General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Nikkishears
Fox News
comments

Comments by "Nikkishears" (@nikkishears6402) on "Is Pelosi admitting Dems didn't have enough on Trump to impeach?" video.

@eddee0149 , ever heard of a suspect being Mirandized? Every defendant has the right to remain silent. It's a right afforded by our Constitution. Thousands of innocent people refuse to cooperate with law enforcement on a daily basis. No one who believed they were being railroaded would cooperate with law enforcement. They would get a lawyer, and let their lawyer protect their rights. Just as you would, if you were Trump. Every defendant is also afforded the presumption of innocence. Every juror must view the accused as innocent, until evidence proves otherwise. If a juror can't afford the accused the presumption of innocence, that juror is dismissed from the trial. It's not Trump's job to exonerate himself. He's already innocent until proven guilty. The burden is the prosecution's. It's their job to prove his guilt. Clearly, Democrats are incapable of doing that, since they're seeking more evidence after voting to impeach. That's called desperate and pathetic.
6
@eddee0149 , the affordable care act was never affordable. We already pay 10 times more for our healthcare prescriptions than any other first world country. Are you one of those bleeding hearts who thinks that universal healthcare is free? Please, tell me you're not that stupid.
5
@eddee0149 , documents were produced, just not the ones Democrats wanted. Do you know how our legal system works? No witness has to testify unless they want to. Only a judge can enforce a subpoena and compel a witness' testimony. Democrats needed to go to court and have a judge compel testimony in the house. They didn't, because they knew that a judge would most likely rule on the side of executive privilege. They couldn't take that risk. If Democrats went to court, and a judge ruled against them, they would have lost the article of Obstruction. They refused judicial intervention just to make another article of impeachment. By desperately seeking witnesses and documents after failing to enforce subpoenas, Democrats are admitting their case is weak. They're basically saying there is no case, and so are you, apparently.
5
@icbmh3079 , right?! The hypocrisy is astounding! I'm amazed by the fact that he had the nerve to call anyone stupid. If he wants to see stupid, all he need do is check the mirror.
5
property Manager , what you're doing, it's called projection. Psychology 101. You're a textbook case. A president's conversations with his staff are private, and fall under executive privilege. We the public have no legal right to know what he communicates to his staff. Only a judge could force them to testify. Democrats failed to get a judge to enforce subpoenas. This is their fault.
4
@xrendellx , the proof is the testimony? Every witness said, "no bribery, no extortion, no quid pro quo, no pressure". Is that the evidence you mean?
4
@xrendellx , explain why it's wrong for Trump to investigate the Bidens, but it's not wrong for house Democrats to investigate Trump for 4 years? Try to wiggle out of your own hpocrisy, dear lying liberal.
4
If dems need more evidence, they shouldn't have voted to impeach. They should have gone to court, and gotten a judge to compel testimony. They refused the courts, saying this was "a matter of national security", and they couldn't wait. They effectively cut out the third branch of government. The house has the sole power to investigate. The Senate has the sole power to try the case. The Senate doesn't investigate at all. That's the house's job. Democrats have no grounds to subpoena new witnesses. They have no authority in the Republican Senate. A fair trial applies to the accused, not the prosecutor
3
Everyone knows the accused is innocent til proven guilty. Every defendant begins trial with a presumption of innocence. That's constitutional law.
3
@mikeroberts8609 , couldn't agree more!😉
3
@xrendellx , clearly you didn't watch the hearings. Every witness was asked if they were accusing Trump of a crime. All said, "no bribery, no extortion, no quid pro quo." If bribery or extortion occurred, they would have been their own articles of impeachment. There is no crime charged in the articles. Abuse of Power isn't a crime. Obstruction of Congress would have been a crime, if only Democrats had gone to court to enforce subpoenas. They didn't. No one has to answer a subpoena unless a judge compels them to. By desperately seeking witnesses after voting to impeach, Democrats are admitting they have no case.
3
property Manager , there are no crimes in the articles, dear. Name the crime.
