12-04-2019, 01:05 PM
** 04-Dec-2019 Windman
So you believe that a court of law would convict someone of a crime
because of Windman's feelings, or on what you "suspect." All the
so-called evidence is feelings and assumptions, but under Republican
cross-examination, they all had to admit that there was no actual
evidence to support their dreams, fantasies, wishful thinking,
feelings and assumptions.
Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican
cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam
Schiff's charges. It was all made up. It was all garbage.
Windman's testimony was especially comical because Schiff freaked out
and cut him off to prevent him from revealing the name of Schiff's
pal, the so-called whistleblower. What a farce.
You'd make a good CNN commentator. You should apply.
(12-04-2019, 12:16 PM)David Horn Wrote: > Really? One witness attended the infamous phone call: LTC
> Windman. He testified to what was said from direct personal
> knowledge, and it tallied directly with what the other witnesses
> said. This is enough by itself to convict in a court of law. If
> other witnesses weren't refusing to testify out of fear of Trump,
> I suspect the corroboration would be even greater.
So you believe that a court of law would convict someone of a crime
because of Windman's feelings, or on what you "suspect." All the
so-called evidence is feelings and assumptions, but under Republican
cross-examination, they all had to admit that there was no actual
evidence to support their dreams, fantasies, wishful thinking,
feelings and assumptions.
Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican
cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam
Schiff's charges. It was all made up. It was all garbage.
Windman's testimony was especially comical because Schiff freaked out
and cut him off to prevent him from revealing the name of Schiff's
pal, the so-called whistleblower. What a farce.
You'd make a good CNN commentator. You should apply.
