Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 16, 2019 1 hour ago, The Observer said: Other than admitting to colluding with a foreign power, having Mueller find 10 instances of obstruction, campaign finance violations for paying off a porn star, witness intimidation for threatening Michael Cohen's family, and having half of ihis original cabinet sitting in a jail cell right now, yes. He is squeaky clean. Link to ANY of that proven? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 16, 2019 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/corrupt-dems-change-impeachment-rules-again-closed-door-interviews-now-considered-depositions-to-limit-one-attorney-asking-questions-per-round/ More horsesh!t rule changes from the Dems. Pathetic attempt at a coup......... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 16, 2019 DOJ has in it's possession two cell phones used by Joseph Mifsud. Why would the DOJ have these phones if Mifsud is actually a Russian as claimed by Comey/McCabe/Clapper/Brennan AND MUELLER?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 Sondland turning on Trump today. Big development Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 Also acting chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney confirmed there was quid pro quo in withholding military aid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beaker15 107 Posted October 17, 2019 Oh Worms, you predictably take the bait every time. God bless you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Beaker15 said: Oh Worms, you predictably take the bait every time. God bless you! They know how dumb their audience is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2019 43 minutes ago, IGotWorms said: Sondland turning on Trump today. Big development How do you know it's the truth since it's behind closed doors and only Dems get to ask questions/leak info? Schifforbrains is trustworthy? Like the Volker testimony was supposed to? Wrong....... https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/16/volker-testimony-destroys-narrative-of-diplomatic-turmoil-following-ukraine-phone-call/#.Xad4KqR11wE.twitter 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted October 17, 2019 24 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said: How do you know it's the truth since it's behind closed doors and only Dems get to ask questions/leak info? Schifforbrains is trustworthy? Like the Volker testimony was supposed to? Wrong....... https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/16/volker-testimony-destroys-narrative-of-diplomatic-turmoil-following-ukraine-phone-call/#.Xad4KqR11wE.twitter Somehow, the press will find out the spin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,366 Posted October 17, 2019 On 10/13/2019 at 10:01 AM, IGotWorms said: Washington (CNN) — The US ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, is expected to tell Congress this week that President Donald Trump relayed to him directly in a phone call the content of a text message that Sondland sent denying quid pro quo, The Washington Post reported Saturday, citing a person familiar with his testimony. Sondland's text message was sent to the top US diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, who raised concerns in a text to Sondland about the US withholding nearly $400 million of US military and security aid. This text message exchange has become a major focal point of the impeachment inquiry into the President. Sondland is expected to testify to Congressthat he has no knowledge of whether Trump was telling him the truth at the time, the Post reports. "It's only true that the President said it, not that it was the truth," the person familiar with Sondland's planned testimony, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive diplomatic matters, told the Post. The congressional testimony by Sondland, a key witness within the State Department and to the President's action in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, could prove damaging to the President and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, the Post reports. Sondland intends to testify to the House under subpoena Thursday, according to his lawyers. Whelp the Dems got their big witness on the stand and here is what we found out... Sondland testified that he recalled NO discussions with the State Department or White House about Vice President Biden or his son. He added that he didn’t recall any effort to encourage an investigation into the Bidens. Sondland stated that neither Ambassador Bolton nor Fiona Hill ever shared any critical comments to him about the Administration’s Ukraine policy. Sondland added that he was “disappointed” by media reports of Hill’s critical comments. Sondland responded to media reports misinterpreting his text messages about his work in Ukraine. He said that allegations he sought to hide information by speaking on the phone, rather than via text, were “completely false.” Sondland said he was aware of NO discussions with the White House on withholding U.S. security assistance from Ukraine in return for assistance with the President’s 2020 re-election campaign. Aka: he undercuts @RepAdamSchiffs theory about a quid pro quo. Sondland responded to alleged concerns of a quid pro quo for security aid. In September, he called the President and asked “What do you want from Ukraine?” The President’s response? “NOTHING.” 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,366 Posted October 17, 2019 Sondland emphasized AGAIN that the President repeated “no quid pro quo” multiple times to him on the same phone call in September. Let’s repeat it one more time: there was NO quid pro quo and NO pressure on Ukraine from President Trump. