TakeYouToTasker Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 China is driving/funding Trump impeachment. 2 3
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: China is driving/funding Trump impeachment. Yeah, but that's not interfering in an election. That's just interfering with the legislature. That's fine. 2
Tiberius Posted October 30, 2019 Author Posted October 30, 2019 9 hours ago, DC Tom said: But you're the ####### who said Flynn wasn't decorated, despite his four Bronze Stars. No 11 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: You sound as if a purple heart is a merit badge or something. Do you even know what has to transpire for a person to get a purple heart? There were 4 guys in Benghazi who didn't get purple hearts, they got stopped hearts and you laughed. Patriots all of them! Sad how you guys used their deaths to advance your evil agenda. Sad. But nothing is too low for the right wing slim machine And now you guys have the worst president in American history to defend Sad
Foxx Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1189353182473998337 3
BuffaloHokie13 Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 12 hours ago, Doc said: If I'm Mitch McConnell, I just come out and say "if the House impeaches, we will absolutely not convict." Mitch is not going to pass up the opportunity to cross examine all of the sources being used through the Mueller report and now these closed door hearings. 2 1 1
Foxx Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said: Mitch is not going to pass up the opportunity to cross examine all of the sources being used through the Mueller report and now these closed door hearings. that is what he ought to come out and say. "we look forward to questioning, under oath, all of these witnesses on the abuses of power they may have committed, including the material included within Mueller Report and beyond." 1
Tiberius Posted October 30, 2019 Author Posted October 30, 2019 Oh, they can question these patriots for sure!
Chef Jim Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 46 minutes ago, Tiberius said: No Patriots all of them! Sad how you guys used their deaths to advance your evil agenda. Sad. But nothing is too low for the right wing slim machine And now you guys have the worst president in American history to defend Sad Hey whatever it takes to lose weight.
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 30 minutes ago, Foxx said: https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1189353182473998337 The MSM is going with "correct". He tried to "correct" the transcript. LOL Uh huh. This guy is *****. I hope Schiffy paid him enough for the prison time. 2 1
Tiberius Posted October 30, 2019 Author Posted October 30, 2019 President Trump’s cultists may have reach an all-time low in their sleazy attacks on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Former vice president Joe Biden: “This guy won the Purple Heart, this guy’s a hero, this guy’s a patriot. It’s despicable to do this. ... This guy is a patriot.”
Keukasmallies Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 WWJBD: What would Joe Biden Do? Therein lies the resolution of all questions regarding impeachment, global warming and the Bills loss to the Eagles.
row_33 Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 (edited) the same type of lying and deranged mob put Jesus and Socrates to death Edited October 30, 2019 by row_33
Chef Jim Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Tiberius said: President Trump’s cultists may have reach an all-time low in their sleazy attacks on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. For mer vice president Joe Biden: “This guy won the Purple Heart, this guy’s a hero, this guy’s a patriot. It’s despicable to do this. ... This guy is a patriot.” Won the Purple Heart?? “Bob just got his arm blown off!! Tell him what he’s won Johnny!!” Edited October 30, 2019 by Chef Jim
Tiberius Posted October 30, 2019 Author Posted October 30, 2019 11 minutes ago, Keukasmallies said: WWJBD: What would Joe Biden Do? Therein lies the resolution of all questions regarding impeachment, global warming and the Bills loss to the Eagles. Biden is terrible at calling offensive plays, for sure
Bob in Mich Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 29 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: “Bob just got his arm blown off!! Tell him what he’s won Johnny!!” Tis but a flesh wound. I've had worse! 1
3rdnlng Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 19 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Biden is terrible at calling offensive plays, for sure Yes, but you have a real knack for saying offensive things. Do you think winning the purple heart is something every trooper aspires to? Why criticize the Right Wing Slim Machine? In only 20 minutes a day you can transform your Jabba the Hutt body into something that can walk on its own. 35 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: Won the Purple Heart?? “Bob just got his arm blown off!! Tell him what he’s won Johnny!!” Bob has already fixed it with his chia weed.
