Anonymous ID: 1567f2 Dec. 5, 2019, 5:21 a.m. No.7431669   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>7431660

My guess is this is why…all the Dems running are trying to protect themselves…they've ALL done something. There's no earthly reason why a faggot mayor from SB would think he has a shot in the Democratic Primary when the entire party knows by now the fix is always in for the favored candidate. I think it's why the race is playing out like a circus of the absurd…Biden, Beto, Yang…even THEY are not taking it seriously.

Anonymous ID: 1567f2 Dec. 5, 2019, 5:41 a.m. No.7431732   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>7431725

Don't forget Cruz…and possibly others. I think this will be the shot heard round the world, when it's disclosed through Bull Durham's work that they were conducting surveillance on other Republicans.

Anonymous ID: 1567f2 Dec. 5, 2019, 6:39 a.m. No.7431960   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>1979

>>7431919

Not a lawfag, but "implications" would not be enough to stop a proceeding. There would have to be a full fledged indictment before the question would even be considered, I think. But there wouldn't be enough time for that to happen.

 

A Senate trial is the BEST venue to reveal ALL of their criminal activities, so we wouldn't want to stop that, anyway. Everything they've done is evidence because it's the REASON they wanted to stop POTUS to begin with.

 

Trump Case:

1) They illegally spied on political enemies.

2) They did so to overturn the election (treason).

3) They committed treason to stop the disclosure of their crimes (selling state secrets, racqueteering, murder, child trafficking, etc…)

 

Number 3 goes to motive. Everything is fair game. Aside from that, there are no limits to the Trump defense. If he wants to argue he's innocent because HRC is an ugly bitch, then he's allowed to mount that defense.