3
@xrendellx , ever heard of a suspect being Mirandized? Every defendant has the right to remain silent. It's a right afforded by our Constitution. Thousands of innocent people refuse to cooperate with law enforcement on a daily basis. No one who believed they were being railroaded would cooperate with law enforcement. They would get a lawyer, and let their lawyer protect their rights. Just as you would, if you were Trump. Every defendant is also afforded the presumption of innocence. Every juror must view the accused as innocent, until evidence proves otherwise. If a juror can't afford the accused the presumption of innocence, that juror is dismissed from the trial. It's not Trump's job to exonerate himself. He's already innocent until proven guilty. The burden is the prosecution's. It's their job to prove his guilt. Clearly, Democrats are incapable of doing that, since they're seeking more evidence after voting to impeach. That's called desperate and pathetic
3
property Manager , ever heard of a suspect being Mirandized? Every defendant has the right to remain silent. It's a right afforded by our Constitution. Thousands of innocent people refuse to cooperate with law enforcement on a daily basis. No one who believed they were being railroaded would cooperate with law enforcement. They would get a lawyer, and let their lawyer protect their rights. Just as you would, if you were Trump. No one has to testify unless a judge enforced a subpoena. That didn't happen here. Democrats refused judicial intervention. Every defendant is also afforded the presumption of innocence. Every juror must view the accused as innocent, until evidence proves otherwise. If a juror can't afford the accused the presumption of innocence, that juror is dismissed from the trial. It's not Trump's job to exonerate himself. He's already innocent until proven guilty. The burden is the prosecution's. It's their job to prove his guilt. Clearly, Democrats are incapable of doing that, since they're seeking more evidence after voting to impeach. That's called desperate and pathetic
3
property Manager , hearsay isn't allowed in a trial. There were only 2 witnesses who have direct knowledge of the call. All other witnesses won't be heard by the Senate, because they're all third and fourth hand accounts (hearsay).
3
@xrendellx , I'm not a Republican, dear. I don't vote for Presidents. I'm a conscientious objector, an anarchist. A president is nothing more than a slave owner. All you're doing is picking your new Master every four years. I prefer actual freedom, instead of enslavement to a party and a president. What you just did, it's called projection. Psychology 101. It's also called hypocrisy. You have no facts, no evidence, but you've convicted him anyway, despite the fact that he deserves the presumption of innocence. You think he's "dirty", because your party told you he's guilty. You're not fighting for the country. You're not fighting for the Constitution. You're fighting for your party to gain more power and control.
3
@xrendellx , no, you didn't listen at all. There is no crime charged against Trump. The articles are Abuse of Power, which isn't a crime, and Obstruction of Congress, which would have been a crime, if only Democrats had gone to court. They didn't. Obstruction can only be a crime when a judge enforces a subpoena, and a witness refused to comply. Again, that didn't happen.
3
property Manager , it's called executive privilege, dear dumbass.😂😂😂
3
property Manager , what you don't know about the law, impeachment, and the courts, we could just about squeeze into the Grand Canyon, dear ignorant yet arrogant hypocrite. 😉😘
3
property Manager , are you done lying yet, dear ignorant yet arrogant hypocrite? I love your dumfounded silence, followed by your absence. Thanks for being so accommodating. 😉😂😂😂😂😂😂😘
3
@xrendellx , are you done being willfully blind and woefully ignorant now?
3
@xrendellx , you're not a Republican. You're a liberal liar, shilling on YouTube. Which Trump cabinet member called this extortion?
3
@xrendellx , if Trump committed bribery or extortion, then why aren't either listed as articles of impeachment, dear hypocrite?
3
@xrendellx , if you were a Republican, you'd want Hunter Biden investigated. Hunter was thrown out of the military for cocaine, and his very next job is sitting on the board of a widely corrupt foreign oil company with American influence. He knew nothing about oil or Ukraine. He didn't even speak the language. He made 83k a month being a drug addict with no knowledge or experience, all while his father was in charge of Ukraine. Is that not corruption? What were they paying him for? Could they possibly have been buying the the influence of Joe Biden, the VP? If Burisma needed ignorant and incompetent drug addicts to sit on their board, why Hunter?
