Lmao
https://twitter.com/gettyimagesnews/status/1197202729334128642?s=21
Trump just pulled the whole "This is not a man I know well...seems like a nice guy, though" maneuver in regards to Ambassador Sondland.
This guy is such a joke.
He has Trump on Speed Dial. They talked regularly.
They have been friends for years.
And Sondland donated over a Million Dollars to Trumps campaign in exchange for an Ambassadorship.
Lmao
https://twitter.com/gettyimagesnews/status/1197202729334128642?s=21
At least he spelled everything right
Lmao
https://twitter.com/gettyimagesnews/status/1197202729334128642?s=21
Wow lol I'm having flashbacks to Sara Palin hand notes lol.
I have to admit, watching the loyal trump followers here still in denial makes me chuckle. I given up on hope that they will one day ditch this idiot known as President Trump, but like the old saying goes, once an idiot, always an idiot.
I don't even think the republicans want Pence at this point. They likely make a deal with the democrats to swear Romney in as VP before Trump resigns. That would be about the only competitive candidate they could put up in 2020 that wouldn't be too damaged by the impeachment process.
I don't even think the republicans want Pence at this point. They likely make a deal with the democrats to swear Romney in as VP before Trump resigns. That would be about the only competitive candidate they could put up in 2020 that wouldn't be too damaged by the impeachment process.
nah fam, it's pence time.
@Vaasman: I'm just going to guess that Horgen means this:
"A bombshell from Gordon Sondland: The US Ambassador to the European Union says he pressured Ukraine to investigate the Bidens at President Trump's "express direction"
I just watch the clip and holy ****! It's not going to be a good day for the president, or Republicans for that matter.
@Vaasman: I'm just going to guess that Horgen means this:
"A bombshell from Gordon Sondland: The US Ambassador to the European Union says he pressured Ukraine to investigate the Bidens at President Trump's "express direction"
I just watch the clip and holy ****! It's not going to be a good day for the president, or Republicans for that matter.
Well if the question is, did Sondland admit clearly to what happened and provide solid documented evidence implicating the president and several other involved officials, the answer is yes, it's very real. Sondland seems like a complete doof of an ambassador, but ultimately his testimony and provided material is damning evidence of inherent wrongdoing as well as obstruction. And part of that was him answering clearly that, yes indeed, it was a quid pro quo underhanded scheme for political gain.
Is this for real?
It's CNN. Probably not.
This what i found on the subject
https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1197233884909293568
Basically CNN was lying again like usual.
So how's this impeachment going. Trump already culled? Or demos trying to find new ways to drag there carnival forwards for another year?
@Gatygun: "It's CNN. Probably not."
I mean, check the video, it's just Sondland talking, no commentary, no editing, nothing.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/20/politics/public-impeachment-hearing-day-4/index.html
@mattbbpl: I know right? Trump barely even knows the man. :P
And in fact his testimony totally exonerates Trump when you think about it.
Rumor coming in that Mike Pompeo is planning to resign early because connection to Trump is killing his reputation. looool.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/mike-pompeo-planning-resign-because-093230187.html
Pompeo had to have known working for Trump was going to hurt his reputation when he took the job, right?
@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If this was an online discussion I think Nunes would be moderated for trolling...
Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
The impeachment was voted on by the House when they didn't even need to, and the constitution specifically says they have broad authority to run impeachment investigations as they like through their available, legal options. Additionally, Republican made house rules in 2015 gave them extra capabilities in issuing subpoenas that they are using. Please explain to me how any of this is not lawful or fair.
Also stop lying about evidence, we now have a dozen sworn depositions from both directly and indirectly involved individuals, a memorandum, dated notations and timelines, and admission from the culprit and his closest staff. Gaslighting trolling won't save you.
Impeachment was not voted on, lets get that straight. A vote was taken to have an inquiry. When Nixon and Clinton occurred they were permitted to have their attorneys present to ask questions, challenge testimony, and call witness. The minority party was permitted to ask questions and call witnesses. Any questions as to witness was referred to the whole committee by the way which was the Judicial committee not the intelligence committee not subject to one person calling all the shots. The depositions you talk about were all taken in secret and cherry picked and leaked to the press by Adam Shiff. He was caught in another lie today. Shiff is also testifying for the witness and asking leading questions. This whole affair is a sham and the American people can see that.
