Intelligence Committee report out

[spence]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

What cat got your tongue, when the right on this board starts responding with one liners, it’s because like the GOP; there just is no defense in light of the overwhelming evidence. You don’t even need to hear these phone calls, when they weave in perfectly with all the testimony to date. It will be more conspiracy theories or hey get over it the president can do whatever he wants, just ask Barr.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

^^^^^^ This

It's the Nunes fart joke defense.

[Duke41]

Lets just see how it plays out. I am sure glad Congress has chosen to spend countless man hours and tens of millions of hard earned tax dollars in this bull #^&#^&#^&#^&. Thank God the country pretty much runs itself. As an independent vote for the candidate that I think will do the best. Last time it was The Donald, before that Mitt and before that Obama. If the Dems want to win the presidency that give us (independents) someone that doesn't sound glib about giving away health care or college with no plan to pay for it. They are making it too easy for Trump, who by the way has been doing a pretty fair job. He is not getting impeached, it just is not going to happen. But lets just keep playing this game. Like I said thank God the country runs itself because there is no-one behind the wheel in Congress right now.

[Got Stripers]

I think he will be impeached, but he will not be removed and as a fellow independent, I’m hoping for better choices.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Turley torpedoed the Democrap impeachment fantasy today
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I think he will be impeached, but he will not be removed and as a fellow independent, I’m hoping for better choices.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hillary is mulling jumping in so there you go
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by scottw

Turley torpedoed the Democrap impeachment fantasy today
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What a shock you might see it that way, no different then every other defense of Cheetos drug deal. He will be impeached in the house, then you can applaud the GOP handling of the senate trial. He will then be able to proudly wear that badge of honor into the 2020 campaign, which surely will make the 2016 run look like a church picnic.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

what conspiracy theory? We have Strzoks text, what i posted, is what he texted to his mistress. And he was leading investigations into Hilary and Trump.

no Peter Strzok, who helped lead the bureau’s investigation of Russian interference


Power I “think he had”? He was
leading those investigations. I can’t prove his investigation reflected political bias, any more than you can prove there was a quid pro quo with Ukraine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you do love making things up.. any more than you can prove there was a quid pro quo with Ukraine.

wow you just can't except the evidence can you .. All Trump needed to do was let people testify .. he refused and they (republicans) haven't disproved anything ( just saying it was just a phone call isn't a defense )

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

Turley torpedoed the Democrap impeachment fantasy today
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this guy

On Wednesday, Turley argued there was no proof that President Donald Trump broke a specific law related to the Ukraine scandal and therefore should not be impeached.

But in 1998, Turley made the opposite case, telling Congress during former President Bill Clinton's impeachment hearings that Clinton's actions didn't need to violate any laws in order to be impeachable conduct.

"While there's a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment, an offense does not have to be indictable," he wrote in a 2014 op-ed for The Washington Post.


some torpedo

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by wdmso

you do love making things up.. any more than you can prove there was a quid pro quo with Ukraine.

wow you just can't except the evidence can you .. All Trump needed to do was let people testify .. he refused and they (republicans) haven't disproved anything ( just saying it was just a phone call isn't a defense )

I think Jim did except the evidence.🤐🤠👤
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

this guy

On Wednesday, Turley argued there was no proof that President Donald Trump broke a specific law related to the Ukraine scandal and therefore should not be impeached.

But in 1998, Turley made the opposite case, telling Congress during former President Bill Clinton's impeachment hearings that Clinton's actions didn't need to violate any laws in order to be impeachable conduct.

"While there's a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment, an offense does not have to be indictable," he wrote in a 2014 op-ed for The Washington Post.


some torpedo

you have no idea what he said yesterday do you?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

What cat got your tongue, when the right on this board starts responding with one liners, it’s because like the GOP; there just is no defense in light of the overwhelming evidence. You don’t even need to hear these phone calls, when they weave in perfectly with all the testimony to date. It will be more conspiracy theories or hey get over it the president can do whatever he wants, just ask Barr.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

probably all sorts of criminal plotting going on in these lengthy phone conversations

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

you have no idea what he said yesterday do you?

