Indeed.How many Democrats voted to impeach Clinton? How many voted to convict Clinton? Hypocritical moron's like you really need to just STFU.
Jerry Nadler | We're Lowering the Standard of Impeachment
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
"John Bolton willing to testify in Trump's impeachment trial"
- Thread starter archives
- Start date
Send the Articles...what is Nervous Nancy afraid of?Bolton could sink the Trump*tanic.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
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.
Some of that is somewhat true but cry me a River lol.
Sorry, but impeachment is a political process. The evidence is supposed to be *convincing enough* it overcomes whatever politicians fear from Trump’s Twitter account.
Pelosi knows this—and has said as much, but she decided impeaching Trump meant more to her than being called a liar and hypocrite.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Micawber,
It's totally case one.
Bolton knew about it before the July 25 phone call, and so did the Ukrainians.
"The first event occurred at a July 10 meeting between Ukraine's then Secretary of National Security and Defense Council Oleksandr Danlylyuk, and then U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, which Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry attended. At this meeting, Sondland asked Ukraine to launch investigations into the Bidens as a condition of meeting with President Trump. Vindman said Bolton cut the meeting short, and that both he and Fiona Hill told Ambassador Sondland his comments were inappropriate and that he reported his concerns to the NSC's lead counsel."
The New York Times
If you are locked out of the NYT, the excerpt also appears here, along with a lot of other very handy information:
Trump-Ukraine Scandal, WIKI
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..
It's totally case one.
Bolton knew about it before the July 25 phone call, and so did the Ukrainians.
"The first event occurred at a July 10 meeting between Ukraine's then Secretary of National Security and Defense Council Oleksandr Danlylyuk, and then U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, which Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry attended. At this meeting, Sondland asked Ukraine to launch investigations into the Bidens as a condition of meeting with President Trump. Vindman said Bolton cut the meeting short, and that both he and Fiona Hill told Ambassador Sondland his comments were inappropriate and that he reported his concerns to the NSC's lead counsel."
The New York Times
If you are locked out of the NYT, the excerpt also appears here, along with a lot of other very handy information:
Trump-Ukraine Scandal, WIKI
Last edited:
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Darth,
Yeah, like the Authors of the Constitution could envision such a thing.
She said things like 'ideally,' and 'should.' And I'm not certain she grasps the relatively new power Trump holds with Twitter. How many Presidents have had the power to bypass the media?
Some of that is somewhat true but cry me a River lol.
Sorry, but impeachment is a political process. The evidence is supposed to be *convincing enough* it overcomes whatever politicians fear from Trump’s Twitter account.
Yeah, like the Authors of the Constitution could envision such a thing.
Pelosi knows this—and has said as much, but she decided impeaching Trump meant more to her than being called a liar and hypocrite.
She said things like 'ideally,' and 'should.' And I'm not certain she grasps the relatively new power Trump holds with Twitter. How many Presidents have had the power to bypass the media?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Hello Darth,
Yeah, like the Authors of the Constitution could envision such a thing.
She said things like 'ideally,' and 'should.' And I'm not certain she grasps the relatively new power Trump holds with Twitter. How many Presidents have had the power to bypass the media?
You talk like that’s a bad thing lol.
Reagan and Trump both by-passed the media. Democrats don’t have to by-pass the media because they own the better part of it.
You tell me which is worse.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Darth,
Actually it is quite problematic because it is not vetted. Ideal for a dictator.
Where did you learn that Democrats 'own the better part of' the media?
Sounds like opinion.
Trump fans messaging is being dictated by one person with no vetting.
That is highly problematic when that one person is a liar who benefits from it all.
Reagan had no Twitter account. That is new. And Reagan was respectful, not a low-class insulting name-caller.
You talk like that’s a bad thing lol.
Actually it is quite problematic because it is not vetted. Ideal for a dictator.
Reagan and Trump both by-passed the media. Democrats don’t have to by-pass the media because they own the better part of it.
You tell me which is worse.
Where did you learn that Democrats 'own the better part of' the media?
Sounds like opinion.
Trump fans messaging is being dictated by one person with no vetting.
That is highly problematic when that one person is a liar who benefits from it all.
Reagan had no Twitter account. That is new. And Reagan was respectful, not a low-class insulting name-caller.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Hello Darth,
Actually it is quite problematic because it is not vetted. Ideal for a dictator.
Where did you learn that Democrats 'own the better part of' the media?
Sounds like opinion.
Trump fans messaging is being dictated by one person with no vetting.
That is highly problematic when that one person is a liar who benefits from it all.
Reagan had no Twitter account. That is new. And Reagan was respectful, not a low-class insulting name-caller.
I learned it by observing lol.
They all parrot the same talking points—which just happen, to align with whatever Democrats are pushing. Rush is famous for doing montages of different media ‘journalists’ repeating the same talking point *verbatim*.
It’s actually kind of comical lol. And no, I’m not a ditto head.
At any rate, Twitter etc is now part of the media—Trump knows how to use it. So do the Squad-ettes.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Look at the polls.
Here's one that is 'favorable' to Trump (considering how unpopular he is.)
Rasmussen
Date 07-Jan-20
Strongly Approve 36%
Strongly Disapprove 43%
Total Approve 48%
Total Disapprove 50%
OK, this is the one poll where he scores the best. 48% approval, 50% disapproval. (He scores lower in all the rest of the polls.)
But look at the break-down.
Of the 50% who disapprove, most of them, 43%, STRONGLY disapprove.
Of the 48% who approve, only 36% strongly approve.
And that's the most Trump-favorable poll.
Of the people who like him, a lot of them don't like him that much.
