Schiff caught out Lying again, page-134

Are you joking trying to give me a dictionary meaning of obstruction? That is stupid beyond belief and only proves that you providing a dictionary meaning as an indisputable facts is pathetic.

No need to go to the judicial branch when Glug can just give us a dictionary meaning. Honestly, I am embarrassed for you because I thought you were much smarter than that.

Read slowly and soak it in. Trump has rights too. If Trump thinks the process is a sham process and refuses to abide by the supbeana, that is why there is a judicial branch. Nancy and Schiff ARE NOT the judge, jury and executioner - that’s why there are 3 branches.

Whether you believe it or not, Trump has rights and those rights get adjudicated by a court, not Nancy and Schiff. Trump has MANY MANY grounds to fight this in court, one being his constitutional right to face his accuser among many other reasons,

You obviously don’t get but Trump could even argue obstruction of justice by the Dems and considering the Dems withheld testimonies, refused witnesses and even his own counsel.

Trump has as much of a right to challenge the Dems on obstruction of justice In court to challenge the validity of the subpeana. .

Maybe this all just too much for you to comprehend. But here is a clue for you. For it to be an “Indisputable fact that Trump obstructed justice”, the Dems must take Trump to court and if or when the court rules in favour of the Dems and of Trump THEN refuses to comply then it becomes an “ Indisputable fact“.

Lucky that in the real world, one that you are clearly detached from , COURTS rule on obstruction of justice as being “ Indisputable facts” , not fools quoting the dictionary and then passing that off as “ Indisputable“.