Tomato Tomahto on Impeachment, an inquiry was voted on and passed. Both Clinton and Nixon did have personal lawyers present during the initial inquiry period, but so will Trump. Per 538 that is a made up argument, because both had lawyers present as it made it's way to the judiciary committee, which our current resolution has also allowed.
"As was the case in both Nixon and Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, when the process moves to the Judiciary Committee, Trump’s lawyers will be able to cross-examine and suggest witnesses and present a formal defense."
The only break is from offering during oversight committee's investigations, but a president is not entitled to such protections during an impeachment inquiry anyway.
Additionally, Republicans have access to all depositions held, for an equal level of time to ask questions relative to their representation. They are capable of requesting witnesses. The reality is, the minority party is desperate for an argument so they've made a shitshow out of a non-argument that they have no agency in any hearings, when they in fact have a lot.
And it was Republicans, might I repeat myself, who voted to offer House rules giving the minority less privilege in hearings.
And latest polling from ABC said 70% of Americans agree the phone call was wrong too, so no actually the American people aren't seeing this as a sham, it's clear there is agreement what happened was wrong among those polled. The majority in that poll also agreed, within the margin of error granted, that the president should be impeached and removed.
The people are seeing this a a sham to the point the major networks are no longer going to cover it because viewer numbers keep dropping. Also in the latest poll on impeachment have moved in favor of the president because of these hearings.
Really? Is that why I'm watching it on both Fox and CNN?
Is there a ringing in your ears? Are you seeing flashing lights or hearing voices?
Fox and CNN are news outlets ABC, NBC and CBS are not and are dropping their coverage because of low viewership.
If this was an online discussion I think Nunes would be moderated for trolling...
Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
If this was an online discussion I think Nunes would be moderated for trolling...
Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
The Democrats don't even know the Constitution. In fact most attorneys don't it is not taught in law school.
@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
Nothing wrong you say? Read here
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) reasserted Congress’ power of the purse. Specifically, Title X of the Act – “Impoundment Control” – established procedures to prevent the President and other government officials from unilaterally substituting their own funding decisions for those of the Congress. The Act also created the House and Senate Budget Committees and the Congressional Budget Office....
An “impoundment” is any action – or inaction – by an officer or employee of the federal government that precludes federal funds from being obligated[1] or spent, either temporarily or permanently....
Put simply, if the President wants to spend less money than Congress provided for a particular purpose, he or she must first secure a law providing Congressional approval to rescind the funding in question. The ICA requires that the President send a special message to Congress identifying the amount of the proposed rescission; the reasons for it; and the budgetary, economic, and programmatic effects of the rescission. Upon transmission of such special message, the President may withhold certain funding in the affected accounts for up to 45 legislative session days. If a law approving the rescission is not enacted within the 45 days, any withheld funds must be made available for obligation.
The person that actually sends the funds to countries that congress approves testified behind closed doors last Saturday and can answer why the funds were held up has been prevented from testifying in public by Adam Shiff. His secret testimony has been placed in a secure sever. It begs the question why is he not allowed to testify in public when he can supply all the answers to this question.
I posted your item yesterday in a post with a link to the American Thinker where that was discussed. You must have must have missed that post.
So if the money was not withheld as part of a quid pro quo, as has been testified to, what was the true reason for doing so? Trump has never actually given a reason for this.
If this was an online discussion I think Nunes would be moderated for trolling...
Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
The Democrats don't even know the Constitution. In fact most attorneys don't it is not taught in law school.
@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
Question for you. If proof is provided by both sides of the aisle, will you support the removal of the president?
I will.
So if the money was not withheld as part of a quid pro quo, as has been testified to, what was the true reason for doing so? Trump has never actually given a reason for this.
Everyone who could clear Trump keeps getting told by the white house that they can't testify. It's just rotten luck for Donald.
Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
The Democrats don't even know the Constitution. In fact most attorneys don't it is not taught in law school.
@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
Question for you. If proof is provided by both sides of the aisle, will you support the removal of the president?
I will.
If there is evidence of a legitimate crime and found guilty, yes. I would also want other government officials that have committed legitimate crime prosecuted. We can not have a two tiered justice system. We are a country of laws and they must be applied fairly and equally.
You mean he is not supporting the Democrat fantasies.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
The Democrats don't even know the Constitution. In fact most attorneys don't it is not taught in law school.
Last night during the testimony the items mentioned in the American Thinker were testified about by the woman from the defense department. Also the person who actually pays out the money authorized by congress and can explain why any funds are delayed was interviewed behind closed doors last Saturday. His testimony was placed in a secure server and he is not permitted to be called to testify by Adam Shiff. I wonder why? I do pay attention to the testimony and so far there has been no evidence to convict Trump. It has been all hearsay and I presume no actual facts. By the way the FBI wants to talk to the alleged whistle blower.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
Question for you. If proof is provided by both sides of the aisle, will you support the removal of the president?
I will.
If there is evidence of a legitimate crime and found guilty, yes. I would also want other government officials that have committed legitimate crime prosecuted. We can not have a two tiered justice system. We are a country of laws and they must be applied fairly and equally.
I have lived through the Nixon and Clinton impeachments. I liked Spiro Agnew but he turned out to be dishonest. After that he no longer had my respect and I was glad he was no longer vice president. Nixon was guilty of covering up the people involved in the Watergate cover up and would have been impeached had he not resigned. There were a lot of things going on at that time more so than today. There break in of Dr. Elberg's office by the plumbers to try and stop leaks. The Viet Nam war. Antiwar demonstrations the country was being tron apart as it is now but by the war.
Wow, Fiona Hill is just murdering the GOP right now.
This is the most damaging testimony yet. Nunes is repeatedly leaving the room, in order to avoid hearing testimon.y
@JimB: The President can not withhold money for no reason.
Then why not the the witness who knows why the money was held up testify?
Everything you say is pure comedy gold.
@JimB: The President can not withhold money for no reason.
Then why not the the witness who knows why the money was held up testify?
Pompeo and Mulvaney would testify, but the white house won't let them. Trump really just can't catch a break. Shifty Schiff!
@JimB: The President can not withhold money for no reason.
Then why not the the witness who knows why the money was held up testify?
Reading his sentence means the reason doesn't matter.
@JimB: "Then why not the the witness who knows why the money was held up testify?"
Trump is free to just tell people why the money was withheld you know. If it would help him why not just do that? Why let this go on from September till now?
@JimB: The President can not withhold money for no reason.
Then why not the the witness who knows why the money was held up testify?
Everything you say is pure comedy gold.
It comes from Shiff pure comedy gold as you put it.
No I mean he's not supporting the country nor the Constitution. Things he took an oath to support.
The Democrats don't even know the Constitution. In fact most attorneys don't it is not taught in law school.
If you paid attention to the testimony...…..by trump administration personal...…...there is no way you'd still be defending trump.
There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong. When you go to court it not what you suspect or think what you know it what you can prove. The Democrat narrative fell like a house of cards after the ambassadors testimony yesterday.
Current evidence is demonstrably showing it's Republicans that do not follow the Constitution. Stop whataboutism.
There is evidence you are just wrapping yourself in a blanket...…..not a flag since country is less important to you than the cult of personality.....and willfully ignoring evidence. There has been first hand testimony AND trump released his transcript. There is no doubt unless one refuses to see it.
Start caring about our democracy and not a person.
Sondland was supposed to testify in Trump's favor, but Shifty Schiff and Crazy Pelosi (maybe Crooked Hillary) must have gotten to him first. It's a sad day when a man who donated $1 million to the Trump campaign turns out to be a never-Trumper.
@JimB: Jim, you just said CBS is dropping coverage of this Impeachment Inquiry. I'm watching it on CBS now. So you're basically like Trump; a liar.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment