DC Tom Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: (Maybe DR and I are the same poster - ever think of that PPP?) Doubt it. If you were, for all the times he kicks your ass, he'd have changed his screen name to "Martin Riggs." 3
row_33 Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 talk about misusing the words... overwhelming (no) and uncontested (you rigged it that way) 1
Whatnot78 Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, row_33 said: talk about misusing the words... overwhelming (no) and uncontested (you rigged it that way) 2
Gary M Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 3 hours ago, Tiberius said: Ha! Like Sondland who had to change his testimony and said there was a quid pro quo! NO, He said he presumed there was At the prompting of Democrats, the ambassador gave hours of testimony on some scheme he imagined was happening. But that testimony was mostly made up of secondhand or speculative claims. He testified that he “presumed” and “came to believe” that the administration was engaged in quid pro quo for certain investigations — providing no proof or new evidence. He also said his theories about why aid was withheld were a “guess.” https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/11/20/impeachment-hearing-gordon-sondland-bombshell-dud-editorials-debates/4254300002/ 1
Hedge Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 35 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: They can't. Their own base would eat them if they did. Which is what happens when you feed that base lies for three years about Nazis in the street and a Trump/Putin conspiracy. They're going to be destroyed from within by their own prog-fascist base. And it'll be a joy to watch. **************** Page to download the report from THE TRUMP-UKRAINE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY REPORT 1
Tiberius Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Gary M said: NO, He said he presumed there was At the prompting of Democrats, the ambassador gave hours of testimony on some scheme he imagined was happening. But that testimony was mostly made up of secondhand or speculative claims. He testified that he “presumed” and “came to believe” that the administration was engaged in quid pro quo for certain investigations — providing no proof or new evidence. He also said his theories about why aid was withheld were a “guess.” https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/11/20/impeachment-hearing-gordon-sondland-bombshell-dud-editorials-debates/4254300002/ We had a direct like to Trump to commit the deed. He said there was a quid pro quo and he was backed up by multiple witnesses. You would be fine with whatever Trump does. I just hope we get even and then some with you people.
Warren Zevon Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 7 minutes ago, Hedge said: Page to download the report from THE TRUMP-UKRAINE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY REPORT Thanks Hedgey - couldn't find this anywhere else
Gary M Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: We had a direct like to Trump to commit the deed. He said there was a quid pro quo and he was backed up by multiple witnesses. Name one of these witnesses and link to a quote of what they testified. So two hours and no response from Tibs. So let me help you. William Taylor testified that an aid told him that Sondland told him. Sorry that's not backing up Sondland, that's repeating the same source info. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/us/politics/impeachment-hearings.html Edited December 3, 2019 by Gary M 1
Warren Zevon Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 True - why was Nunes on the phone with someone as corrupt as Parnas? Why didn't Nunes disclose this information? 1
Tiberius Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 11 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: True - why was Nunes on the phone with someone as corrupt as Parnas? Why didn't Nunes disclose this information? Criminals all. This is the Republican Party today
row_33 Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: best and most entertaining President ever!!!
jrober38 Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 43 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Criminals all. This is the Republican Party today Yet they preach the "rule of law". It's hysterical.
Deranged Rhino Posted December 3, 2019 Author Posted December 3, 2019 (edited) Edited December 3, 2019 by Deranged Rhino 3
dubs Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 50 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Criminals all. This is the Republican Party today If you can make a compelling or even coherent argument that Trump is a criminal, I’d be all ears. Seriously. Pro tip: it helps to have actual evidence to reference to indicate guilt of said crime.
Warren Zevon Posted December 3, 2019 Posted December 3, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: lol good luck
Deranged Rhino Posted December 3, 2019 Author Posted December 3, 2019 They think you're too stupid to know the difference. (one person posting in this thread under multiple alts, is -- but I digress) 1
Recommended Posts