Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

I don't see any vindication.

I'm not sure there's enough there to stand up in court. But impeachment is more a political process than an evidentiary one, and barring some huge exculpatory revelation, my guess is the votes are there to remove. I haven't really paid a lot of attention, since the whole thing seems like a kangaroo court with a known outcome.

Regardless, I think Paxton is a sleazy person who should never have been trusted in that office. Kind of like the Fort Bend rat man, Tom DeLay.

(09-12-2023 08:37 AM)appst89 Wrote:  Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

I guess you are clueless as to the term 'punch back'. Got it.

(09-12-2023 08:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:37 AM)appst89 Wrote:  Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

I guess you are clueless as to the term 'punch back'. Got it.

And you're just clueless, but, for the first time you actually responded to what I said. Congrats, I guess. You're 1 for 6 now. Keep going and you might reach the Mendoza Line.

(09-12-2023 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 04:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 01:14 AM)banker Wrote:  So it’s cool to go to the FBI and file a complaint because you don’t like your bosses’ non-illegal actions? That’s what I’m getting out of this. A group of people in the office didn’t like the AG using his power in a non-illegal way and thought he should be investigated for doing it even though there is no evidence he benefited from it.

I can here it now, he will be found guilty of difference of opinion.

Yeah, contrary to the opinion of some in here, the rest of us can actually read and comprehend, and sometimes come to different conclusions.

IMO, "testimonial evidence" is just hearsay or opinion until someone digs up some actual evidence of legal wrongdoing and personal gain. Did I miss something?

In this era of cancel culture, I don't believe a damn thing people say any more.

Too bad the facts of Paxtons actions line up with their testimony.
I guess you missed that issue in the long run.

Considering you are opining from tweet reading or the like, call me unsurprised.

You have no clue what I'm reading or not. And I would call you something other than "unsurprised."

You would think with your brilliance you could debate people without resorting to personal slurs and nanny nanny boo boos. Guess not.

Do judges let you get away with that? Or do you just close real estate or chase ambulances?

(09-12-2023 08:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:37 AM)appst89 Wrote:  Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

I guess you are clueless as to the term 'punch back'. Got it.

BINGO!!!!!!

(09-12-2023 08:37 AM)appst89 Wrote:  Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

Ad hom is apparently the only phrase he learned in lawyer school.

(09-12-2023 09:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 04:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 01:14 AM)banker Wrote:  So it’s cool to go to the FBI and file a complaint because you don’t like your bosses’ non-illegal actions? That’s what I’m getting out of this. A group of people in the office didn’t like the AG using his power in a non-illegal way and thought he should be investigated for doing it even though there is no evidence he benefited from it.

I can here it now, he will be found guilty of difference of opinion.

Yeah, contrary to the opinion of some in here, the rest of us can actually read and comprehend, and sometimes come to different conclusions.

IMO, "testimonial evidence" is just hearsay or opinion until someone digs up some actual evidence of legal wrongdoing and personal gain. Did I miss something?

In this era of cancel culture, I don't believe a damn thing people say any more.

Too bad the facts of Paxtons actions line up with their testimony.
I guess you missed that issue in the long run.

Considering you are opining from tweet reading or the like, call me unsurprised.

You have no clue what I'm reading or not.

*Whatever* you are reading, it seems horribly short on the issue if your comment of ""testimonial evidence" is just hearsay or opinion until someone digs up some actual evidence of legal wrongdoing and personal gain"

Considering everyone that has testified has related first hand situations, mutually consistent, and having the support of communications, I would call your comment comically shallow, at best.

And further, first hand testimony is *not* hearsay. Nor is first hand testimony of actual actions 'opinion'. No matter how much you kick and thrash and whine.

And no, testimonial evidence does not *change* at the point "someone digs up actual evidence of wrongdoing and personal gain".

And further, misuse of the power of the office Atty General does *not* require personal gain -- it just requires the wrongful use of the office.

So yeah, whatever you are reading is shallow crap. I suggest you try a bit more before you kneejerk another comment like you do above, or another shallow comment like you led off with.

(09-12-2023 09:23 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:37 AM)appst89 Wrote:  Ad hom. Lolz. Funny that. I'm only missing a chuckles to hit BINGO.