3
@xrendellx , I love your dumfounded silence followed by your absence, dear lying liberal. 😉😘
3
@xrendellx , "oh let's be honest", you're not a Republican and neither am I. Stop lying. You're not fooling anyone, dear liberal liar.
3
@xrendellx , you clearly didn't hear Sondland say, "Trump didn't trust Ukraine, and was skeptical of giving foreign aide to begin with".
3
@icbmh3079 , this guy is one of those paid Google shills, hired to try to sway public opinion. They are so desperate. Trump will go down as the president who exposed the media for the propagandists and liars they truly are.
3
@icbmh3079 , I've liked a few of them. Maybe it's me, but it couldn't just be me. I have a feeling that there are far more like minded individuals reading this than we think. They just can't stand to argue with the lunatic left.
3
@Bob Bop Perono , the reason Democrats keep losing is because they THINK they're morally and intellectually superior to anyone who disagrees with them. You're not. Quite frankly, society as whole is tired of your fantasy elitism. Get over yourself, dear arrogant yet ignorant hypocrite. There's nothing special about a liberal liar, like yourself. In fact, there could be nothing more generic than a liberal lying. 😉
3
@xrendellx do you enjoy shilling for Google? It doesn't bother you that you're a fascist?
3
@xrendellx , from the above article: "So, you really have no testimony that ties President Trump to a scheme to withhold aid from Ukraine in exchange for these investigations?” Turner asked Sondland at one point during his questioning. Sondland replied: “Other than my own presumption.” “Which is nothing,” Turner responded.
3
@WakeUpAmerican000s , from the above article: "So, you really have no testimony that ties President Trump to a scheme to withhold aid from Ukraine in exchange for these investigations?” Turner asked Sondland at one point during his questioning. Sondland replied: “Other than my own presumption.” “Which is nothing,” Turner responded.
3
@xrendellx , by the way, you've been debating Trump supporters for two days. Nice hypocrisy. What you just did, it has a name. It's called cowardice.
3
@WakeUpAmerican000s , first of all, Mueller concluded no American colluded with Russia. Did he lie? Putin is the leader of a third world country. He can't even feed his own people, but you think he owns a billionaire president and all the Republicans?! How did that happen? Please explain.
3
@WakeUpAmerican000s , you're repeating a script provided by your intellectual superiors on TV. This doesn't make you informed, dear. It makes you a parrot.
3
@WakeUpAmerican000s , emoluments isn't one of the articles. Neither is bribery or extortion. Did you bother to read the articles?
3
@WakeUpAmerican000s , by Nancy holding onto the articles of impeachment indefinitely, until she gets the trial she wants in the Senate, she's interfering in an election, and holding the Senate hostage for a quid pro quo. She's doing exactly what she accused Trump of doing. More hpocrisy from the left.
3
If dems need more evidence, they shouldn't have voted to impeach. They should have gone to court, and gotten a judge to compel testimony. They refused the courts, saying this was "a matter of national security", and they couldn't wait. They effectively cut out the third branch of government. The house has the sole power to investigate. The Senate has the sole power to try the case. The Senate doesn't investigate at all. That's the house's job. Democrats have no grounds to subpoena new witnesses. They have no authority in the Republican Senate. A fair trial applies to the accused, not the prosecutor
3
Alex Sokolov , you clearly didn't read my comment. Nothing I said was untrue.
3
If dems need more witnesses, they shouldn't have voted to impeach. They should have gone to court, and gotten a judge to compel testimony. They refused the courts, saying this was "a matter of national security", and they couldn't wait. They effectively cut out the third branch of government. The house has the sole power to investigate. The Senate has the sole power to try the case. The Senate doesn't investigate at all. That's the house's job. Democrats have no grounds to subpoena new witnesses. They have no authority in the Republican Senate. A fair trial applies to the accused, not the prosecutor
2
@Robbie S , every defendant is innocent until proven guilty. That is constitutional law. This isn't a criminal trial, but the defendant is still afforded criminal rights. You're being obtuse or willfully blind.
