Reality vs. trump supporters

[PoliTalker]

Hello Daddyo,

When there is a conflict between the first 2 branches it is resolved in the 3rd.

It may look like republicans don't care but we do. Problem is it also seems that demoncrats are hell bent on removing this president. They have litterally said so. Russia collusion didnt work so now it's this. They went from QPQ to bribery once trump released the transcript. During the Schiff shit show he didnt allow a single republican witness. They didnt allow witnesses with exculpatory information. So we dont blame trump for resisting the witch hunt. I read the transcript and found nothing wrong. You did. Who is right?

The same garbage that are so concerned about this military aid to Ukraine and how desperately needed it was and how lives were at risk lol these same pieces of crap refused to give those damn missiles to ukraine instead giving blankets before trump took office. See I look at all that hypocrisy and I believe they are politically motivated traitors desperate to eliminate his victory in 2020 aka election meddling btw.

So no problem with bidens QPQ but trump fake QPQ turned to bribery is a threat to the republic. It's fake outrage from sacks of human dung in and all out attempt to turn an election to their favor. The very charge they level on trump.

There is NOTHING professional about Schiff. He is a traitor attempting to manipulate the 2020 election. ImO worst than foreign interference is domestic.

Again you have 2 parties involve in this "bribery" one has said he felt no pressure and didnt even know the missiles were being held up. A crime with no victim? Tough to bribe if they dont know the consequences for NOT complying.

The president has a duty via treaty with Ukraine to investigate corruption between us officials and Ukraine. He is the chief the head honcho. He is well within his rights to inquire and ask for assistance in this matter. Remember that biden admitted on video his crime so it really wasn't a bombshell expose game changer. Biden aka the nibble can't remember yesterday and trump needed no help since he admitted to the QPQ on film.

It is not OK to solicit foreign intervention in our domestic elections. Trump did it 3X. It is a pattern of abuse. He also has a pattern of obstructing Justice and no we have not forgotten about the instances Mueller identified and no they have not gone away. Trump is just adding more reasons to impeach. Intimidating witnesses too.

Bottom line if Obama did this you'd be demanding impeachment. In 2014 33% of America wanted to impeach Obama for nothing. That's the same 30% that strongly favors Trump. So it's really only another 13% who somewhat favor Trump to add up to his whole pitiful 43% of support.

Any other President had this economy he would be polling at 70% but Trump is so wrong for the office he can't even get 50% in the RCP average. Now he screwed up big time and he needs to go.

Zelenski said no pressure because he is in great fear of losing US support. He cannot cross the President. No Republican can say a cross word because they are all in constant fear of being tweet-slapped. That's why Republicans are afraid to step our of line, unable to express their true feelings on the matter.

Executive privilege does not mean the President is above the law. He must answer for his misconduct under oath and stop obstructing the key witnesses. We need to hear under oath from Trump (And he can be compelled to testify as this is not a normal crime. We are not talking about locking him up, just firing him.) and we need to hear from McGahn, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Perry, Barr, Nunes, Pence, and the OMB, all under oath.

Republicans are afraid to hear from Trump under oath. They are fine with being lied to.

 

[rjhenn]

Since the russians aided trump so massively in the 2016 election it should be quite easy for you to give just a couple examples of how they did it. You will of course ignore this question.

I find it hard to believe that you will find collusion when 20 rabid liberal trump hating lawyers couldn't after 2 years 20 plus million AND all the investigatory tools of government. But I'll wait in anticipation anyway just for you.

I'll ask one more question seldomely answered by you liberals. Based on campaign rhetoric which candidates agenda was better for Russia?

You are, most likely deliberately, massively ignorant. An army of Russian bots posted waves of disinformation on social media in support of Trump. And collusion by itself is not criminal. Mueller documented plenty of collusion, just nothing that amounted to criminal conspiracy. Ignoring meaningless campaign rhetoric, it was clearly Trump, being deeply in debt to both Russian banks and Russian organized crime, who was better for Russia. Probably why he still, despite having promised to multiple times, vehemently resists releasing his tax returns. But you are clearly a dedicated Trump cultist, deep in TDS, so reality will make no impression on you.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

You have it worst than most lol.

