Trump’s Crack Impeachment Lawyers Misspelled ‘United States’—Again

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

3 hours ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

Actually if you look in the tweet you would see that she isn't verified but in the impeachment hearings it shows her tweets as being verified, not to mention they changed the date on the tweets altogether by almost a full year. 

I looked it up, that evidence was not presented.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

1 minute ago, CanAm1980 said:

I looked it up, that evidence was not presented.

That evidence was submitted on the floor of the Senate. Show me where it wasn't presented. There is even a interview with Trump's attorney where they talk about it being presented. 


+1 for me and 0 for you

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

Just now, Cyberfx1024 said:

That evidence was submitted on the floor of the Senate. Show me where it wasn't presented. There is even a interview with Trump's attorney where they talk about it being presented. 


+1 for me and 0 for you

Show you where something didn't happen? Show me where it did!

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

2 minutes ago, CanAm1980 said:

Show you where something didn't happen? Show me where it did!

I gave you the tweet where the woman being referenced on the Senate floor calls them out for lying.... 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Cyberfx1024

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

3 hours ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

Actually if you look in the tweet you would see that she isn't verified but in the impeachment hearings it shows her tweets as being verified, not to mention they changed the date on the tweets altogether by almost a full year. 

You want me to look through 41 pages of postings for a tweet?

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

5 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I gave you the tweet where the woman being referenced on the Senate floor calls them out for lying.... 

This is my reference

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/538654-democrats-dismiss-claims-they-misrepresented-evidence-during-impeachment-trial

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

3 minutes ago, CanAm1980 said:

You want me to look through 41 pages of postings for a tweet?

Pretty easy to go look at when I posted the exact post. 
 

 

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

3 minutes ago, CanAm1980 said:

This is my reference

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/538654-democrats-dismiss-claims-they-misrepresented-evidence-during-impeachment-trial

You mean this right here where the dates were wrong and the verification checks were as well: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Democrats dismissed former President Trump's defense team's accusation that they “created false representations” with video and tweets during the Senate impeachment trial. 

During opening arguments on Friday, one of Trump's defense lawyers, David Schoen, alleged that House impeachment managers, including Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), had used tweets with irrelevant dates and verification and confused the term "cavalry" with "calvary" in one post. 

One senior aide on the House impeachment team noted that Trump's tweets are only available via the archive since his account was suspended indefinitely following the Capitol attack. 

The aide said the content of the tweets displayed were accurate and the argument that the verification on one of the retweeted posts indicates false information is inaccurate.

"As Trump’s attorneys spotlighted, while inexplicably condemning the managers for a draft graphic of a tweet barely visible on a computer screen inside a New York Times photo that was not shown in the Senate, it is necessary to format and blow up the text of tweets into a graphic so that Senators can see it. The text is entirely unchanged," the aide said.

"The final graphic accidentally had a blue verification checkmark on it, but the substance of it was entirely accurate. So what is Trump’s attorneys’ point? If anything, it is further evidence of President Trump’s attention to and knowledge of what was being openly planned on Jan. 6 by his followers, even those without Twitter verifications,"

Edited February 16, 2021 by Cyberfx1024

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

27 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

You mean this right here where the dates were wrong and the verification checks were as well: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Democrats dismissed former President Trump's defense team's accusation that they “created false representations” with video and tweets during the Senate impeachment trial. 

During opening arguments on Friday, one of Trump's defense lawyers, David Schoen, alleged that House impeachment managers, including Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), had used tweets with irrelevant dates and verification and confused the term "cavalry" with "calvary" in one post. 

One senior aide on the House impeachment team noted that Trump's tweets are only available via the archive since his account was suspended indefinitely following the Capitol attack. 

The aide said the content of the tweets displayed were accurate and the argument that the verification on one of the retweeted posts indicates false information is inaccurate.

"As Trump’s attorneys spotlighted, while inexplicably condemning the managers for a draft graphic of a tweet barely visible on a computer screen inside a New York Times photo that was not shown in the Senate, it is necessary to format and blow up the text of tweets into a graphic so that Senators can see it. The text is entirely unchanged," the aide said.

"The final graphic accidentally had a blue verification checkmark on it, but the substance of it was entirely accurate. So what is Trump’s attorneys’ point? If anything, it is further evidence of President Trump’s attention to and knowledge of what was being openly planned on Jan. 6 by his followers, even those without Twitter verifications,"

So what part of the Hill article do you disagree with? 

 

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

On 2/10/2021 at 5:38 AM, Dashinka said:

So what do you do when you can't get your kitten filter off your virtual face?

You stress you are a lawyer, even in the kittenface of evidence which appears to prove you are not.

[TBoneTX 43,422]

5 hours ago, elmcitymaven said:

You stress you are a lawyer, even in the kittenface of evidence which appears to prove you are not.

But then you can be charged with UPF (unauthorized practice of felinity).

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,330]

12 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

But then you can be charged with UPF (unauthorized practice of felinity).

your humor has sunken to new highs 

[TBoneTX 43,422]

Which means upvotes, waiting for them man.