The Impeachment Thread

#4,203
#4,203
Orange_Crush said:
Ok. I'll explain. You put something that the prey wants into the trap, but the prey doesn't know that it's only set out to capture or consume them.
Click to expand...

So Trump set the trap by making his perfect phone call? This was all planned out in July (or earlier)?
 
#4,205
#4,205
evillawyer said:
The rage tweeting continues.

Too bad Donny was never a reader. He should have read the boy who cried wolf. He could have learned something.

Click to expand...


If you don’t think people are listen to those tweets like that , take a head count on his next rally . He hasn’t even started heavy with the socialism and gun confiscation part yet , but you can bet that’s coming when he hits the campaign trail .
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython
#4,206
#4,206
Velo Vol said:
So Trump set the trap by making his perfect phone call? This was all planned out in July (or earlier)?
Click to expand...
I just pointed out that it could have been both a trap and a coup. It took a while for you to get the concept. Longer than one should expect actually. But if we're in agreement to that logic, I feel like we've made headway.
 
#4,209
#4,209
Orange_Crush said:
I just pointed out that it could have been both a trap and a coup. It took a while for you to get the concept. Longer than one should expect actually. But if we're in agreement to that logic, I feel like we've made headway.
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to figure out what parts of this story are being directed by the master planner Trump.
 
#4,212
#4,212
NorthDallas40 said:
I’ve actually read the statute. I want to hear from somebody under oath why it was not dealt with until this point in time and suddenly within two days the form is updated and a second hand complaint is registered against Trump. As many connect the dots as you lefties have played for three years I’m shocked shocked I say that this issue doesn’t register with you.
Click to expand...
You are attaching too much importance to the form. The statute is what matters. If you've read the statute, then you know that there is (and there has been) nothing wrong with a member of the intelligence community citing 2nd hand information in a "whistleblower complaint" submitted to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That isn't something new either. I can't believe that The Federalist didn't look up the statute before running with that story. That makes them look like idiots... on top of being biased.
 
#4,214
#4,214
Weezy said:
I know at my workplace I don't reference laws, I reference forms which I assume are based on laws.
Click to expand...
... but I'm sure that you understand that the form isn't worth the paper it's printed on, unless it corresponds with the law and/or a controlling statute.
 
#4,216
#4,216
BowlBrother85 said:
You are attaching too much importance to the form. The statute is what matters. If you've read the statute, then you know that there is (and there has been) nothing wrong with a member of the intelligence community citing 2nd hand information in a "whistleblower complaint" submitted to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That isn't something new either. I can't believe that The Federalist didn't look up the statute before running with that story. That makes them look like idiots... on top of being biased.
Click to expand...
Ah ok got it. If the tables were reversed you’d be screeching your lefty lungs out.

This disparity existed for a while and then boom it all gets fixed in two days and a complaint is filed against Trump.

Put people under oath and have them establish the whole timeline and who the original sources are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#4,224
#4,224
Biden seeks to bar Giuliani from TV news, after Trump lawyer alleges possible Biden corruption



Joe Biden's presidential campaign requested in a letter on Sunday that major news networks not invite President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani anymore, after Giuliani spent the morning on a series of talk shows aggressively highlighting what he called Biden's apparently corrupt dealings in Ukraine and China.

The Biden campaign wrote to NBC News, CBS News, Fox News and CNN to voice "grave concern that you continue to book Rudy Giuliani on your air to spread false, debunked conspiracy theories on behalf of Donald Trump," according to The Daily Beast, which first reported the existence of the letter.

Should a network choose to book Giuliani, the Biden campaign called for "an equivalent amount of time" to be provided "to a surrogate for the Biden campaign." The letter noted Giuliani was not a public official, but Trump's lawyer and personal advisor.

Responding to the request, Trump 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted: "Can we request the removal of Democrats on TV that push hoaxes? Wait, but then who would do the interviews?"​

Hours earlier, Giuliani made the rounds on several Sunday shows, including "Fox News Sunday," to argue that evidence of Biden's possible corruption has been hiding in plain sight for months.​

Biden has acknowledged on camera that, when he was vice president, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire that prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings — where son Hunter Biden had a highly lucrative role on the board paying him tens of thousands of dollars per month, despite limited relevant expertise. The vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion in critical U.S. aid if Shokin was not fired.

Shokin himself had been widely accused of corruption, while critics charged that Hunter Biden essentially might have been selling access to his father, who had pushed Ukraine to increase its natural gas production. Giuliani, on Sunday, suggested Shokin was the target of an international smear campaign to discredit his work.
In a fiery interview on ABC News' "This Week" on Sunday, Giuliani presented what he said was an affidavit signed by Shokin that confirmed Hunter Biden was being investigated when Shokin was fired.
​
"The Washington press will not accept the fact that Joe Biden might have done something like this."
"I have an affidavit here that's been online for six months that nobody bothered to read from the gentleman who was fired, Viktor Shokin, the so-called corrupt prosecutor," Giuliani said. "The Biden people say that he wasn't investigating Hunter Biden at the time. He says under oath that he was." The Shokin affidavit purportedly said the U.S. had pressured him into resigning because he was unwilling to drop the case.
Later, Giuliani added: "I have another affidavit, this time from another Ukrainian prosecutor who says that the day after Biden strong-armed the president to remove Shokin, they show up in the prosecutor’s office -- lawyers for Hunter Biden show up in the prosecutor’s office and they give an apology for dissemination of false information."​

After anchor George Stephanopoulos expressed skepticism, Giuliani fired back: "How about if I -- how about if I tell you over the next week four more of these will come out from four other prosecutors? ... No, no, no, George, they won’t be [investigated], because they’ve been online for six months, and the Washington press will not accept the fact that Joe Biden might have done something like this."​


That was a reference to an explosive report in The Federalist showing that the intelligence community recently changed its form for reporting improper conduct. Earlier this year, the intelligence community's form for whistleblowers explicitly stated that complaints based on secondhand information were not actionable.
But, that admonition was removed sometime afterward -- around the time that an unnamed whistleblower filed a complaint, based on secondhand information, alleging misconduct in the White House. Although there has been no strict legal requirement for whistleblower complaints to contain only firsthand information, the previous intelligence community form made it clear that such secondhand complaints would not be investigated as a matter of procedure.
694940094001_6089540034001_6089540912001-vs.jpg





​

​

 
#4,225
#4,225
BowlBrother85 said:
It doesn't sound like Rep. Adam Schiff was leveraging U.S. military aid to the Ukraine, as Trump was... nor is Rep. Schiff potentially going to be running a campaign against Trump next year.
Click to expand...
Did you dislocate anything with that rapid spin attempt? So Schitt is a completely disinterested political party here? Ok... 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obsessed and VolnJC
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top