Meaning that I am far more connected to reality than any Trump cultist. And definitely more than you are.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

Been like that for years. They also take the worst possible assumed intent with the republican and give the demoncrat the most positive assumed intent. It's so sad its funny.

More of the usual projection.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

While I do now believe trump to be the best president in my lifetime it wasn't always like that. I was worried in the beginning. I only voted for him because hillary was so evil. President Trump (wow that sounds so sweet) has earned my support.

We go back and forth about who Russia supported or who they wanted as president but one thing proves it. One candidate would have been great for Russia and the other has been horrible for them. Those are fact plain to all willing to look. Oil based economies dont want more oil on the market. Our enemies dont want a stronger better military. Even Obama your savior refused to give Ukraine javeline missiles. Hillary would not have. Trump did. No way Russia wanted trump.

Your rebuttal will include something to the affect that trump is so corrupt it wouldn't matter about the above. Horseshit prove it. Give evidence of it or you are wrong. Your pushing the narrative doesn't make it fact.

You are deep in TDS. You will never admit that Trump is anything other than your perfect Messiah. You treasure your degree from TrumpU. You are the one pushing a narrative and wishing that it was reality.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

Lol you guys are sick. You know she admitted to having a private server. It had classified info on it. Both crimes. She ordered the destruction of subpoenaed cell phones and bleach bit wiped the server......oh like with a rag lol my god what balls......both crimes. Comey, the same scum bag who signed off on FISA warrants using known bogus info saved her ass by changing the wording from gross negligence. Actual crimes friend. Not partisan attacts against a president that they know they will lose to in 2020.

The GOP ran multiple witch hunts against Hillary, yet never came up with anything. There doesn't appear to have been anything "bogus" about the info used for the FISA warrants. You appear to just be spouting the usual right-wing paranoid conspiracy theories.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

Lol you guys are sick. You know she admitted to having a private server. It had classified info on it. Both crimes. She ordered the destruction of subpoenaed cell phones and bleach bit wiped the server......oh like with a rag lol my god what balls......both crimes. Comey, the same scum bag who signed off on FISA warrants using known bogus info saved her ass by changing the wording from gross negligence. Actual crimes friend. Not partisan attacts against a president that they know they will lose to in 2020.

The usual BS. Private servers were standard State Department practice at the time. And that classified info wasn't classified when she received it, but was classified later. If you applied the same standard to Trump that you apply to Hillary, he would have been impeached two years ago. I thought Hillary was the worst candidate that the Democrats could have nominated, with Trump being the worst candidate that the Republicans could have nominated. This Presidency is yet another argument for ranked choice voting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Daddyo]

Trumpys are all reaching for the next thing to save them. Now the Durham investigation that they touted as blowing the roofs off Biden and the Dems came up flat empty. He found zero evidence . Do you have another one going? The IG report. Nope. They must have been secretly taken over by the dark underground of illegal and corrupt leftys. We know the Repubs cannot be wrong. They just can't...well not again ..and again.

The Durham report isn't even out yet lol December 9th. They are saying that nobody knows what's in it.

Btw trump doesn't need saving. Did you see the witch hunt sham impeachment hearing yesterday? It was 4 constitutional law professors talking about the awful crimes trump committed.all four never trumpers with 3 of them displaying obvious anti trump bias. None voted for trump and most had financially supported his opponent. The woman was likely a vag hat wearing Hillary supporter who was in line for a supreme court appointment had hillary won. Pretty spooky imagine a rabid ruth bader Ginsburg. No trump needs no help it's that obvious as to what is being done to him.

 

[Daddyo]

I was interested in the legal definition of hearsay since our Reichwing friends think it's somehow a defense despite all the credible witnesses who testified what they heard/saw during the hearings. This site provides some illumination. I thought this paragraph was enlightening. It pretty much defeats the RWers' claims.

