All the above are conclusive proof of russian collusion, obstruction of justice, high crimes and misdemeanors, popular vote versus electoral vote, racism, sexism and whatever else the soy boys on the left have thrown at trump for 3 years.
Senior Member
All the above are conclusive proof of russian collusion, obstruction of justice, high crimes and misdemeanors, popular vote versus electoral vote, racism, sexism and whatever else the soy boys on the left have thrown at trump for 3 years.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Click the link above to see how much you owe the government.
"Well I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black."
-Superracist, Joe Biden
“If you don’t believe in free speech for people who you disagree with, and even hate for what they stand for, then you don’t believe in free speech.”
-My favorite liberal
BANNED 4 LYFE
This is taking butthurt to a whole new level holy fuckOriginally Posted by ClydeR
[Private]-GSIV:Nyatherra: "Until this moment i forgot that i changed your name to Biff Muffbanger on Lnet"
This is crazy right? It's not just me?The length of the call has also been called into question. The document claims to summarize a 30-minute call but Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, told CNN that staffers in his office read the exchange out loud and clocked it at under 11 minutes, nearly 20 minutes shorter than the length described by the document.
This is the type of thing a 10 year old thinks up to prove how smart they are. But it's not a 10 year old. It's our elected officials conducting "investigations" into probably the most serious matter in the entire world: impeaching a sitting US president.
I guess I can't fully blame our elected officials because our media are willingly playing along with this shit. Imagine seriously publishing this in your news article instead of pushing back and saying "Dude are you serious?"
This entire thing just looks like a complete setup.
So there was a new "bombshell" in this aid bullshit in which there were text messages shared between a senior diplomat to Ukraine and someone else.
Said diplomat Bill Taylor said: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
The left went nuts! "PROOF THERE WAS A QUID PRO QUO RIGHT THERE! THIS PERSON HEARD IT FIRST!"
Not only did the person in texts spell out in no uncertain terms that there was no quid pro quo, but Democrats were making it sound like Bill Taylor had first hand knowledge of the supposed quid pro quo, only problem is that narrative is completely false.
Turns out Taylor's "knowledge" of a supposed quid pro quo was an article he read in Politico. That article was written by Natasha Bertrand, someone who has been pushing one Trump conspiracy theory after another.
This is all just too much bullshit to digest for a Friday evening.
BANNED 4 LYFE
What about the Micro Machines guy?
All the above are conclusive proof of russian collusion, obstruction of justice, high crimes and misdemeanors, popular vote versus electoral vote, racism, sexism and whatever else the soy boys on the left have thrown at trump for 3 years.
[Private]-GSIV:Nyatherra: "Until this moment i forgot that i changed your name to Biff Muffbanger on Lnet"
Saint by Day, Devil at Night
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2nd-...7_null_bsq_hed
Looks like the Deep State is going to produce whatever it is they need for the coup against Trump. Then they can install Hillary, make everyone drive Priuses instead of flying, eliminate hamburgers from the face of the Earth, remove all borders, and have a big multi-gender orgy. AMIRITE?Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the whistleblower who sounded the alarm on President Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine and triggered an impeachment inquiry, tells ABC News that he is now representing a second whistleblower who has spoken with the inspector general.
Zaid tells ABC News' Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos that the second person -- also described as an intelligence official -- has first-hand knowledge of some of the allegations outlined in the original complaint and has been interviewed by the head of the intelligence community's internal watchdog office, Michael Atkinson.
The existence of a second whistleblower -- particularly one who can speak directly about events involving the president related to conversations involving Ukraine -- could undercut Trump's repeated insistence that the original complaint, released on Sept. 26, was "totally inaccurate."
Finally Back makes sense.
Come on now, Back, even someone like you can surely see this is starting to look like complete bullshit.
"Whistleblower" with third and fourth hand information comes forward with accusations that are mostly false. The whistleblower spoke with top Democrats in the House prior to coming forward. Democrats say it's bad shit and demand transcripts of the phone call, expecting Trump to deny the request and using that as further evidence that Trump is corrupt.
Instead Trump complies with the demand, the transcript shows the whistleblower is mostly wrong, Democrats immediately move on to the next talking point that the transcript isn't important, Adam Schiff realizes the whistleblower complaint is such shit that he has to literally make up what Trump said in the transcript to make Trump look as bad as possible and John Brennan practically begs more "whistleblowers" to come forward and wouldn't you know it? More "whistleblowers" come forward.
Even someone of your limited intelligence has to admit this all seems rather suspect, even if you don't want to flat out admit it's all bullshit.
Last edited by Tgo01; 10-06-2019 at 02:37 PM.
Saint by Day, Devil at Night
The only thing suspect is Trump's patriotism in asking a foreign government to investigate an American political rival.
Trump has full disposal of the American intelligence apparatus to investigate anything he wants yet he asks a transitioning Ukranian government and the adversarial government of China to investigate. Trump is ready to believe these foreign governments over his own intelligence agencies like when Putin told him he didn't meddle.
Watch the republicans in the Senate abandon Trump when the trial comes.
Last edited by Back; 10-06-2019 at 03:30 PM.
So people running for president can't be investigated for possible crimes? What about people who are currently president?
Pretty sure Barr is looking into some of this shit too. Does that make you feel better?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
