| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
11-20-2019, 02:00 PM
|
#1
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
You left out that Starr is talking about Trumps obstruction into this impeachment inquiry, that's the impeachable offense Starr sees.
If Trump broke the law by obstructing the impeachement inquiry, prove it and kick him out. The accusation of quid pro quo, extortion, bribery, whatever other name du jeur the libs want to assign, is as of now, baseless.
Sondland said under oath, that Trump told him he didn't want anything from Ukraine.
|
It's important to note the timing of Trump's "I want nothing..I want no quid pro quo" statement to Sondland: It occurred on September 9, the exact same day the House Intel Committee received the whistleblower's complaint.... |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
11-20-2019, 02:14 PM
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
It's important to note the timing of Trump's "I want nothing..I want no quid pro quo" statement to Sondland: It occurred on September 9, the exact same day the House Intel Committee received the whistleblower's complaint....
|
But that’s when Sondland asked the question of what Trump
wanted.
See Pete, the way human conversations work is, someone asks you a question, and then you answer it. It’s not easy to answer a question before it’s asked, even if that would be politically preferable.
So to you, the fact that Trump didn’t answer the question until
it was asked, is evidence of guilt. Trump should have preemptively told him that he didn’t want anything.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-20-2019, 02:48 PM
|
#3
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
But that’s when Sondland asked the question of what Trump
wanted.
See Pete, the way human conversations work is, someone asks you a question, and then you answer it. It’s not easy to answer a question before it’s asked, even if that would be politically preferable.
So to you, the fact that Trump didn’t answer the question until
it was asked, is evidence of guilt. Trump should have preemptively told him that he didn’t want anything.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
See Jim, the way conspiracies work is the boss gets the people who work for him to do the dirty work, they never know all the parts of the conspiracy and the boss knows it all. It does make it harder to investigate, but it can and has been done under RICO many times.
That's why the hearsay rules for a conspiracy differ from typical.
Obstructing the investigation by withholding testimony and documents will make it harder to obtain the truth.
Has the WH let anyone testify?
Has the WH released any of the subpoenaed documentation?
Did Zelensky go to the White House already?
Was the money released before the White House learned of the whistleblower?
Did Ukraine's new government get all the Trump and Pence meetings it was first promised? |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
11-20-2019, 03:52 PM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
See Jim, the way conspiracies work is the boss gets the people who work for him to do the dirty work, they never know all the parts of the conspiracy and the boss knows it all. It does make it harder to investigate, but it can and has been done under RICO many times.
That's why the hearsay rules for a conspiracy differ from typical.
Obstructing the investigation by withholding testimony and documents will make it harder to obtain the truth.
Has the WH let anyone testify?
Has the WH released any of the subpoenaed documentation?
Did Zelensky go to the White House already?
Was the money released before the White House learned of the whistleblower?
Did Ukraine's new government get all the Trump and Pence meetings it was first promised?
|
I heard they were going to let the whistleblower testify
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
PRO CHOICE REPUBLICAN
|
|
|
|
|
11-20-2019, 04:27 PM
|
#5
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles
I heard they were going to let the whistleblower testify
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Why not the Intelligence IG then to explain why he did not follow the law and provide the whistleblowers complaint that was deemed urgent and credible on to Congress as it should have been?
The Whistleblower BS is like calling 911 to report you heard of a crime and never having the Police investigate.
You want to blame the guy who called 911 for the failure to investigate or find out why nothing happened with the call.
It's pretty obvious at this point that something happened to the aid to Ukraine and it involved the administration. |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 PM.
|
| |
Hybrid Mode