But for the people who dislike him, they REALLY don't like him.
Impeachment is the right thing to do.
We need to hear from Bolton.
Here's one that is 'favorable' to Trump (considering how unpopular he is.)
Rasmussen
Date 07-Jan-20
Strongly Approve 36%
Strongly Disapprove 43%
Total Approve 48%
Total Disapprove 50%
OK, this is the one poll where he scores the best. 48% approval, 50% disapproval. (He scores lower in all the rest of the polls.)
But look at the break-down.
Of the 50% who disapprove, most of them, 43%, STRONGLY disapprove.
Of the 48% who approve, only 36% strongly approve.
And that's the most Trump-favorable poll.
Of the people who like him, a lot of them don't like him that much.
But for the people who dislike him, they REALLY don't like him.
Impeachment is the right thing to do.
We need to hear from Bolton.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Darth,
Just as I said. It is pure opinion. Which means it could actually be incorrect. Actually, the media could simply be giving the public what it wants. Some lean left, some lean right. But if their reporting is too far away from the rest, it is likely the mainstream is more accurate. Fox is an outlier. Their reporting is pretty far away from the rest. They have a lot of slant to the right. The rest are not 'liberal.' They are the mainstream.
Meaning that they take their feed from AP.
The problem, with that statement is that most ditto heads would claim the same thing.
AOC scares the right. She tells the truth they don't want to hear. She was right when she said Trump proposed committing war crimes.
I learned it by observing lol.
Just as I said. It is pure opinion. Which means it could actually be incorrect. Actually, the media could simply be giving the public what it wants. Some lean left, some lean right. But if their reporting is too far away from the rest, it is likely the mainstream is more accurate. Fox is an outlier. Their reporting is pretty far away from the rest. They have a lot of slant to the right. The rest are not 'liberal.' They are the mainstream.
They all parrot the same talking points—which just happen, to align with whatever Democrats are pushing. Rush is famous for doing montages of different media ‘journalists’ repeating the same talking point *verbatim*.
Meaning that they take their feed from AP.
It’s actually kind of comical lol. And no, I’m not a ditto head.
The problem, with that statement is that most ditto heads would claim the same thing.
At any rate, Twitter etc is now part of the media—Trump knows how to use it. So do the Squad-ettes.
AOC scares the right. She tells the truth they don't want to hear. She was right when she said Trump proposed committing war crimes.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Ever hear of something called "The 4th Estate?"
Have any idea what it means and how it serves democracy?
Twitter + slick-talking dictator = big trouble.
Have any idea what it means and how it serves democracy?
Twitter + slick-talking dictator = big trouble.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Ever hear of something called "The 4th Estate?"
Have any idea what it means and how it serves democracy?
Twitter + slick-talking dictator = big trouble.
The 4th estate doesn’t serve democracy by propagating lies like Russian collusion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/04/02/poll-fake-news-494421
More than 3-in-4 of 803 American respondents, or 77 percent, said they believe that major traditional television and newspaper media outlets report “fake news,” according to a Monmouth University poll released Monday, marking a sharp increase in distrust of those news organizations from a year ago, when 63 percent registered concerns about the spread of misinformation.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Darth,
Nearly half of voters think Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump* since he took office.
That is not true. SOME Democrats have. MOST have not. Not until the Ukraine Scandal broke and there was real evidence that Trump tried to rig the 2020 election using foreign intervention. Dems did not choose the timing. Ideally, the time to undo an election gone bad is right after the election, not 3 years later when the term of office has mostly already transpired. Why wait until the thing you're trying to avoid has already happened? That makes no sense. They could have had impeachment hearings after the Mueller Report. They didn't. That's not 'trying to impeach.' That's looking at a situation and saying it didn't look like there was enough of a case.
But this. Trying to rig an election by inviting foreign help. That is absolutely a violation of the oath of office. That is serving yourself, not the nation. That is tyrannical. That cannot be 'let go.' Democrats would have been failing to live up to THEIR oaths of office if they DIDN'T impeach.
Just because Trump* fans want to buy into the BS, you know, because of the 'great economy,' that is their bag. They are free to fall for all the unvetted BS they want to. The rest of us are under no obligation to play along.
The 4th estate doesn’t serve democracy by propagating lies like Russian collusion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/04/02/poll-fake-news-494421
More than 3-in-4 of 803 American respondents, or 77 percent, said they believe that major traditional television and newspaper media outlets report “fake news,” according to a Monmouth University poll released Monday, marking a sharp increase in distrust of those news organizations from a year ago, when 63 percent registered concerns about the spread of misinformation.
Nearly half of voters think Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump* since he took office.
That is not true. SOME Democrats have. MOST have not. Not until the Ukraine Scandal broke and there was real evidence that Trump tried to rig the 2020 election using foreign intervention. Dems did not choose the timing. Ideally, the time to undo an election gone bad is right after the election, not 3 years later when the term of office has mostly already transpired. Why wait until the thing you're trying to avoid has already happened? That makes no sense. They could have had impeachment hearings after the Mueller Report. They didn't. That's not 'trying to impeach.' That's looking at a situation and saying it didn't look like there was enough of a case.
But this. Trying to rig an election by inviting foreign help. That is absolutely a violation of the oath of office. That is serving yourself, not the nation. That is tyrannical. That cannot be 'let go.' Democrats would have been failing to live up to THEIR oaths of office if they DIDN'T impeach.
Just because Trump* fans want to buy into the BS, you know, because of the 'great economy,' that is their bag. They are free to fall for all the unvetted BS they want to. The rest of us are under no obligation to play along.