"Catchall Exception to the Rule against Hearsay

Finally, the last exception is the so-called "catchall" rule. It provides that evidence of a hearsay statement not included in one of the other exceptions may nevertheless be admitted if it meets these following conditions:

It has sound guarantees of trustworthiness

It is offered to help prove a material fact

It is more probative than other equivalent and reasonably obtainable evidence

Its admission would forward the cause of justice

The other parties have been notified that it will be offered into evidence"

( https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/hearsay-evidence.html )

One thing that I think is kind of amusing -- the RWers disbelieve all the witnesses who testified that they heard Trump's convo with Zelensky but that doesn't count because they claim it's hearsay. Yet they instantly believe Zelensky on his version and his take on the convo, even though that would also be considered hearsay by their interpretation.

You should know that MOST of the witnesses asked if they had proof that trump committed a crime said no. Most only had their opinion of what they heard.

Zelinski's word is golden because he and only he knows if HE was pressured. He says he was not. Game over to all except the rabid left coup traitors.

Btw why do I need a bias government trump hating agents opinion of a phone call that I CAN READ FOR MYSELF?

 

[evince]

Post a clip or a link. Or you are the liar.

and when I post them will you ignore them?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

You should know that MOST of the witnesses asked if they had proof that trump committed a crime said no. Most only had their opinion of what they heard.

You should know that most of the witnesses are not trained attorneys or LEOs. That's no different than you witnessing what appears to be a shoplifting while you're at the grocery store. Later you are called to testify as to what you witnessed. If the defense attorney asks you on the stand "Was what you saw a crime?" how would you answer, knowing only the piece of the action that you personally witnessed?

Zelinski's word is golden because he and only he knows if HE was pressured. He says he was not. Game over to all except the rabid left coup traitors.

Zelenskyy has a vested interest as president of Ukraine to secure whatever means he can to protect his country. You don't think that would factor into his statements in any way?

Btw why do I need a bias government trump hating agents opinion of a phone call that I CAN READ FOR MYSELF?

I'm glad you can read. Too bad we weren't given the entire transcript, eh? But they gave us enough.

"President Zelenskyy: ....I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

"The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it."

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
All you've done is just regurgitate BS talking points found on Fox Noise....All have been examined and found NOT to be the conclusion Trump and his chumps want Americans to believe. The folks in the recent hearings were the people (career, appointed) who tell ALL the facts via eyewitness. That you choose to ignore them is irrelevant.

Sorry wrong again. I watched the hearing. I understand the difference between direct evidence and heresy. I also read the transcript. I also took into consideration trumps anti corruption stance, well known before this phone call. I also considered the duty and frankly desire of trump to find out who was in bed with Ukraine when they helped hillary in her bid to become president. Which they have admitted.

See unlike you borg drone liberals I use facts to formulate my position. You guys use opinion especially in this case. Well the opinions of possibly bias officials are garbage just as the OPINIONS of hard core partisans are. Then you hypocritically accuse others of what you infact are guilty of. Nothing but a CNN parrot.

Try as you might, the GOP and it's flunkies/sycophants cannot change the following:

1) EVIDENCE: first hand eye witness accounts of patterns of conduct DONE BY TRUMP'S REPRESENTATIVE GIULIANI point to removal/slander/side lining of all career foreign service personnel who raised a red flag or disagreed with such.

2) EVIDENCE: first hand eye witness accounts that Ukrainian gov't officials did raise concerns as to why the transaction of weapons was being held up prior to Trump's infamous phone transcript with Zelensky. Also that a meeting with Trump hinged on a promise to announce an investigation on a discredited scenario that the Biden's were involved in a Ukrainian company "quid pro quo" type deal.

3) EVIDENCE: the time frame of when the whistle blower account was known to DC officials and the release of funds for the aforementioned weapons.

4) EVIDENCE: several testimonies by gov't personnel DEFYING Trump's (non-official) order not to comply with the hearings.

5) EVIDENCE: Party mantra that Trump is not being allowed legal defense, DESPITE OFFICIAL INVITATIONS TO DO JUST THAT WHICH THE WHITE HOUSE TURNED DOWN.

6) EVIDENCE: Trump banning key White House officials from participating in hearings, insinuating that he would invoke "executive privilege" if they are subpoenaed.

7) EVIDENCE: Transcript showing Trump specifically asking a foreign gov't to investigate a situation that is directly tied top his political rival, despite resident intelligence agencies stating right behind Zelensky looking forward to weapons transaction.

Like most right wing wonks, you just ignore what you don't like. First the GOP tells you it's all hearsay, then they say eye witnesses don't matter because they didn't talk to the President personally, then they say the eye witnesses had to have direct proof of a quid quo pro deal from the White House itself (Trump, Giuliani, Bolton, etc.). Absurd, but then again the Senate GOP says no matter what they won't even censure!

Zeig Heil, baby.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Schiff has been lying three years straight, non stop. so stfu about kellyanne conway, you fuckin dink.

translation: I can't logically or factually refute the OP, so I make an unsubstantiated attacked on Schiff to divert attention.

You are indeed an Ass Hat Zombie for the right wing.

 

[Taichiliberal]

"Fuckin dink", I LIKE that. And an apt description of that moron.

what's the matter Stevie? Frustrated because I (yet again) provide some facts that you and your insipidly stubborn, willfully ignorant ilk can't logically or factually refute? Awww, poor widdle Stevie, commiserating with his ass hat.

 

[Truth Detector]

Schiff has been lying three years straight, non stop. so stfu about kellyanne conway, you fuckin dink.

Absolutely; this idiot is the biggest liar to ever sit in the House of Representatives.

"Significant Evidence" of Trump Collusion
Mar 18, 2018

 

[Taichiliberal]

Absolutely; this idiot is the biggest liar to ever sit in the House of Representatives.

"Significant Evidence" of Trump Collusion
Mar 18, 2018

And as Mueller went out of his way to point out....everyone was wrong to think that "collusion" was a legal term to be investigated...Mueller did not, and came to the conclusion that there was no substantial evidence to show Trump had any first hand knowledge or participated in the Russian interference actions of the Russians. However, Mueller did say that Trump's actions of obstruction and omissions warranted Congressional investigation. Hence the hearings.

 

[PoliTalker]

Face it, caring and well informed people.

We may as well be trying to impeach Jesus.

In their minds it's one and the same.

 

[Truth Detector]

You are clearly the one afflicted with TDS. Completely unable to see the reality of Trump. Of course those who deny the QPQ have every reason to lie about it. Trump has no desire to eliminate corruption. He wallows in corruption. Whatever support the Ukraine gave Hillary vanishes when placed against the massive support that Russia gave Trump. Of course, nothing that Trump has admitted to "on camera" matters at all to you.

Truth Deflector has very little acquaintance with facts.

The usual right-wing paranoid conspiracy theories. The Trump campaign was investigated because of their repeated contacts with Russian agents. Nobody framed Trump. He did it all himself. He even admitted, on camera, that he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation. Of course, with your deep-seated TDS, you can't admit that Trump has ever done anything wrong.

^^The reason one cannot argue with leftist loons and why it is better just to point at these dishonest pathological lying morons and laugh.

 

[Truth Detector]

And as Mueller went out of his way to point out....everyone was wrong to think that "collusion" was a legal term to be investigated...Mueller did not, and came to the conclusion that there was no substantial evidence to show Trump had any first hand knowledge or participated in the Russian interference actions of the Russians.

It was the Party of the Jackass and the PHONY media who made the collusion bullshit up.

However, Mueller did say that Trump's actions of obstruction and omissions warranted Congressional investigation. Hence the hearings.

Mueller never said anything of the sort. I have the report and his testimony.

Representative Doug Collins to Mueller: "at anytime during the investigation was your investigation curtailed, or stopped, or hindered?"

Muller: "no".

Video of this part 38 seconds in

 

[Truth Detector]

Face it, caring and well informed people.
We may as well be trying to impeach Jesus.
In their minds it's one and the same.

Face it dishonest partisan hacks; you got NOTHING.