Impeachment

And of course the Ukranian President himself. But, like I have said, anti-Trump people will say he was pressured into saying there was no pressure.
 
Garmel said:
Yet, most of the other witnesses said that didn't happen. Of course all of these are according to "sources" because the chicken **** democrats won't release the transcripts. I wonder why.
Click to expand...
The transcript released by the White House indicated that this was true.
 
OUBubba said:
The transcript released had a clear quid pro quo. Mulvaney even validated that this weekend. Are we talking about the same thing?
Click to expand...

The transcript had nothing. Bubba, how many times can you fall for fake news? You did this during Russian collusion, the Stormy Daniels case, etc.. Mulvaney's statements could have been be interpreted in different ways. Personally, I think Trump was trying to get them to take a vote.
 
Last edited:
OUBubba said:
The transcript released had a clear quid pro quo. Mulvaney even validated that this weekend. Are we talking about the same thing?
Click to expand...
Haha, I'll bet you have always believed every word that came out of Mulvaney's mouth as well as any other Trump Administration official.

He didn't say that, but if it can be spun that he did, suddenly he is 100% credible.
 
To be fair, he created the receipts with text messages and, surely, access to the whatsapp stuff.....But, her emails!!!!!!! LOL
 
OUBubba said:
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.co...note/5125c5bd-9723-4ea9-8180-7bb6fd714783.pdf This guy disagrees with your assessments. He's got the receipts. He's also a Republican.

How many people have resigned around this?

The fact that John Bolton called it a drug deal and told them to brief the lawyers is telling. But, keep saying that it's nothing. Nothing to see here...Redirect Notice
Click to expand...

You see, Bubba, the democrats are pulling a fast one on the American people and we can't really be sure what Bolton said, Like I said, there are witnesses who have claimed no quid pro happened. Of course, you don't care about those. The fact that the democrats will not allow transcripts to be shown to the American people tells me all that I need to know.
 
OUBubba said:
The transcript released had a clear quid pro quo. Mulvaney even validated that this weekend. Are we talking about the same thing?
Click to expand...

. There wasn’t anything close to a quid pro quo in the transcript. Clear? Bubba, do you just tell yourself that over and over Hoping it will change to reality?
 
I35 said:
. There wasn’t anything close to a quid pro quo in the transcript. Clear? Bubba, do you just tell yourself that over and over Hoping it will change to reality?
Click to expand...
If libs tell a lie often enough, they believe it to be reality...no matter how many times they are shown to be wrong. They are the horse you can lead to the trough but cannot get to drink...although Shillary clearly drinks enough for many of them if the election night stories were even remotely close to accurate.
 
Bill Taylor also notes how many people are aware that a highly irregular policy group is running things, that they are undermining established US policy, that they are making corrupt domestic political demands, and - crucially - that they are trying to cover their tracks.

Will Trumpsters discredit him? jk

of course they will
 
mb227 said:
If libs tell a lie often enough, they believe it to be reality...no matter how many times they are shown to be wrong.
Click to expand...

Like I told SH that if the democrats had a witness that said he saw Trump shooting JFK they'd believe it. Ok, maybe a little hyperbole but you get my drift. All we will now hear from now on is the name Bill Taylor. It doesn't matter that there are other witnesses said there wasn't a quid pro quo. His opinion is the only one that matters.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Which witnesses? Not Sondland. Volker simply said he wasn't aware.
Click to expand...

That's not true(according to sources) but believe what you want to believe. Btw, I just heard Rep. Matt Gaetz say that Bill Taylor's testimony was not the full testimony and not the complete truth although he said he couldn't go into details. He said important things were left out from this leak.
 
horninchicago said:
Fake outrage again. Only morons connect the word lynching with race. It means punishment without trial. Exactly what Democrats are attempting.

So, are we to believe only black people have been lynched throughout World and US history? Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

OUBubba said:
Actually, the way I understand it is that the House serves as the grand jury and the Senate serves as the court. So there is nothing incumbent upon the house to call certain "witnesses" or to represent both sides. The Senate will do that. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

horninchicago said:
I do not know if you are wrong on that. However,...

The context of the lynching comment, I think, is the last 3 years of the Democrats looking for ANY reason to undermine, hinder, and obstruct Trump's ability to do his job. Also, the lynch mob mentality of wanting to impeach at all costs.
Click to expand...

Seattle Husker said:
Pressuring Ukraine to open political politically motivated investigations is Trump doing his job. :facepalm:
Click to expand...

1998-remarks-from-biden-surface-after-he-attacks-trumps-lynching-remarks

I wonder if anyone keeps a tally of things Dems said that they are now outraged about when a Republican, particularly Trump, says it now.
 
horninchicago said:
And of course the Ukranian President himself. But, like I have said, anti-Trump people will say he was pressured into saying there was no pressure.
Click to expand...
Yeah: I think the unexplained withholding of funds coupled with Giuliani's intercession and the President's request for a favor would have a clear meaning to anyone not an imbecile.
 
Garmel said:
You see, Bubba, the democrats are pulling a fast one on the American people and we can't really be sure what Bolton said, Like I said, there are witnesses who have claimed no quid pro happened. Of course, you don't care about those. The fact that the democrats will not allow transcripts to be shown to the American people tells me all that I need to know.
Click to expand...
Once Bolton testifies we will know. Receipts. Encrypted apps. Imagine if HRC hade done that. High crimes......
 
I've heard cries that government should operate like a business. Well, we see that in action with a businessman clearly looking out for #1 and #1s buddies.
 
horninchicago said:
Your quote above was to explain why this process the Dems are following could not be termed a lynching, correct? True, you did not actually criticize the use of the word.
Click to expand...
I just said it couldn't be construed as a one sided “trial”. It’s the prosecution’s side of the indictment process. At least to my understanding. The Senate can roll out the mythical server and other such tropes like the pizza pedophile ring run out of a pizza shop basement with no actual basement.
 
Horn6721 said:
Why wouldn't the Dems who keep saying they want transparency not release the complete transcript?
Click to expand...

We all know the reason.
horninchicago said:
1998-remarks-from-biden-surface-after-he-attacks-trumps-lynching-remarks

I wonder if anyone keeps a tally of things Dems said that they are now outraged about when a Republican, particularly Trump, says it now.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I would like to have a dollar for everything Obama did with no protest from the dems with Trump doing the exact same thing that all of sudden causes outrage. Liberals have no idea how the media manipulates them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top