Just because you refused to read the Mueller Report to give yourself plausible deniability doesn't mean the Mueller Report didn't state facts.
It just didn't state facts that helped your case.
Also, why did Manafort share polling data with Kilmnik?
COMMITTEES RELEASE TESTIMONY OF YOVANOVITCH AND McKINLEY - PUBLC HEARINGS COMING UP
- Thread starter reagansghost
- Start date
Just because you refused to read the Mueller Report to give yourself plausible deniability doesn't mean the Mueller Report didn't state facts.
It just didn't state facts that helped your case.
Also, why did Manafort share polling data with Kilmnik?
Dan Bongino
✔
@dbongino
Of all of the Democrats’ dopey hoaxes (the collusion hoax, the Mueller is investigating a crime hoax, the “Adam Schiff is a smart guy” hoax)
the “whistleblower” hoax is by far the dumbest. We have the transcript. We see it. Move along now kids.
1,400
12:44 PM - Nov 4, 2019
✔
@dbongino
Of all of the Democrats’ dopey hoaxes (the collusion hoax, the Mueller is investigating a crime hoax, the “Adam Schiff is a smart guy” hoax)
the “whistleblower” hoax is by far the dumbest. We have the transcript. We see it. Move along now kids.
1,400
12:44 PM - Nov 4, 2019
Why did Manafort share polling data with Kilmnik?
What you care about is covering your own ass so you don't have to be held personally responsible for your own poor judgment.
It's why you have multiple IDs.
Schiff didn't leak anything. The opening statements are not classified. So try again.
Which begs the interesting question; if you aren't reading anything related to this, how are you coming up with your judgment?
the FACT the process was corrupt makes the transcript a record of a corrupt process" Repubs caolud not call their own witnesses / Schiff could over-rule their question /Schiff was leading witnesses.
Why would I read such trash, just like Mueller was trash?
The Repubs did attend - I suppose they took notes -oh that's right they could not even READ A TRANSCRIPT without a Democrat minder
it's a pig circus
the court of public opinion is being FED A NARRATIVE.
If the process is corrupt it logically and legally follows the "Fruit" is also corrupt!
I am hoping the American public can hear thru the noise of a partisan narrative dressed up as a Hearing.
we'll see.
i won't sully my karma reading fallacious narrative
yada yada -same old crap from you
NONE OF ANY OF IT WAS CLASSIFIED -so why the Schiff SCIF? -so he could leak a narrative while creating a narrative..
The POTUS has the authority to remove who he wishes for any reason he wishes. Where is the impeachable crime that equates to TREASON? Go ahead....show us the US CODE law that makes void the executive authority of the Commander in Chief. They are "political appointments" and serve at the sole discretion of the President of the Untied States.
Reality: The reason she was fired is more than obvious, she refused to permit certain Ukrainian Citizens permission to come to the Untied States with information concerning the corruption of US citizens in their dealings with the Ukrainian Government in targeting Paul Manafort (who at the time was working with the Trump campaign). FACTS...especially documented facts often get in the way of biased heresay propaganda. Facts are facts. Yovanovitch was usurping the power of the executive she was serving (the damn POTUS). She was attempting to tell the Ukrainian Government who they could prosecute and who they could not...she delivered a NO PROSECUTION list to the Ukrainian Prosecutor. Not only was she meddling in things she had no official authority to meddle, she refused to grant travel to the US by those who had proof of Democrat interference in the 2016 US election.....those who targeted Manafort in order to get to TRUMP.
https://therightscoop.com/john-solo...ng-with-investigation-before-trump-fired-her/
Truth....irrefutable truth: The President of the United States possess (6) absolute constitutional powers. 1. Command the Military 2. Grant reprieves and pardons 3. Make treaties 4. APPOINT AMBASSADORS AND OFFICERS (no ambassador must receive congressional approval before dismissal..which is at the sole discretion of the POTUS). 5. Grant commissions and call SPECIAL SESSIONS OF CONGRESS (his ace up his sleeve)….he could at any time he wishes....STOP this non-impeachment, impeachment in its tracks via calling for a special senate investigation. 6. The power to approve or veto bills.
No....congressional panel can make null and void Article 2 of the US constitution. What then is the crime worthy of impeachment? Name the code law that says its a crime for a president to fire an ambassador. Anyone?
Wait - so you're moving the bar from leaking info to leaking a "narrative"?
Well, it's no mystery that Trump and his lackeys were running shadow foreign policy lead by Rudy Colludy.
What "narrative" has been leaked?
You refusing to participate in the process does not make the process corrupt; it makes you corrupt for refusing to participate.
What witnesses would they have called that they weren't allowed to call?
Name them.
The transcripts have started being released, so what is your problem?
What questions were the GOP denied to ask?
Here's the transcripts, show your work.
Oh right, you won't be able to show your work because you refuse to read the transcripts.
So nothing was leaked, you're just mad because people are testifying and it's not favorable to you.
What witnesses would have made it favorable that the GOP were not allowed to call?
You haven't said how the process is corrupt; all you've said is that Conservatives were either too lazy or too cowardly to take part in it.
Who knew that extorting foreign countries would be a partisan narrative?
Weak sauce excuse there; "I won't read the thing I'm talking about because then I wouldn't be able to lie about it."
Plausible Deniability.
This would mean something more if you weren't switching between IDs all the time.
What's wrong? Wait until the republicans release their transcripts of the same hearing.
Its in the works. Then we shall compare. What? You thought no was taking notes with the soviet style behind closed door hearings? The left would have to go to court to stop it. But that's the problem no? They want nothing to do with the actual rule of law....that's why the so called impeachments and no shows where never challenged in court....it took a republican filing suit to remove the DOOR/PRIVATE democrat only hearing to the public arena.
Notice how anatta here has moved the bar.
First, he accused Schiff of leaking.
Then, when asked what Schiff leaked, dukkha doesn't say but shifts the goalposts to leaking a "narrative".
What narrative was leaked? Here are the transcripts, by all means, show your work!
They can't and won't.
If the GOP had anything in those hearings that could save Trump, they would have leaked it by now.
No it's not.
Since the GOP refused to attend the hearings, and made a big show of it, why would they produce anything credible from the same hearings they refused to attend?
You're delusional.
Pelosi just held the vote last week for public hearings. You didn't win shit.
What's wrong? Wait until the republicans release their transcripts of the same hearing.
The transcripts are out. Have someone read and explain them to you. There is not alternative transcripts. It is not like what Trump does .