Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Its so true. 

 

Secret meetings, Russian helped him win, Trump Towers meetings, Hotel deals, trying to get Puty into G8, saying we are as bad as Russia 

 

Wake up 

  It's so true....that it is a liberal fantasy.  Psychiatrists say there is a yearning to get something personal out in the open with depictions such as you have shown.  Pretty easy to see that you want to be the one on his knees and mouth wide open before Putin.  

Edited by RochesterRob
Posted
9 hours ago, jrober38 said:

All that matters today is that Sondland said it was a quid pro quo. Trump extorted a foreign government to benefit himself politically.

 

Did he say that?

Honestly, I'm late to this discussion. Can you point to what language he used, because all I see is him saying the quid pro quo was white house meeting  in exchange for announcing an investigation into 2016 and Burisma.  If there's something more, let me know.  If there's not, then you're mis-characterizing the testimony.

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Did he say that?

Honestly, I'm late to this discussion. Can you point to what language he used, because all I see is him saying the quid pro quo was white house meeting  in exchange for announcing an investigation into 2016 and Burisma.  If there's something more, let me know.  If there's not, then you're mis-characterizing the testimony.

 

 

 

 

Actually the President himself told this guy there was NO quid pro quo....and that he did not want ANYTHING! 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

From the little of it I saw this morning....Sonland is not a serious person.  When do some of these water cooler gossiping, middle management types get their walking papers?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

 

Missed the past hour+... 

59 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


c-span has a burp during the exchange (Conaway from Texas (R) pointed it out) about the D congressman calling for a boycott of Sondland's hotel in Oregon as a way to intimidate him into testifying "correctly".  Who was the Democratic congressman that called for the boycott? 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
41 minutes ago, Albwan said:

If you guys would put that shift eating troll on ignore and stop quoting him 

he would crawl back into the hole he came from.

He is truly a sick individual.

Also the authorities should do a health check on him and make sure

he has no weapons.

  What you said is true of 80 percent of the trolls out on the internet.  From what I have seen Tibs will be back with a new account as often as needed for the express purpose of getting under people's skins so one block will not do it.  It's happened on other websites I have been on.  I still maintain that Tibs and his socks are part of a paid presence here.  The people who oversee this board need to realize this and just block his IP address.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
42 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

You didn't even say it was impeachable.

You stopped at "wrong".

 

 

 

 

 

I was trying to get the opinion of the person I originally quoted.  I was hoping we might find some common ground and knew 'impeachable', while I firmly believe in it, was unlikely to find common agreement.  That is why I did not say it where noted. 

Posted

question - why are there an unbalanced number of members from either side on the Intelligence Committee? more Dems than Repubs.

Posted
1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

I was trying to get the opinion of the person I originally quoted.  I was hoping we might find some common ground and knew 'impeachable', while I firmly believe in it, was unlikely to find common agreement.  That is why I did not say it where noted. 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

From the little of it I saw this morning....Sonland is not a serious person.  When do some of these water cooler gossiping, middle management types get their walking papers?

 

has anyone with a government job, testifying, looked like they had a 3 digit IQ

 

since Ollie North?

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

I was trying to get the opinion of the person I originally quoted.  I was hoping we might find some common ground and knew 'impeachable', while I firmly believe in it, was unlikely to find common agreement.  That is why I did not say it where noted. 

I'm not sure he speaks Ganja.

Posted
Just now, row_33 said:

 

has anyone with a government job, testifying, looked like they had a 3 digit IQ

 

since Ollie North?

 

 

How about in your country?  Which Russians do you think are really intelligent?  Certainly Putin, right?  He seems very clever.  I mean anyone that could outsmart Trump must have a really large brain.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Foxx said:

question - why are there an unbalanced number of members from either side on the Intelligence Committee? more Dems than Repubs.

 

always thought majority in the House and Senate gets the extra seat on Committees.

 

 

Posted
5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

I was trying to get the opinion of the person I originally quoted.  I was hoping we might find some common ground and knew 'impeachable', while I firmly believe in it, was unlikely to find common agreement.  That is why I did not say it where noted. 

 

Actually, as I was following through the thread, you called out for anyone to answer your question.

But, really it wasn't a question.  You stated a conclusion of what you believe with hypothetical facts supporting your conclusion, and then you asked for anyone to agree with your conclusion.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

How about in your country?  Which Russians do you think are really intelligent?  Certainly Putin, right?  He seems very clever.  I mean anyone that could outsmart Trump must have a really large brain.

Image result for nonsense gif

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, snafu said:

 

Actually, as I was following through the thread, you called out for anyone to answer your question.

But, really it wasn't a question.  You stated a conclusion of what you believe with hypothetical facts supporting your conclusion, and then you asked for anyone to agree with your conclusion.

 

 

 

 

That's what he does. 

 

Like when he talks about "WHERE ARE THE SURVEILLANCE TAPES OF TRUMP!" and then ignores every single answer to that response. 

 

Bob doesn't want a conversation. He wants to virtue signal that he's not a RACIST by saying how much he hates Trump. And then lumps anyone who raises objections to that (simple minded) world view as NAZIS!

 

He's a joke.

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...