how did it reinforce nothing was wrong? Pompeo lied about being there, initially. how is he believable?Manafort May be a “s always” how are Barr and Giuliani “confirmed” scalawags? That’s just your opinion.
unless your point is how open Trump was, that he had the Secretary in on the call.. fuck that. he had Manafort, Gulliani, and Barr in on stuff, too. 3 confirmed Scalawags.. Originally Posted by Chung Tran
- bambino
- 10-02-2019, 09:50 AM
- matchingmole
- 10-02-2019, 09:57 AM
Pompeo lying about it last week was as funny as Paul Manafort lying in 2016. These Trumptard minions are entertaining in interviews.
- Chung Tran
- 10-02-2019, 10:04 AM
- matchingmole
- 10-02-2019, 10:08 AM
- Chung Tran
- 10-02-2019, 10:19 AM
- rexdutchman
- 10-02-2019, 10:43 AM
Listen , they want to investigate let them BOTH SIDES see where that goes
- WTF
- 10-02-2019, 10:44 AM
Because they are Progressives. They aren't Liberals. They are Democratic Socialists.
Other good points:
-if the need to impeach is so strong, why is Congress in recess?
-if the need to impeach is so strong, why is the timeline for vote supposedly "at the end of the year?"
-if the need is so strong, why did Pelosi change the rules?
-if the case is so strong, why aren't they making it a formal impeachment process? Originally Posted by gnadfly
Or
If the evidence so weak
Why is Trump and all his minions lying and covering up?
- WTF
- 10-02-2019, 10:48 AM
- matchingmole
- 10-02-2019, 10:59 AM
POMPEO to Martha Raddatz about Trump's Ukraine call: "You just gave me a report about an IC whistleblower complaint. None of which I've seen.
" POMPEO today: "I was on the phone call."
" POMPEO today: "I was on the phone call."
- matchingmole
- 10-02-2019, 11:02 AM
"So to be clear, Mr. Trump has no financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs?" O'Donnell questioned.
"That's what he said. That's what I said. Obviously, that's . . . what our position is," Manafort, fumbling, responded.
"That's what he said. That's what I said. Obviously, that's . . . what our position is," Manafort, fumbling, responded.
- WTF
- 10-02-2019, 11:29 AM
- I B Hankering
- 10-02-2019, 11:44 AM
Trump tried to get a foreign leader to help him win the 2020 election. Even Pompeo has finally admitted to hearing the conversation, Originally Posted by matchingmole
An intelligent person would discern from the transcript that the telephone conversation was about investigating possible crimes committed near and around the 2016 election.
- WTF
- 10-02-2019, 11:50 AM
- I B Hankering
- 10-02-2019, 12:15 PM
HaHa….that is why Quid Pro Joe was mentioned.... Originally Posted by WTF
FTFY
Quid Pro Joe admitted to the crime. Hunter Biden was connected to Burisma from 2014 until 2019, and those dates bracket the 2016 election.
And an intelligent person would discern that Trump asked about CrowdStrike before there was any mention of Biden.
The dim-retards don't have a legitimate leg to stand on.
- WTF
- 10-02-2019, 12:56 PM
The fact that you talk about Jesus before God does not mean you did not discuss God.
And an intelligent person would discern that Trump asked about CrowdStrike before there was any mention of Biden.
. Originally Posted by I B Hankering
And any intelligent person would know that Crowdstrike is a nutjob conspiracy.
Trump’s efforts to enlist a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political rival Joe Biden that prompted Democratic lawmakers to launch impeachment proceedings. But the fact that Trump is still suggesting there's some sort of frame job in election interference has officials and cybersecurity experts just as irate.
“The fact that the president of the United States, contrary to all evidence from his own government and allied governments, is talking about this now is absurd,” Peter Singer, a cyberwar expert and senior fellow at the New America think tank, told me. “The attribution to Russia was a debate to have in 2016 but based on what we know now it’s inarguable.”