I guess you are clueless as to the term 'punch back'. Got it.

BINGO!!!!!!

And the term 'punch back' fits the facts in this thread. Amazing that...

taint punching back

(09-12-2023 08:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't see any vindication.

I'm not sure there's enough there to stand up in court. But impeachment is more a political process than an evidentiary one, and barring some huge exculpatory revelation, my guess is the votes are there to remove. I haven't really paid a lot of attention, since the whole thing seems like a kangaroo court with a known outcome.

Regardless, I think Paxton is a sleazy person who should never have been trusted in that office. Kind of like the Fort Bend rat man, Tom DeLay.

Exactly! This is NOT a Criminal or Civil case it’s merely a Political Grandstand for an Impeachment.

Paxton is a poster child for a Politician. Lies cheats on wife, uses his office for personal gain. It’s not he’s cornered the market on that.

He was smart enough to get Buzbee who will run circles around those other has beens.

But at the end of the day Paxton May not have enough Republican Allies to keep his job. Either way I will only get 10 hours of good sleep worrying about it.

(09-12-2023 09:51 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  taint punching back

Glad to see you still cannot make a substantive comment. The Warrior Way at its finest.

We should just close the forum and let Tanq talk to himself. He seems to think he gets better answers that way.

I'm overwhelmed by his smartness and suave courtroom manner.

Great idea

(09-12-2023 10:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  We should just close the forum and let Tanq talk to himself. He seems to think he gets better answers that way.

I'm overwhelmed by his smartness and suave courtroom manner.

At least this thread wont have the plethora seriously shallow kneejerk remarks based on really crappy sourcing as some seem prone to do.

Of course he agrees. Imagine that. Typical prog filth.

(09-12-2023 11:35 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Of course he agrees. Imagine that. Typical prog filth.

Idiot thinks that anyone who disagrees with him in any matter == 'prog filth'.

Mark of real stupidity.

Have fun railing Warrior Boy.

(09-12-2023 08:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't see any vindication.

I'm not sure there's enough there to stand up in court. But impeachment is more a political process than an evidentiary one, and barring some huge exculpatory revelation, my guess is the votes are there to remove. I haven't really paid a lot of attention, since the whole thing seems like a kangaroo court with a known outcome.

Regardless, I think Paxton is a sleazy person who should never have been trusted in that office. Kind of like the Fort Bend rat man, Tom DeLay.

What did DeLay do that was sleazy? I don't remember anything.
And let me add, I never voted for him. I would leave it blank or vote for the Libertarian or Green candidate rather than vote for him. But I don't think he was crooked, just wrong a lot.

(09-12-2023 08:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't see any vindication.

I'm not sure there's enough there to stand up in court. But impeachment is more a political process than an evidentiary one, and barring some huge exculpatory revelation, my guess is the votes are there to remove. I haven't really paid a lot of attention, since the whole thing seems like a kangaroo court with a known outcome.

Regardless, I think Paxton is a sleazy person who should never have been trusted in that office. Kind of like the Fort Bend rat man, Tom DeLay.

I thought of Judge Roy Bean as an example.

(09-12-2023 10:02 AM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(09-12-2023 08:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't see any vindication.

I'm not sure there's enough there to stand up in court. But impeachment is more a political process than an evidentiary one, and barring some huge exculpatory revelation, my guess is the votes are there to remove. I haven't really paid a lot of attention, since the whole thing seems like a kangaroo court with a known outcome.

Regardless, I think Paxton is a sleazy person who should never have been trusted in that office. Kind of like the Fort Bend rat man, Tom DeLay.

Exactly! This is NOT a Criminal or Civil case it’s merely a Political Grandstand for an Impeachment.

Paxton is a poster child for a Politician. Lies cheats on wife, uses his office for personal gain. It’s not he’s cornered the market on that.

He was smart enough to get Buzbee who will run circles around those other has beens.

But at the end of the day Paxton May not have enough Republican Allies to keep his job. Either way I will only get 10 hours of good sleep worrying about it.

Maybe his enemies have taken example from the Demonics. If politicians haven't learned anything from them after 6 years of TDS then they're as dense as the Libturds that post here. Throw anything at the wall and see if it sticks and I'm not talking about spaghetti either