The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG

[SoCal Deek]

I’m not able to watch this circus but did this Hill lady really suggest that the country shouldn’t waste its time on politically driven false narratives? Holy crap lady!  We just spent $40 million and 3 years investigating a FALSE NARRATIVE. Has she been living under a rock?

[jrober38]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not able to watch this circus but did this Hill lady really suggest that the country shouldn’t waste its time on politically driven false narratives? Holy crap lady!  We just spent $40 million and 3 years investigating a FALSE NARRATIVE. Has she been living under a rock?

 

So because one happened, it's okay to do it again?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Uncle Joe]

Yeah, seeing Big Stuff on the screen caused some flashbacks as well...

[row_33]

just doing a little bit of reading on Watergate....

 

so the House did not bother to vote on Articles of Impeachment, which would have been a foregone conclusion, and the Senate began it's hearings anyway?

 

So the Senate at any time can start a hearing in this process?

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

 

[snafu]

4 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

So because one happened, it's okay to do it again?

 

No. You don’t get it. 

It is okay to find out who pushed the false narrative, how did they push it, and why. So it never happens again. That’s not a conspiracy or a false narrative, that’s an investigation. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

3 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

No. You don’t get it. 

It is okay to find out who pushed the false narrative, how did they push it, and why. So it never happens again. That’s not a conspiracy or a false narrative, that’s an investigation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's amazing this is so difficult to grasp for people who claim to be interested in truth above partisan politics. 

 

It's almost like they've been programmed to reject this (logical) premise by the media outlets they get their information from. Which, would make sense, since those same media outlets are DESPERATE to avoid asking this question because it would expose their role in KNOWINGLY pushing a lie and disinformation onto the public on the behalf of the coup plotters and their IC sources. 

 

Can't let the NPCs know how curated their reality is... nope. That would be "dangerous". 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Deranged Rhino

[row_33]

3 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

No. You don’t get it. 

It is okay to find out who pushed the false narrative, how did they push it, and why. So it never happens again. That’s not a conspiracy or a false narrative, that’s an investigation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

he's not capable of following an argument beyond "yes i want fries with that, jrober!"

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[row_33]

back to Russia again

 

[Rob's House]

Does anyone know who holds the record for the most hail Marys intercepted in the end zone?

[snafu]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It's amazing this is so difficult to grasp for people who claim to be interested in truth above partisan politics. 

 

It's almost like they've been programmed to reject this (logical) premise by the media outlets they get their information from. Which, would make sense, since those same media outlets are DESPERATE to avoid asking this question because it would expose their role in KNOWINGLY pushing a lie and disinformation onto the public on the behalf of the coup plotters and their IC sources. 

 

Can't let the NPCs know how curated their reality is... nope. That would be "dangerous". 

 

It is unfortunate. 

 

 

[row_33]

1 minute ago, Rob's House said:

Does anyone know who holds the record for the most hail Marys intercepted in the end zone?

 

want it to be Leonard Smith

 

[Foxx]

21 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

So because one happened, it's okay to do it again?

no. it's all about context and she is being disingenuous.

[Westside]

45 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I own Black Rock mutual funds.

Am I tied to Ukraine?

Lieing comes naturally to you.

 

[B-Man]

 

That's all you need for a kangaroo court

 

Trump impeachment based on unreliable presumptions, rumor
and innuendo – Not facts

by Gregg Jarrett

 

Original Article

 

The House Intelligence Committee’s impeachment hearing Wednesday posed a conundrum. Better yet, let’s call it a riddle. When is a “quid pro quo” not a “quid pro quo?” The answer is … when it’s “presumed.”

 

U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified that there was a “quid pro quo” between the U.S. and Ukraine, even though President Trump made it crystal clear to Sondland that there was no “quid pro quo.” So, how did the ambassador arrive at his opinion that a “quid pro quo” must somehow exist? It turns out that he assumed or “presumed” it. At one point, he called it a mere “guess.”

 

?

 

 

 

 

[Foxx]

7 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

Does anyone know who holds the record for the most hail Marys intercepted in the end zone?

i'll take... who is JRober for $5, Alex. 

[B-Man]

 

Mark Meadows: Impeachment hearing
produced this 'real bombshell'

by Vandana Rambaran

 

Original Article

 

GOP Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, hammered America's ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, during Wednesday's testimony, seizing on Sondland's admission that he never heard the president or anyone else in the White House explicitly link Ukrainian aid with the opening of an investigation into 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden and his son Hunter. Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., applauded his colleague on producing "the real bombshell" of Sondland's long-anticipated testimony and marked the moment as "game over," for the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry.

 

 

 

.

[Rob's House]

5 minutes ago, Foxx said:

i'll take... who is JRober for $5, Alex. 

 

Sorry, we were looking for Adam Schiff.

 

However, over the break our judges determined we will accept your answer.