I heard him clear as day i also heard Republicans ask them who they(experts) voted for donations if any a solid line of questions.. about everything except impeachment but in typical fashion Republicans l hang their hat on the needle in the haystack guy..

Whos opening statement says that Mr. Trump should not be impeached

Then Republicans complained the other 3 came with their minds made up..... of course they did they law professor.. not jurors
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I heard him clear as day i also heard Republicans ask them who they(experts) voted for donations if any a solid line of questions.. about everything except impeachment but in typical fashion Republicans l hang their hat on the needle in the haystack guy..

Whos opening statement says that Mr. Trump should not be impeached

Then Republicans complained the other 3 came with their minds made up..... of course they did they law professor.. not jurors
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

^^^^I have no idea what this means but....

democraps choose great "experts"...surely the dems could have found a few who were not lefty unhinged loons


"Here, in Pamela Karlan, we have a person with so many chips on her shoulders that she is fortunate to have shoulders. Her record, augmented by her own words, presents a deep-seated leftist bias in her politics — so extreme that even Obama would not name her to a judgeship, deeming even Sonia Sotomayor more “moderate.” Karlan, reminiscent of Inspector Javert’s single-minded pursuit of Jean Valjean in Les Misérables, has been going after Donald Trump from day one of his presidency — and even from before. She is on record, even before Mr. Trump became president, as saying about him that “I can’t think of one who had such an across-the-board combination of ignorance, indifference and defiance.” She is on record, even before he began, as questioning whether or not he would last four years in the presidency and mocking his “Trumpian standards.” She publicly released an open letter warning him — again, even before he took office — that she and her ilk “feel a responsibility to challenge you in the court of public opinion, and we hope that those directly aggrieved by your administration will challenge you in the courts of law.”


by contrast the republican witness, turley, didn't vote for trump...has some serious issues with trump.... and had reasonable issues with the process

let the dempcrap debacle continue...best thing that ever happened for the trump re-election effort

[scottw]

this is a great article for the bunched panties crowd


"If you think Trump’s behavior is the worst in American history, you might be insane."

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...l-perspective/

[Pete F.]

If Floridaman thinks he's home free and no one can do anything to stop him if he gets thru this.......

If the Senate doesn’t vote to convict Trump, or tries to monkey with his trial, he can be retried in the new Senate should he win re-election. Double jeopardy protections do not apply. And the Senators voting on impeachment in the next months know this.

[scottw]

at least you have something left to cling to...

[Pete F.]

Here is a simple Yes or No question, that no Trumplican politician has answered:

Is it ever OK for a president to ask a foreign power to investigate a political rival?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here is a simple Yes or No question, that no Trumplican politician has answered:

Is it ever OK for a president to ask a foreign power to investigate a political rival?

Hunter Biden is not a political rival. And it is OK for a President to ask a foreign power to whom we give money to investigate alleged and systemic corruption, which may also include corruption by U.S citizens (even if they are political rivals) and corrupt attempts to "interfere" with our elections.

[Got Stripers]

Tell me you didn’t expect that answer 😜
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

if it’s wrong for a president to ask a foreign govt to investigate a political rival, how about senators? we have seen the letter that senate democrats sent to ukraine asking them
to investigate Manafort and Trump.

So it’s wrong for a president, but ok for senators?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Tell me you didn’t expect that answer 😜
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I did.

[Got Stripers]

Only so many deep state conspiracy theories one can follow, even Barr can’t follow and now it appears cant prove them true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Only so many deep state conspiracy theories one can follow, even Barr can’t follow and now it appears cant prove them true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well . . . that was easy to follow. Not sure where it took us . . . but very clear.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Hunter Biden is not a political rival. And it is OK for a President to ask a foreign power to whom we give money to investigate alleged and systemic corruption, which may also include corruption by U.S citizens (even if they are political rivals) and corrupt attempts to "interfere" with our elections.

