I Take No Delight In This But Devin Nunes Is In Serious Trouble

So why haven’t any of the Trumpholians addressed the subject of Chapel’s post? Originally Posted by HoeHummer

What subject in the post? He/she gave no links or real relevant information other than to mention Parnas.

And from all I can find the information from Parnas went to CNN/etc. second hand from Bondi.

And Chris Hayes was quoted as specifically saying

Chris Hayes
✔ @chrislhayes

One important cautionary note about Parnas is that he’s about as credible a character as Michael Cohen, so just because he says something definitely does not make it true.

15.6K 9:46 PM - Nov 22, 2019

The whole post is more unsubstantiated second and third hand information thrown at the wall to see if it sticks.

I think there is a fair chance trump my be impeached by the DPST house.

What happens in an open, non - partisan rules Senate trial is another matter.

Pelosi is terrified of that happening.

We shall see.



call me racist - but the Latina avatar was one hell of a lot better looking!
Why post an LGBTQ avatar of a trans in this forum???

From where you sit? You're sitting in Austin ya fake Canuck. This is what's sad. Yessup has to make up a fake handle just so he can fake post in here. Tsk tsk. Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Keep it up yer COB! You make yourself look sillier and sillier with every false accusation you make! Of course you do a much better job of making yourself silly with that raccoon makeup you paint on your drooping jowls every day.

We’ve got a terms for COBs like yous in Canada...

hey fake canuck - your hatred for AE will get you joining the 'Band" - Again.

Thank you for displaying your true character.

Hoedummer is a SLUNT! Hey Hoedummer give your AXE GASH a tug!

And Chris Hayes was quoted as specifically saying

Chris Hayes
✔ @chrislhayes

One important cautionary note about Parnas is that he’s about as credible a character as Michael Cohen, so just because he says something definitely does not make it true.

15.6K 9:46 PM - Nov 22, 2019

The whole post is more unsubstantiated second and third hand information thrown at the wall to see if it sticks. Originally Posted by eccielover

But but but.... didn't the Steele dossier tell us Michael Cohen met with Russians in Prague to collude during the 2016 campaign? I mean, that was proven by the Mueller investigation, right?

Oh wait, it never happened either?

Never mind!

Why post an LGBTQ avatar of a trans in this forum??? Originally Posted by oeb11

that's madea who's played by Tyler Terry in a bunch of Madea movies.


yeah, he was in drag in all those Madea movies.

that's madea who's played by Tyler Terry in a bunch of Madea movies.

yeah, he was in drag in all those Madea movies. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

It's definitely not SC. He/she only uses pink hair rollers.

This is really sad. ;-)


Lev Parnas Says He Has Info on Devin Nunes’ Role in Trump’s Ukraine Dirt-Digging Mission.

Apparently Nunes traveled to Europe to meet with Shokin and has been hiding this key information. Lev Parnas who is a personal friend of Rudy who was working with Rudy on this shady deal is going to testify before Congress in what will undoubtedly be a dramatic showdown of the ages. It would be devastating if Shiff could subpoena Nunes and force him to answer questions. This will be a dream come true to see this unfold. America is on the verge of an ancient Rome like collapse all complimentary of the Republican party.

The Gumbo Pot is heating up. Stay tuned. Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

Would have been nice to see the article in full where you got this information but I'll simply have to go with what you provided.


Apparently Nunes traveled to Europe to meet with Shokin and has been hiding this key information.


And what law exactly does that break? Reminds me of so and so "talked to a Russian" which of course does not break any law.


It has been reported that VP Biden made 3 phone calls to Shokin? Does that make him a criminal? I can't find any proof of that with a Google search but there are plenty of articals about Biden trips to Ukraine and it wouldn't be unreasonable to think he meet with the countries former prosecutor. I sure would like to see the transcripts of all those conversations the Obama administration had with the prosecutor that Biden wanted fired and the leader who ran back to Russia. Wouldn't those conversations be interesting.


