Agnzona said:
It doesn't matter. As we saw yesterday the media will just lie.
I think Schiff should have found a better "actor" than Vindman to star in his latestQuote:
The New Yorker reported in 2018 that "Schiff has been writing screenplays on the side for years", including a murder mystery, a post-Holocaust story, and a spy drama.
Schiff is vegan.
FriscoKid said:Agnzona said:
It doesn't matter. As we saw yesterday the media will just lie.
I don't know how two groups can see things so differently. You have the truth and then the other side.
Silent For Too Long said:
That's a blatant mischaracterization of what has transpired.
He was not asked about what he allegedly omitted so there was nothing to contradict.
The only perjurer we currently have on record is Vindman.
Quote:
(Sondland told Yarmak) the resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks.
Silvertaps said:
As soon as I turn on the tv l hear "...and here is the latest on the Impeachment of President Trump...".
Stephanopoulos, quit telling people what/how to think and actually REPORT the news! IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHMENT!
/morning rant over
They won't have a vote "on impeachment" the vote(s) will be on individual articles of impeachment. After the Schiff Show ends, the action moves to Nadler and the Judiciary Committee (where it should have been all along) and it will be up to Nadler's LawFare lawyers to somehow craft the articles of impeachment out of this hodge podge of hearsay, discussions, differing advisors offering differing advice, those in the loop and those out of the loop. All without ever hearing from the original complainant who started the whole mess.BMX Bandit said:Silvertaps said:
As soon as I turn on the tv l hear "...and here is the latest on the Impeachment of President Trump...".
Stephanopoulos, quit telling people what/how to think and actually REPORT the news! IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHMENT!
/morning rant over
When these hearings are done and they have a vote on impeachment, are you still going to complain about the semantics of whether this is an impeachment hearings?
Some of us are morning people.Spotted Ag said:
It's 8:15 AM on November 20, 2019 and Donald J. Trump is STILL the POTUS.
(Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery)
Gary Johnson said:Spotted Ag said:
It's 8:15 AM on November 20, 2019 and Donald J. Trump is STILL a con man, tax cheat, charlatan, and fraud.
Well said.
When this goes to the Senate, the Senate can subpoena whomever the want, correct? So EC is fair game in the Senate?aggiehawg said:They won't have a vote "on impeachment" the vote(s) will be on individual articles of impeachment. After the Schiff Show ends, the action moves to Nadler and the Judiciary Committee (where it should have been all along) and it will be up to Nadler's LawFare lawyers to somehow craft the articles of impeachment out of this hodge podge of hearsay, discussions, differing advisors offering differing advice, those in the loop and those out of the loop. All without ever hearing from the original complainant who started the whole mess.BMX Bandit said:Silvertaps said:
As soon as I turn on the tv l hear "...and here is the latest on the Impeachment of President Trump...".
Stephanopoulos, quit telling people what/how to think and actually REPORT the news! IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHMENT!
/morning rant over
When these hearings are done and they have a vote on impeachment, are you still going to complain about the semantics of whether this is an impeachment hearings?
BMX Bandit said:Silvertaps said:
As soon as I turn on the tv l hear "...and here is the latest on the Impeachment of President Trump...".
Stephanopoulos, quit telling people what/how to think and actually REPORT the news! IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHMENT!
/morning rant over
When these hearings are done and they have a vote on impeachment, are you still going to complain about the semantics of whether this is an impeachment hearings?
The Republican Senate needs to do the same. Make the same choice the Democrat Senators did in 1998 in turn. This is not like 1974, but more like partisan 1998. Treat it the same way. Throw it in the round file regardless. Let the election decide.Agnzona said:
The otherside knows they are lying. The media and Dems have conscientiously calculated that getting Trump is paramount no matter what. They are not seeing or interpret things differently they are knowingly lying.
Yes. Unless the guy goes into hiding and his current attorneys announce they are no longer representing him so they subpoena cannot be properly served.FireAg said:When this goes to the Senate, the Senate can subpoena whomever the want, correct? So EC is fair game in the Senate?aggiehawg said:They won't have a vote "on impeachment" the vote(s) will be on individual articles of impeachment. After the Schiff Show ends, the action moves to Nadler and the Judiciary Committee (where it should have been all along) and it will be up to Nadler's LawFare lawyers to somehow craft the articles of impeachment out of this hodge podge of hearsay, discussions, differing advisors offering differing advice, those in the loop and those out of the loop. All without ever hearing from the original complainant who started the whole mess.BMX Bandit said:Silvertaps said:
As soon as I turn on the tv l hear "...and here is the latest on the Impeachment of President Trump...".
Stephanopoulos, quit telling people what/how to think and actually REPORT the news! IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHMENT!
/morning rant over
When these hearings are done and they have a vote on impeachment, are you still going to complain about the semantics of whether this is an impeachment hearings?
More likely he refuses to answer without taking the 5th and cools his jets in jail for contempt for awhile.FireAg said:
But even then, they could force LC Vindman to identify who the unnamed "other person" he told was, correct?
And he can either lie, plead the 5th, or he could flat out say the name?
Gary Johnson said:
You guys still arguing about who called 911 when 20 cops showed up and we have 30 witnesses? WGAF.
The guy that called 911 was a witness to a crime.Gary Johnson said:
You guys still arguing about who called 911 when 20 cops showed up and we have 30 witnesses? WGAF.
George Soros money and child sex slavery.BuddysBud said:FriscoKid said:Agnzona said:
It doesn't matter. As we saw yesterday the media will just lie.
I don't know how two groups can see things so differently. You have the truth and then the other side.
Your answer is in the statement you quoted. The other side is lying. My question is how did we get to the point in our government where the thirst for political power by one party and their MSM accomplices supersedes what is best for the country?
What do expect to get out of a Democrat president?Gary Johnson said:Spotted Ag said:
It's 8:15 AM on November 20, 2019 and Donald J. Trump is STILL a con man, tax cheat, charlatan, and fraud.
Well said.
I just hope Lindsey isn't FOS again and follows through with his proclamation that he will call EC, Schiff and others as witnesses in the Senate trial.titan said:The Republican Senate needs to do the same. Make the same choice the Democrat Senators did in 1998 in turn. This is not like 1974, but more like partisan 1998. Treat it the same way. Throw it in the round file regardless. Let the election decide.Agnzona said:
The otherside knows they are lying. The media and Dems have conscientiously calculated that getting Trump is paramount no matter what. They are not seeing or interpret things differently they are knowingly lying.
If they do that, the democrats have to play by rules other than the ones they made up. They know they won't get a conviction and they also know that what happens in the senate could go very badly for them. Be interesting to see if they want to play out this game of chicken.FireAg said:
Based on what Sondland is testifying to right now, I am 100% confident this is going to the Senate for conviction or acquittal...
you keep forgetting that sending this to the senate means they lose control of the tightly manufactured and controlled narrative. The republicans control the senate and you can bet every dollar that you have that if they hold a trial, it will be used as a forum to air every last piece of democrat dirty laundry (oh, and to pay lip service to whatever articles the house democrats can conjure).FireAg said:
Based on what Sondland is testifying to right now, I am 100% confident this is going to the Senate for conviction or acquittal...
Oh it's a game of chicken all right...Spotted Ag said:If they do that, the democrats have to play by rules other than the ones they made up. They know they won't get a conviction and they also know that what happens in the senate could go very badly for them. Be interesting to see if they want to play out this game of chicken.FireAg said:
Based on what Sondland is testifying to right now, I am 100% confident this is going to the Senate for conviction or acquittal...
Joseph Parrish said:
Why do we always have 2 official impeachment threads?