So Yes and Floridaman NEVER worried about corruption till Ukraine, Biden and the Crowdstrike myth. Just think how stupid that is?
“When the National Republican Congressional Committee realized its emails were hacked, it called in a familiar firm: CrowdStrike, the same company the Democratic National Committee used in 2016 when suspected Russian hackers stole emails to sow electoral chaos.

The decision to employ CrowdStrike raised eyebrows amid remaining questions about the company's performance in 2016, but several cybersecurity experts are pushing back on suggestions that the firm botched the DNC response, allowing more emails to be taken.

“Their reputation is warranted and they are very good. They have worked for both parties for years now,” said Nicholas Weaver, a computer security expert at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Criticism of CrowdStrike's job in both cases is unfair. They are an incident response team: You bring them in AFTER the manure has hit the 3 MW wind turbine. So it is unfair to complain about a mess,” Weaver said in an email.

Few details are available about the NRCC hack, which reportedly lasted three months. CrowdStrike, which also worked with the NRCC before the hack, said in a statement it was asked in April to respond after the email intrusion was detected by another company.”

Bunch of fools

Funny not a single elected person will say Yes it is acceptable, the Trumplicans witness yesterday said it was not “perfect”
Will it be acceptable if it’s a dem calling for the investigation of Jared dealing with China while Ivanka gets trademarks?
The bailout of 666 Fifth Ave, such a prescient address for this administration.
The prince, princess and baron are untouchable?
Or Floridaman letting Erdogan into Syria to protect his investments in Ankara?
Slimiest man elected ever.
You just keep believing in the Creature from the Gold Lagoon.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

👍🏽🍔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

So Yes and Floridaman NEVER worried about corruption till Ukraine, Biden and the Crowdstrike myth. Just think how stupid that is?
“When the National Republican Congressional Committee realized its emails were hacked, it called in a familiar firm: CrowdStrike, the same company the Democratic National Committee used in 2016 when suspected Russian hackers stole emails to sow electoral chaos.

The decision to employ CrowdStrike raised eyebrows amid remaining questions about the company's performance in 2016, but several cybersecurity experts are pushing back on suggestions that the firm botched the DNC response, allowing more emails to be taken.

“Their reputation is warranted and they are very good. They have worked for both parties for years now,” said Nicholas Weaver, a computer security expert at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Criticism of CrowdStrike's job in both cases is unfair. They are an incident response team: You bring them in AFTER the manure has hit the 3 MW wind turbine. So it is unfair to complain about a mess,” Weaver said in an email.

Few details are available about the NRCC hack, which reportedly lasted three months. CrowdStrike, which also worked with the NRCC before the hack, said in a statement it was asked in April to respond after the email intrusion was detected by another company.”

Bunch of fools

Funny not a single elected person will say Yes it is acceptable, the Trumplicans witness yesterday said it was not “perfect”
Will it be acceptable if it’s a dem calling for the investigation of Jared dealing with China while Ivanka gets trademarks?
The bailout of 666 Fifth Ave, such a prescient address for this administration.
The prince, princess and baron are untouchable?
Or Floridaman letting Erdogan into Syria to protect his investments in Ankara?
Slimiest man elected ever.
You just keep believing in the Creature from the Gold Lagoon.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nothing that you've said in this screed changes my answer to your yes or no question.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Hunter Biden is not a political rival.

they keep ignoring this simple fact...nor is burisma(nor gropin' joe probably)

[scottw]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...rump-6957.html


democraps are going to vote to impeach a president with no clear public support(waning in fact)...no republican support and perhaps some democrats voting against...this is OUTSTANDING!!

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by scottw

i know we keep ignoring the fact military aid was withheld to announce an investigation that really didn’t have to happen and to secure a White House meeting; this simple fact we know to be true, but we must tow the party line

In your head, I pulled it out, I know it hurts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

In your head, I pulled it out, I know it hurts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wow...you are worse than re-pete.....