2
@Robbie S , the Senate gets to make their own rules for trial, just like Democrats made their own rules in the house. They are guided by 200 years of legal precedent.
2
@Robbie S , Nixon wasn't removed, dear ignorant and inept. He resigned. He was never convicted. You know nothing.
2
If dems need more witnesses, they shouldn't have voted to impeach. The fact that they're looking for more evidence is proof of their weak case. They should have gone to court, and gotten a judge to compel testimony. They refused the courts, saying this was "a matter of national security", and they couldn't wait. They effectively cut out the third branch of government. The house has the sole power to investigate. The Senate has the sole power to try the case. The Senate doesn't investigate at all. That's the house's job. Democrats have no grounds to subpoena new witnesses. They have no authority in the Republican Senate. A fair trial applies to the accused, not the prosecutor
2
@saraups , the walls already being built. It was funded by taxpayers, and Democrats allocated the money, giving it to build the wall. It's actually your own party who is instrumental in building the wall. Why don't you thank them for their hypocrisy?
2
@xrendellx , you're not a Republican. You're a lying liberal. Who do you imagine you're fooling, dear Google shill?😂😂😂 It's called hypocrisy to invoke the name of God while you're lying. Just saying. You're failing your own "moral standards test". 😂😂😂
2
@icbmh3079 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Dying!!😂😂😂😂😂😂That's called brilliant comedy. Well played, Sir!😉
2
@icbmh3079 , oh, that was definitely a compliment. You should have been a lawyer. You're great at arguing succinctly, and I basically agree with everything you're saying. Just the minor stuff, we differ. Like I don't vote. I think it's a waste. As Mark Twain said, "if voting made a difference, they wouldn't let you do it." It's my opinion Presidents are selected, not elected. Other than that, you're most def a cool cat.
2
@WakeUpAmerican000s , as far as what Democrats are doing, if they wanted witnesses in the Senate, they had to appear in the house first. Democrats refused to enforce subpoenas by going to court. Only a judge can compel testimony. Nancy said, "we can't wait for the courts to decide". Yet now she can hold onto the articles indefinitely, despite calling this an emergency. That's called hypocrisy. Democrats had enough evidence to impeach, but now not enough for trial? That's more hypocrisy.
2
@icbmh3079 , because they know they've lost, but they can't admit it. It's actually a psychological protection for a sociopath. Their denial is deep, and it's real. 😂😂😂 AND they ARE reading a script. We are talking to paid Google shill parrots.
2
@icbmh3079 , no, we're not. But I believe everyone has the right to believe whatever they want. Just cause I believe in God and you don't, doesn't mean we can't get along or find common ground. I can imagine you and I would have quite a fruitful debate, if we ever discussed religion.
2
@icbmh3079 , you're an intelligent soul, and you're honest. You're looking for truth, same as I am. I can respect that.
2
@icbmh3079 , ooh, I bet there's a story there. Something significant.
2
@xrendellx , by the way, waiting til the middle of the night to post, in an effort to gain the last word, that's called cowardice. 😉 Didn't you say you "don't debate Trump supporters"? It's day three, and you're still arguing with Trump supporters, dearest liberal liar. More lies and hypocrisy from you.
2
@xrendellx , Mueller proved no American colluded with Russia. Did he lie, dear liberal, lunatic, shill? How generic of you to think everyone who disagrees with you, or is smarter than you is Russian. By your own logic, the entirety of the country must be Russian. 😂😂😂
2
@eddee0149 , you do know impeachment is political, not criminal? There are no actual laws broken in the articles of impeachment. President Trump had every right to contest subpoenas even if he's running out the clock. This is politics. That's how the game is played. I wonder if you wanted to impeach Obama when he told Eric Holder to defy Congressional subpoenas. No Republicans tried to impeach him for going to a judge to rule on the matter, but you wanna impeach Trump for it. That's called hpocrisy.