On another note. I find it interesting but sad how Democrats had no voice about their concern for Ukrainian lives when the Obama administration sat by and watched 14,000 Ukrainians get slaughter because he wouldn't provide lethal weapons for the Ukrainians to fight back with. You see Obama was worried about what Putin might think, might do. Imagine that. Maybe that whisper from Obama to Medvedev that he would have more "flexibility" in his dealings with Russia after his re-election because I guess what his new deal with Putin might actually hamper his re-election. I guess we'll never know, unless of course we can see transcripts of all Obama's conversations with Russia from the time of the invasion to the end of his Presidency.


So to some up, Obama fiddled while Ukrainians died and Trump gave them Javelin missiles which probably halted any thought by Putin for a full invasion.


Democrats would like you to believe that the 55 days Trump held up 400 million dollars in aid put Ukrainian national security and our national security at risk. Nothing could be further from the truth. Ukraine already had Javelin tank killers so Putin wasn't about to move on Ukraine. They didn't run out of anything during those 55 days. They still had money and weapons from the last shipment. It wasn't like they were more vulnerable to attack during those 55 days because they were not. The other argument from Democrats is that this may have "signaled" to Putin that our support for Ukraine was "questionable". Did he launch an invasion? Nope. So I guess we have the answer to that question.

HF - thoughtful post.

assup my butt buddy Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel(sissy chump)

Sissy Chump my butt buddy Originally Posted by HoeHummer(assup)

HF - thoughtful post. Originally Posted by oeb11

you guys truly represent the best and the brightest. Hahahahaha

Pay attention as I shred his silly ass rant to pieces. Hahaha

Would have been nice to see the article in full where you got this information but I'll simply have to go with what you provided.


Yea you do that:lol_2:


Apparently Nunes traveled to Europe to meet with Shokin and has been hiding this key information.


And what law exactly does that break? Reminds me of so and so "talked to a Russian" which of course does not break any law.

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Let me explain in child style so yall dont miss. Trump and Nunues (as his proxy) can both be impeached as they violated not 1 but 2 laws. First off by directly requesting or suggesting that President Z use Ukraine’s resources to help his reelection efforts, Trump violated campaign finance law. Do you understand the difference in what Trump did vs. what Joe Biden and other world leaders did? This is basic comprehension 1 0 fucking 1.

Trump asked Ukraine to make an “expenditure” by spending resources for the purpose of influencing the 2020 election. An “expenditure” that is coordinated with a candidate is a campaign contribution; “coordinated” means made at the “request or suggestion” of a candidate. So Trump requesting that Ukraine make an expenditure means that he solicited a contribution. For a campaign finance violation to be a crime, the “thing of value” must exceed $2,000 for a misdemeanor violation, or $25,000 for a criminal felony violation. The requested government investigation into Biden would certainly cost Ukraine over $2,000 to conduct, and it would absolutely be worth over $2,000 to Trump’s campaign. So that's violation #1 of which Devin Nunes was clearly a part of.

Now violation #2 is a Constitutional violation with Trump as the captain of this sinking ship and Nunes as his little water boy blatantly violating the Constitution of which they both should be impeached.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says the POTUS “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”The transcript makes clear that Trump tied together the request for a personal favor with the delivery of military aid. But even if he had not made such a direct connection...this sort of corrupt use of public office to obtain a private benefit fits squarely within the definition of bribery as stated in the Constitution.

It would be nice if you guys educated yourselves before you started spewing total garbage and complete and utter nonsense. Trump and his criminal enterprise associates will be joining Michael Cohen and others in prison soon.

Patronizing BS

If Pelosi had the "proof" she would already have passed the Articles of Impeachment.

DPST's feel inviolable for their crimes - and spew "Trump crimes" with Schiff and nadler holding McCarthyite "evidence' in hand.

That never is brought forth
Just DPST propaganda.



Now - don't forget to label all Conservatives "RACIST'" sc

If Pelosi had the "proof" she would already have passed the Articles of Impeachment. Originally Posted by oeb11

Hahahaha..no disrespect but you guys arent very bright.

Of course she has the proof but to impeach this cock sucking sociopath you have to build your case. Slow roll out all the Presidents men so that the American people know the process wasnt rushed but was thorough. Building a case with credible qualified republican witness after witness is devastating and reaching the people it needs to reach which are the independents and the key Republicans that still believe in the rule of law...you my friend arent one of those Republicans that believe in the rule of law.

This is chess not checkers. You guys are clueless. Just not very bright at all.