of the impeachment hoax yesterday in Judiciary with four obscure law professors providing more opinion, more statements based on opinion, conjecture, presumption and third or fourth hand testimony.  Surprisingly they managed to have one that wasn't suffering from TDS and his testimony was surprising and should have been enlightening for those on the fence or not suffering from TDS. Nadler was not happy with this testimony and was probably wondering which staffer needs to be fired for having Turley testify.  The one thing all these professors have in common with almost all the other witnesses is that they have never met or talked to the President, they weren't on the phone call and they are willing to state their opinions as if they are fact or supported by facts when the opposite is true.

However, the real moment that defines the joke that this process represents was the comment made by the Stanford law professor and uber liberal Hillary supporter who thought she was going to get nominated to SCOTUS should Hillary win....which I love to remind you, she didn't.  She angrily declared that while Trump could name his son Barron, he can't make him a Baron!  Then she smugly sat back and waited for the applause.  I would bet anything she practiced this smug, condescending and mean spirited line in front of a mirror 20 times.  What a moment that defines this whole process and when you have to bring the President's 13-year old son into the impeachment process you know you're losing. Another telling moment when another of the leftists said he was skeptical of impeachment until the July call.  That was an abject lie and the internet is now alive with articles and tweets of him calling for Trump's impeachment going back to 2017.  When you have to tell an easily disproved lie under oath then you know you are losing.

It's not based on facts, logic or reason....it's about anger and hatred toward those Americans that had the temerity to vote for Trump in 2016.  The are angry at us and they hate Trump.  And they don't care if there were no crimes...they want to undo the election and they are terrified that none in the clown car can beat Trump.  And these smug liberal elitists are not helping their cause.  They simply reinforce why we voted for Trump in the first place.

Name:	Carlson -	Reply
Subject:	one Wrote on adopting Scaria law
Date:	12/5/2019 2:27:34 PM

You can't make up this stuff

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/5/2019 4:19:43 PM

I read this morning that she ended up apologiizing for the remark about Trump's son.  When you feel it necessary to hit the President's kids, you have gone very low. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/5/2019 5:04:02 PM

Yeah, after Rep Gaetz called her out she gave a non-apology apology by including how Trump should apologize for all the mean things he has said about people.  It boggles the mind that someone that thinks like a 4-year old is a law professor and was called to testify at such an important hearing.  How childish is it to say, "I'm sorry for my totally inappropriate and mean spirited comment but Orange Man Bad". 

This is where we are on the left with their anger and hatred toward the American people for not electing Hillary and their abject hatred toward Trump for having beaten her.  It boggles the mind along with the idea that only after the testimony of four law professors opine about something for which they have zero first hand knowledge that they all of the sudden announce they are moving ahead.  This is all about the IG report coming out and RBG on her last legs.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/5/2019 5:31:59 PM

You get a gold star - exactly.

Name:	PTClakefan -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/6/2019 9:56:21 AM

Professor Turley was called as a witness by House Republicans, I believe, so his testimony should not have been a surprise to anyone.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Defining moment yesterday
Date:	12/8/2019 10:31:36 AM (updated 12/8/2019 10:35:07 AM)

Should have been more clear, which staffer will be fired for allowing Turley to testify.  Likewise, nor should the other three who were called by Democrats for obvious reason.  Hence, it was an utterly pointless exercise because everyone knew who would be pro-impeachment and who would not.  But if you want to judge the veracity of their views you need to look at them individually.  On that score, Professor Turley is wildly more reliable.  He didn't vote for Trump and he is a Democrat so ideologically he is at odds with Trump.  On the other hand, the others lied about their prior support for impeachment, all give money to Democrats including Hillary, were nasty, arrogant and condescending and are all suffering from TDS.  The nasty one from Stanford is bitter because she'll never make it to SCOTUS like she might have had Hillary won.  They are prime examples of why people dislike lawyers....as if we didn't need another reason.