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, Cdub100 said: Sondland emphasized AGAIN that the President repeated “no quid pro quo” multiple times to him on the same phone call in September. Let’s repeat it one more time: there was NO quid pro quo and NO pressure on Ukraine from President Trump. Didn't Mulvaney acknowledge that there was? https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/17/mulvaney-confirms-ukraine-aid-2016-probe-050156 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: Didn't Mulvaney acknowledge that there was? https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/17/mulvaney-confirms-ukraine-aid-2016-probe-050156 You have a problem with trump looking into the devised scam that tried to take down his presidency? They are going to get to the bottom of it and you're not going to like the results. Same with this current devised scam. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 1 minute ago, drobeski said: You have a problem with trump looking into the devised scam that tried to take down his presidency? I question that it was his only motive or even his motive at all. I don't trust Trump. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,468 Posted October 17, 2019 Orange Man Bad! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,552 Posted October 17, 2019 While it's hard for the sky screamers and libtards like we have around here to phathom another Trump victory, I for one would find it very interesting to see what a lame duck Trump for 2 plus months will look like. Can you imagine the amount of dirt he will unclasify in those two months? Thanks to Obama, it's real easy to do now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: I question that it was his only motive or even his motive at all. I don't trust Trump. What would the other motivations be? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, Filthy Fernadez said: What would the other motivations be? Getting dirt on his opponent in order to benefit himself in the election. You know, the thing that most people are interested in knowing the truth about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 27 minutes ago, Cdub100 said: Sondland emphasized AGAIN that the President repeated “no quid pro quo” multiple times to him on the same phone call in September. Let’s repeat it one more time: there was NO quid pro quo and NO pressure on Ukraine from President Trump. Well that’s weird Mulvaney said there was. Right there in a white house press conference for all to see. Yet, somehow, I’m sure you’ll manage to continue denying it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 26 minutes ago, drobeski said: You have a problem with trump looking into the devised scam that tried to take down his presidency? They are going to get to the bottom of it and you're not going to like the results. Same with this current devised scam. Pivot! Oh sh1t they had to come clean on quid pro quo! Quick, let’s now pretend like that’s perfectly fine!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,151 Posted October 17, 2019 24 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: I question that it was his only motive or even his motive at all. I don't trust Trump. Well then, there ya go. Let's hang the orange bastage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2019 5 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: Getting dirt on his opponent in order to benefit himself in the election. You know, the thing that most people are interested in knowing the truth about. A couple problems with your theory. 1. The dirt was already out there. 2. Guilliani was over there working on this MONTHS prior to Biden announcing his run. 3. Biden isn't his opponent yet as he hasn't won the nomination. Most people are interested in knowing the truth about? Then let's have the investigation into the Bidens instead of trying to cloud the issue and shut it down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2019 16 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: Getting dirt on his opponent in order to benefit himself in the election. You know, the thing that most people are interested in knowing the truth about. Biden is not his opponent. Biden has 11 opponents right now, none of them named trump. Fact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, drobeski said: Biden is not his opponent. Biden has 11 opponents right now, none of them named trump. Fact. If your point is trump is a focktard because he might’ve thrown away his presidency over a guy he probably wasn’t even going to end up facing in the general election, I agree Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, IGotWorms said: If your point is trump is a focktard because he might’ve thrown away his presidency over a guy he probably wasn’t even going to end up facing in the general election, I agree Haha wanna bet he's still president when the election rolls around ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, drobeski said: Haha wanna bet he's still president when the election rolls around ? Not really. With how focking retarded a good chunk of people are I not only predict he will beat impeachment, I’m fairly certain he’ll get re-elected as well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2019 1 minute ago, IGotWorms said: Not really. With how focking retarded a good chunk of people are I not only predict he will beat impeachment, I’m fairly certain he’ll get re-elected as well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,366 Posted October 17, 2019 35 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: Getting dirt on his opponent in order to benefit himself in the election. You know, the thing that most people are interested in knowing the truth about. Just to be clear you are against illegal activities being reviled to the public? Because that's what you're saying Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Cdub100 said: Just to be clear you are against illegal activities being reviled to the public? Because that's what you're saying Nope. Didn't say that at all. I do find it a bit naive to believe that's all Trump was trying to do. I understand there is bias and a need to defend everything he does though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, drobeski said: What’re you laughing about? This guy admittedly damaged national security interests and extorted a foreign country to investigate a domestic political rival. And nothing will happen as a result. This is very, very bad for our democracy. VERY bad. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EternalShinyAndChrome 2,480 Posted October 17, 2019 1 minute ago, IGotWorms said: What’re you laughing about? This guy admittedly damaged national security interests and extorted a foreign country to investigate a domestic political rival. And nothing will happen as a result. This is very, very bad for our democracy. VERY bad. He did no such thing. There's actually proof that he didn't because there are now two people who said he didn't. two people directly tied to the situation. Not some anonymous guy who heard something from somebody. you must get your talking points directly from the Democratic party every morning, right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
avoiding injuries 1,220 Posted October 17, 2019 It baffles me that people are upset and accusing Trump of digging up dirt on his opponents, but don’t seem to have a care in the world that the democrats have been doing it to him for years. Hypocrisy to highest degree. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 6 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said: He did no such thing. There's actually proof that he didn't because there are now two people who said he didn't. two people directly tied to the situation. Not some anonymous guy who heard something from somebody. you must get your talking points directly from the Democratic party every morning, right? So, who the hell is telling the truth now? Didn't the WH just admit that he did do it? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, avoiding injuries said: It baffles me that people are upset and accusing Trump of digging up dirt on his opponents, but don’t seem to have a care in the world that the democrats have been doing it to him for years. Hypocrisy to highest degree. It baffles me that you don't understand why people care or even know the difference between the two. It does help me understand how all of you here follow him so blindly though. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,366 Posted October 17, 2019 10 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: Nope. Didn't say that at all. I do find it a bit naive to believe that's all Trump was trying to do. I understand there is bias and a need to defend everything he does though. Ok can you clarify by what you mean when you say dirt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vuduchile 1,940 Posted October 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, IGotWorms said: What’re you laughing about? This guy admittedly damaged national security interests and extorted a foreign country to investigate a domestic political rival. And nothing will happen as a result. This is very, very bad for our democracy. VERY bad. Not exactly “[Did] he also mention to me, in the past, that the corruption related to the DNC server?” Mulvaney said. “Absolutely, no question about that. But that’s it. And that’s why we held up the money. ... The look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. And that is absolutely appropriate Mulvaney said Trump had not, however, had a similar quid pro quo involving the other investigation he desired — the one involving the Bidens. “The money held up had absolutely nothing to do with Biden,” he said. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/17/white-house-chief-staff-mick-mulvaney-admits-it-there-was-ukraine-quid-pro-quo/%3foutputType=amp Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
avoiding injuries 1,220 Posted October 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: It baffles me that you don't understand why people care or even know the difference between the two. It does help me understand how all of you here follow him so blindly though. You’re either being disingenuous, obtuse or likely both. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vuduchile 1,940 Posted October 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said: So, who the hell is telling the truth now? Didn't the WH just admit that he did do it? No. Read ALL the stories. Not just the headlines. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye21 1,847 Posted October 17, 2019 Just now, Cdub100 said: Ok can you clarify by what you mean when you say dirt? Asking the Ukraine to investigate Biden is wrong. He is not suppose to be asking other countries favor that may benefit him in an election. If Biden was not running for President I wouldn't have as much of a problem with this, of course we all know that Trump wouldn't have him investigated if he wasn't running. I believe Trump is breaking the law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,297 Posted October 17, 2019 15 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said: He did no such thing. There's actually proof that he didn't because there are now two people who said he didn't. two people directly tied to the situation. Not some anonymous guy who heard something from somebody. you must get your talking points directly from the Democratic party every morning, right? It’s been admitted. All of it. How can you still question this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
