"John Bolton willing to testify in Trump's impeachment trial"

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

ThatOwlWoman said:
I think that's exactly it. Plus he's got a tell-all book coming out. He has a legacy to preserve; he would like to be seen as loyal, patriotic, etc. So will he fall on his sword for TRE45ON, or will he try to exonerate himself by rolling on Trump and saving the nation?
Click to expand...

Bolton advised Trump to release the aid which was being withheld to try to force Zelensky into the demanded Biden investigation in August. Then on Sept 10, Bolton is OUT.
 
PoliTalker said:
Bolton advised Trump to release the aid which was being withheld to try to force Zelensky into the demanded Biden investigation in August. Then on Sept 10, Bolton is OUT.
Click to expand...

Do you think that TRE45ON told him the reason why he had the aid withheld?
 
Hello ThatOwlWoman,

ThatOwlWoman said:
Do you think that TRE45ON told him the reason why he had the aid withheld?
Click to expand...

I doubt it. I have not heard that. But I think Bolton knew it. Bolton's lawyer said Bolton had new evidence not previously heard, should he be subpoenaed by the Senate.

This certainly raises the stakes and the pressure on Republicans to allow the testimony.
 
Truth Detector said:
How many times do we have to beat it into the heads of uneducated leftist dullards that without high crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment is pointless.

Was Jackson convicted? Yes or no? Was Clinton convicted? Yes or no?



No-BS-advice-1.gif
Click to expand...

Will President Trump be convicted, yes or no? Lol.
 
Hello Darth,

Darth Omar said:
That’s not evidence Zelensky was lying.

And if Zelensky wasn’t aware of any pressure that’s a real problem for Democrats.
Click to expand...

The thing is that you are placing all your marbles in the Zelensky statements. And we have sworn testimony to the contrary of Zelensky's not-sworn measured political responses. You can't only listen to Zelensky because he is saying what you want to hear. You have to consider the sworn testimony which refutes Zelensky.

We've got one guy who says one thing not under oath, and then there are several people who say the opposite, and they are all sworn in. The only reason to believe the not sworn story is prejudice.
 
PoliTalker said:
The thing is that you are placing all your marbles in the Zelensky statements. And we have sworn testimony to the contrary of Zelensky's not-sworn measured political responses.
Click to expand...

Another laughably stupid post; that the person who Shifty Schiff claims was bribed says he wasn't but is not as credible as people who heard it from someone else. STFU you willful idiot. :rolleyes:
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Darth,



The thing is that you are placing all your marbles in the Zelensky statements. And we have sworn testimony to the contrary of Zelensky's not-sworn measured political responses. You can't only listen to Zelensky because he is saying what you want to hear. You have to consider the sworn testimony which refutes Zelensky.

We've got one guy who says one thing not under oath, and then there are several people who say the opposite, and they are all sworn in. The only reason to believe the not sworn story is prejudice.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. There is no sworn testimony about anything illegal, or even untoward.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Darth,



The thing is that you are placing all your marbles in the Zelensky statements. And we have sworn testimony to the contrary of Zelensky's not-sworn measured political responses. You can't only listen to Zelensky because he is saying what you want to hear. You have to consider the sworn testimony which refutes Zelensky.

We've got one guy who says one thing not under oath, and then there are several people who say the opposite, and they are all sworn in. The only reason to believe the not sworn story is prejudice.
Click to expand...

Actually, most of my marbles are on democrats emphasis on hearsay lol.

There’s a reason they lost three members of their own caucus and it has nothing to do with Fox News. Zelensky was actually there, the ambassadors weren’t. He should know whether he was being pressured or not.
 
Darth Omar said:
Actually, most of my marbles are on democrats emphasis on hearsay lol.

There’s a reason they lost three members of their own caucus and it has nothing to do with Fox News. Zelensky was actually there, the ambassadors weren’t. He should know whether he was being pressured or not.
Click to expand...

Trump could release the whole transcript. It is just that easy. If it were exculpatory, we all know Trump would have released it immediately. As more leaks, it shows Trump was turning the thumbscrews.
The Dems have to use hearsay because Trump stonewalled every attempt to get the truth out,. He ordered everyone to not testify and refuse subpoenas .Trump shows his guilt in all he says and does, not his innocence.
 
Hello Darth,

Darth Omar said:
Actually, most of my marbles are on democrats emphasis on hearsay lol.

There’s a reason they lost three members of their own caucus and it has nothing to do with Fox News. Zelensky was actually there, the ambassadors weren’t. He should know whether he was being pressured or not.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you've got a way to rationalize supporting the conman liar narcissist.

Oh, the reason no Republicans voted for impeachment was because they are all afraid of being tweet-shamed by he who is loose with insults but can't take it when somebody else gives him the same treatment as he dishes out.

And the reason the few Dems who voted no did so was because they are in heavy Trump-fan districts.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Darth,



I'm sure you've got a way to rationalize supporting the conman liar narcissist.

Oh, the reason no Republicans voted for impeachment was because they are all afraid of being tweet-shamed by he who is loose with insults but can't take it when somebody else gives him the same treatment as he dishes out.

And the reason the few Dems who voted no did so was because they are in heavy Trump-fan districts.
Click to expand...


Exactly!
 
PoliTalker said:
I'm sure you've got a way to rationalize supporting the conman liar narcissist.

Oh, the reason no Republicans voted for impeachment was because they are all afraid of being tweet-shamed by he who is loose with insults but can't take it when somebody else gives him the same treatment as he dishes out.

And the reason the few Dems who voted no did so was because they are in heavy Trump-fan districts.
Click to expand...

How many Democrats voted to impeach Clinton? How many voted to convict Clinton? Hypocritical moron's like you really need to just STFU. :rolleyes:

Jerry Nadler | We're Lowering the Standard of Impeachment
 
THere are one of two things happening here:

1. JB knew before phone call meeting with sondland et al that Trump had a quid pro quo agenda and feigned surprise then

2. JB was unaware until phone call meeting and was surprised

Only in case 1 will he have the most useful information. If he was in fact unaware of the drug deal (case 2) , then he lacks that additional
percipient knowledge sought about Trump's stated intentions. Sondland and Taylor would still be the best evidence.

In case one, the more Machiavellian case, he knew and then was astounded that Sondland would disclose it to others in his presence
and had to feign surprise. In that case his actual knowledge would be damning to Trump, but he would be loathe to say so
because it would implicate himself in a coverup of a self described drug deal..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top