2
Alex Sokolov , you're not a lawyer. You're liar, and Trump isn't being sued. A lawyer would know what Bill Clinton was impeached for, and a lawyer would know Nixon wasn't convicted. A lawyer would know Nancy has no legal precedent for holding impeachment articles. She's panicking, and has no idea what to do. Here's a clue: if you have to lie to win the argument, you have no chance of winning. 😂😂😂😉😘
2
Alex Sokolov , the judiciary branch needed to be involved in the house proceedings. They weren't. Democrats cut out the third branch of government. Now they wanna use it? Too late, dearest liar.
2
Alex Sokolov , I don't have to like my own comments, dear projecting hypocrite. And I don't have to lie about being a lawyer, like you. What you don't know about the law, we could just about squeeze into the Grand Canyon, dear lying, phoney lawyer.😉
2
@Robbie S , the same Democrats requesting new witnesses in the Senate, denied Republicans new witnesses during Clinton's impeachment. The same rules for Trump as Clinton. How is that unfair? Again, the house has the sole power to investigate impeachment. The Senate doesn't investigate. They simply hear the case. If Democrats wanted these witnesses, they needed to go to court and get a judge to compel house testimony. No new witnesses are allowed in a Senate hearing. Period. The case has to be made in the house. They simply report findings to the Senate. All witnesses have had to appear before Congress, in order to appear in the Senate. These witnesses Dems want, never testified before Congress. They can't testify in front of the Senate until they've testified before Congress first. That's how it works.
1
@Robbie S , regardless of the trial not being criminal, the defendant is afforded criminal rights. Bill Clintonn got these rights. Why shouldn't Trump?
1
@Robbie S , in what world do you imagine the Republican majority Senate will remove the Republican president on hearsay evidence and no crime? Are you high, or just delusional? Either way, reality escapes you.
1
@Robbie S , the fact that you seem to think Democrats need these witnesses so badly, that's an indication of how weak the case against Trump is. If this was as critical as Nancy claimed, why is she sitting on her hands? This was called a matter of "national security". Delaying the trial hardly makes the case that this is an "emergency".
1
@Robbie S , are you done being willfully blind and woefully ignorant now? What you don't know about impeachment, we could just about squeeze into the Grand Canyon.😉
1
What part of the Constitution did Trump violate. The Constitution is the law. He's not even charged with a crime. Please explain. The Democrat fantasy of presidential necromancy is never gonna happen. How could you possibly know what dead presidents would think? This is called a strawman argument. You're either delusiona, or you're high. Either way, reality escapes you.
1
@xrendellx , there's no conditionality in the transcript. There's no bribery or extortion in the transcript. Please provide the part of the transcript where you found extortion, dearest liar. Provide your proof.
1
@bettablue2660 , ever heard of a suspect being Mirandized? Every defendant has the right to remain silent. It's a right afforded by our Constitution. Thousands of innocent people refuse to cooperate with law enforcement on a daily basis. No one who believed they were being railroaded would cooperate with law enforcement. They would get a lawyer, and let their lawyer protect their rights. Just as you would, if you were Trump. No one has to testify unless a judge enforced a subpoena. That didn't happen here. Democrats refused judicial intervention. Every defendant is also afforded the presumption of innocence. Every juror must view the accused as innocent, until evidence proves otherwise. If a juror can't afford the accused the presumption of innocence, that juror is dismissed from the trial. It's not Trump's job to exonerate himself. He's already innocent until proven guilty. The burden is the prosecution's. It's their job to prove his guilt. Clearly, Democrats are incapable of doing that, since they're seeking more evidence after voting to impeach. That's called desperate and pathetic
1
@xrendellx , you don't even know his chief of staff's name. 😂😂😂 It's Mulvaney. A republican would know that. 😂😂😂 And he never said this was extortion. Provide the quote, dearest lying liberal.
1
@icbmh3079 , absolutely! Why is he lying about being a Republican. Do these shills think we're all as stupid as they are?