row_33 Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 41 minutes ago, Chef Jim said: Won the Purple Heart?? “Bob just got his arm blown off!! Tell him what he’s won Johnny!!” The Dems attacked Bob Dole's bravery and war record when he was running against El Slick seeing as the election result was no surprise, this was well beyond the pale of any decency
Bob in Mich Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 On 5/8/2019 at 2:37 PM, Bob in Mich said: Thought I would re-post this here. If we do actually get into impeachment it might be interesting to see how the backpedaling from today's Repubs follows the Dems actions from the Clinton impeachment in the 90's. Obviously the details are different but if we go down the path there will be similarities I would guess too. The other day I found a 1999 email I wrote to a friend expressing frustration with the Dems and their constant backpedaling with respect to Bill Clinton's impeachment. I recall too at that time my golf partner calling me the Raging Republican. You may think I am now a Raging Democrat but I view myself as Independent and have voted for plenty of Dems and Repubs and will likely continue that pattern. I wouldn't want anyone convicted of non-existent crimes but I also don't think we should ignore misdeeds just because of our party affiliation. I think we citizens should be more like jurors and less like the lawyers I see around here. Here is the 99 email: > I think I'm finally starting to put together some clues on this ... > > Many Clinton supporters view all of the Republicans as the Religious > Right Wing, therefor the enemy. They feel that for many years the > Religious Right has been trying to take away more and more personal > freedoms in the name of morality. They want the government to stay out of > their personal lives. That feeling is at the root of this Clinton > support. They see Ken Starr as one who has pried into the President's > personal life. They feel that the Republicans (aka Christian Coalition) > now are trying to throw him out of office because of 'immoral behavior in > his private life'. Many have decided that regardless of the facts, they > are not giving any more ground to this morality craze. > > Also, most people that liked Bill (before all of this) knew he had > told lies in the past and they accepted him anyway. Many of us that > didn't like him because of his lying felt that his backers just couldn't > see how dishonest the guy was. In reality the backers saw the dishonesty > and liked him for his other fine leadership qualities. When he is finally > caught red handed in these lies, his detractors say 'See, we told he was > dishonest. Look at the evidence we have on him.' While his supporters > say, 'What's the big deal? He told a lie about sex. The economy is > great. Get over it.' > > This is the backstepping I've seen in protecting our buddy Bill. It > seems so many points have been conceded, yet there's always another > position to fall back to ... > > 1. The story breaks... He did not have an affair with this > 'gold-digger'. She is just trying to smear the President or just out to > get a book deal for her self. The Whitehouse says that she was stalking > the President and that the FBI is investigating her. > 2. Talk of the stained dress surfaces. Now the stance is 'I > doubt he had any affair, but even if he did, so what if he committed > adultery, it's strictly a personal matter between himself, his family, and > his God. The damn Republicans probably planted this woman in there to try > to get Clinton'. > 3. He lied about sex, so what, everybody lies about sex. Who > hasn't lied about sex? Obstruction of Justice! Get real. > 4. He didn't have any obligation to do the job of the Jones' > attorneys. He wasn't forthcoming and he was evasive. He can be > misleading without committing perjury. There's nothing illegal just > because he didn't offer up answers to questions he wasn't asked. Besides > he had to protect Hillary. > 5. OK, maybe he lied, but it was a civil matter and the case > was eventually thrown out. Everybody lies in civil cases. It's not a > serious matter to commit perjury in a civil case. Besides, that Ken > Starr spent how many millions of dollars? He was appointed to investigate > Whitewater and then it became Travelgate and blah, blah, blah ... That > Betty Curry thing? He was just helping to refresh his memory, that's all. > 6. Well, he had to lie to the Grand Jury. What was he going to > do, admit to perjury in the Jones case - that would have been stupid. He > had to deny that he lied earlier or Ken Starr, that no good, rotten, > bastard .... would be able to indict him for perjury when he leaves > office. He has to maintain that he never lied now, or Starr will get him. > > 7. Look, perjury is just not that serious of a matter. It's > certainly not a 'high crime or misdemeanor like treason or bribery'. > There's no way they could make any case for Obstruction of Justice. The > obstruction case is purely speculation. He says- She says case - could > never be proven. Even if, for the purposes of argument, you suppose all > allegations are true, these are not 'high crimes or misdemeanors'. > 8. The House prosecutors show that a few Federal Judges have > been removed by the Senate for just such deeds (The Senate labeling the > perjury a 'high crime or misdemeanor'). Ok, in some cases perjury could > be grounds for removal, but not in this case. This case is only about sex > and lying about it and if that pervert Starr wasn't peeping into > everybody's bedroom... Would you want to be asked sexual questions under > oath? > 9. The Senators are not just jurors, you know. They are trying > the case. They need to consider more than just the facts, the rule of > law, and the Constitution. They also need to consider what's in the best > interests of this country. The House managers may have made a pretty good > case, but it is not in our best interests to remove the president even if > he committed perjury and obstruction of justice. > 10. And then the latest to my ears ... They had no business > asking him personal, private questions in a grand jury setting where he > couldn't plead the fifth (the protection from self incrimination). That > f***er Ken Starr. It was a witch hunt. Any evidence against Clinton has > to be discounted because of the 'illegitimate' means that were used in > acquiring it. It doesn't really matter what they found out because of the > way they went about it.
3rdnlng Posted October 30, 2019 Posted October 30, 2019 This "never met a word he didn't like" goes back quite a ways.
Tiberius Posted October 30, 2019 Author Posted October 30, 2019 Well, imagine that! The State Department officials, Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, said their optimistic view of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky clashed with a darker outlook of the new government held by Trump and an informal channel of actors linked to the president’s attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani. Anderson, a career Foreign Service officer, will detail efforts when U.S. officials tried to demonstrate support for Ukraine only to be batted down by the White House, including after Russian forces attacked and seized Ukrainian military vessels in the Sea of Azov in 2018. He is scheduled to speak to lawmakers Wednesday afternoon. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/testimony-from-career-diplomats-to-outline-trumps-dark-view-of-ukraine/2019/10/29/1681d293-f23c-476a-bdd8-35244e23d66a_story.html
Recommended Posts