1
@icbmh3079 , hell no. I don't even vote. I think a president is nothing more than a slave owner. I believe all people are doing is picking their new Master every four years. I prefer actual freedom. That said, where can I go to live as I choose? Nowhere. I have no choice, but to live by the laws of my country. But if I have to follow the law, then so do our elites. When there government puts it's full weight behind railroading any American, I get pissed. That's what happened to Trump. He's no angel, but he's not the devil either. Truth is all Presidents are basically the same. But Thank God, or whoever you believe, we got Trump, instead of Hillary.
1
@xrendellx , why are you liking your own comments, dear lying liberal? Slightly insecure? 😂😂😂😂
1
@xrendellx explain why it's wrong for Trump to investigate the Bidens, but it's not wrong for house Democrats to investigate Trump for 4 years? Try to wiggle out of your own hpocrisy, dear lying liberal. Answer the question, dearest corwardly hypocrite. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Dying laughing at you! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂💀👻😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
1
@xrendellx , are you psychic? How could you know why he did it, unless you're psychic? You have no evidence of intent, dear lying liberal.
1
@xrendellx , the transcript says, "Do us a favor, because OUR COUNTRY has been through a lot, and Ukraine knows a lot about it." That's verbatim. Where's the extortion? Where's the evidence of Trump's intent? I'm asking you questions you can't answer, dearest lying liberal.
1
@xrendellx , you're stating an opinion, dear lying liberal. Opinions aren't facts. Do we need to define the two? Cause you seem genuinely confused.😂😂😂
1
@icbmh3079 , I'm gonna like all your posts now. 😉😂
1
@icbmh3079 , doing great! He's not even responding to us anymore. 😂😂😂😂😂 Don't you love winning? 😂😂😂😂😂😂
1
@xrendellx , I'm not a Trump supporter. I don't vote. Can you read? I've said like 16 times
1
@xrendellx , you're not a Republican. You're a Google shill, lying on YouTube. 😘
1
@xrendellx , 😂😂😂😂I don't vote, dear. And you never voted for Reagan. 😂😂😂😂
1
@WakeUpAmerican000s , I'm not a Republican, dear. I don't vote for Presidents. I'm a conscientious objector, an anarchist. A president is nothing more than a slave owner. All you're doing is picking your new Master every four years. I prefer actual freedom, instead of enslavement to a party and a president. What you just did, it's called projection. Psychology 101. It's also called hypocrisy. You have no facts, no evidence, but you've convicted him anyway, despite the fact that he deserves the presumption of innocence. You think he's "dirty", because your party told you he's guilty. You're not fighting for the country. You're not fighting for the Constitution. You're fighting for your party to gain more power and control.
1
@WakeUpAmerican000s , what you just did, it's called projection. Psychology 101. You're a textbook case. 😉
1
@xrendellx , the reason you liberals keep losing is because you THINK you're morally and intellectually superior to anyone who disagrees with you. You're not. Quite frankly, humanity as a whole is sick of your fantasy elitism. Get over yourself. There's nothing special about you. You're just a lying liberal. Nothing could be more generic or common place.
1
@icbmh3079 , I'm sure I'd find it a very interesting story. Funnily enough, I work in medicine. It was science that proved God to me. Kind of ironic... The difference in our reasonings and conclusions.
1
@eddee0149 , you have no evidence of personal gain. Are you psychic? Unless you ARE psychic, you couldn't know what Trump was thinking, and therefore cannot prove this was for personal gain. Again, you are completely ignorant of constitutional law, legal proceedings, and the political process of impeachment. Please, educate yourself. This back and forth it's getting redundant. Talking to you is like talking to a rock. Pointless. You're incapable of understanding and always will be.
1
Alex Sokolov , by the way, dearest liar, I'm not a Trump supporter. I don't vote for Presidents. A president is nothing more than a slave owner. All you're doing is choosing your new Master every four years. I prefer actual freedom, instead of enslavement to a party and a president. That's you, dear lying slave to your party.
1
Alex Sokolov , you should know, I have a 149 IQ. You really think you you can lie to me about being a lawyer? 😂😂😂😂 Poor dumbass. 😘
1