Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No. They don’t have Bolton’s actual words because they don’t have Bolton’s actual words. Bolton could go on television today and tell what he thinks is so damning. He doesn’t because the suspense helps sell the book. It’s like the bogus lead headline of a tabloid.
They don’t have Bolton’s words because the Trump administration blocked testimony.
 
The GOP wants to subpoena and distribute the book before it goes on sale to punish him. Lol.
 

Make no mistake about it. From about 4 o’clock, the time former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi rose to speak, until about 6, when a longtime lawyer for El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago named Eric Herschmann wrapped up what amounted to some MAGA rally cosplay, a monstrously obvious fraud was perpetrated on the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment. If any lawyer in any municipal court in the country had lied and misrepresented the facts of a case involving a speeding ticket as thoroughly as Bondi and Herschmann did here, that lawyer’s license would have been pulled by lunchtime
 
It is OK, Trump waived privilege as to Bolton. Maybe he should consult with lawyers? To late
 
a longtime lawyer for El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago
Typical of Democrats spewing their venom at Trump and those who support him. People who voted for Trump and support him need to realize it’s not Trump himself that the Party of Abortion despises; it’s them. The “irredeemables”, “bitter clingers”, “smelly Walmart shoppers”.

They hold you in utter contempt because you won’t support their only real cause; abortion. It was interesting to see Buttegieg admit to a “prolife Democrat” that she (and her kind) are not welcome in the party. He’s not the first Dem who said that.
 
Last edited:
They hold you in utter contempt because you won’t support their only real cause; abortion.
You know, I’ve been trying to play everything straight.

What you still, after a long time, fail to acknowledge that there are non-Democrat people who are pro life and oppose Trump.

The best you could come up with from that article is to pull the abortion card. Remember, the ends don’t justify the means.
 
Anyway, any comment on the substance of the post?
Yes, these were snippets cut short and taken out of context, but were explained in detail at the trial. Did you not listen?

Factcheck over the years has often been completely misleading, if not utterly erroneous. I no longer use them as a reliable source. You may believe what you wish about these bullet points, but they have been thoroughly explained by the Defense. Try listening with a open mind and ear. You may be able to recap some of this through CSPN2 when they rerun some of the testimony.

Sorrowfully, I suspect you are a victim of Fake News, and you do not use due diligence in sorting it out.
 
Last edited:
So th De ms rush through the impeachment process,leave for Christmas,stall in
sending documents to the Senate and NOW they don’t want to hurry the process.Spare me,actually spare the Country from prolonging this nonsense :roll_eyes:
 
You know, I’ve been trying to play everything straight.
With things like “El caudillo del Mar a lago” you claim you are “trying to play everything straight”. Sure.
What you still, after a long time, fail to acknowledge that there are non-Democrat people who are pro life and oppose Trump.
Probably there are some, but no prolife person ought to want his defeat or removal because the replacement will be even more virulently pro-abortion than Obama. Only a fool or a fake prolifer would want that.
The best you could come up with from that article is to pull the abortion card. Remember, the ends don’t justify the means.
The left has so many articles in the Dem media that it’s not possible to respond to them all, and especially not when Dems scattergun them in places like this.
,stall in
sending documents to the Senate
I would say there’s a better than even chance they knew the Bolton manuscript would come out in January and wanted to stall so it would. They want this impeachment trial to go on all the way to the election, so they can campaign on public money.
 
Absent a crystal ball, we will have to see.
Bolton is a meticulous note taker. And his previous books confirm exacting detail.
Bolton is the only one in Trump’s orbit who harbors the " Vindictive trait" anywhere near Trump. They parted on bad terms, Trump has already called him a liar, got Barr to call him a liar, and sicked Fox on him where he was a member for 14 years.
The idea that Bolton didn’t want to burn Bridges is gone. Bolton knows if he tries to hedge, Trump is still coming full on at him. So he won’t. Bolton is still a hero to some GOP SENATORS. AND BOLTON’S PAC gives them money.
It is a perfect storm.
 
Trump has already called him a liar, got Barr to call him a liar, and sicked Fox on him where he was a member for 14 years.
I think Trump denied what the NYT claims are the Bolton allegations. But I haven’t seen him call Bolton “a liar”. Maybe you can give us the quote from a reliable source.
The VP is the replacement.
He would be just as viciously attacked. Some of the liberal sources have already done that. The Dems want the White House and they’ll do anything to get it.
 
With things like “El caudillo del Mar a lago” you claim you are “trying to play everything straight”. Sure.
Quoting. an. article. That’s not something I would normally say. I didn’t even know it was a thing.
Probably there are some, but no prolife person ought to want his defeat or removal because the replacement will be even more virulently pro-abortion than Obama. Only a fool or a fake prolifer would want that.
I want more out of the pro life movement. They can distance themselves from a person such as Trump instead of embracing him.

I am neither a fool nor a fake prolife person and am insulted that you would say so. You’ve crossed the line and I’ll not be responding to you anymore.
 
Wow! It is not a criminal issue. It is an Impeachment issue.
And suppose Bolton is telling the truth.
Should he be punished for telling the truth?
 
Nonsense. Bolton could tell them right now, or go on national television with it tonight.
Nonsense. He was blocked by Trump and would put himself in legal jeopardy if he went on TV and told everyone what he knew. There’s a reason why the White House gets a copy of the book to go through it before it is published.

Trump is blocking the testimony. Period.
 
And suppose Bolton is telling the truth.
Should he be punished for telling the truth?
I don’t think we know what Bolton really says or intends. The NYT purports to be paraphrasing him, but that statement doesn’t say Bolton actually witnessed anything, only that, like all Dem witnesses, “concluded” something.

Maybe Bolton’s statement will be more than that when he makes it. But for now, it’s “Clintonspeak”.
 
They would run against him in a campaign. Campaigns are full contact, but that’s tradition.
You say Trump didn’t call him a liar. We can all read the tweet.
Trump said he didn’t tell Bolton " that"
He said Bolton is just trying to sell books.
You can parcel words, that message is an equivilent to lie. Taking out some venom perhaps.
Bongino did not parce words. I wonder how he knows? Was he there with Bolton and Trump at the time?
One thing that actually matters is that Tweet waived privilege. The door is open to full throated truth.
 
Last edited:
He was blocked by Trump and would put himself in legal jeopardy if he went on TV and told everyone what he knew.
It would depend on what he said. If he said “Trump told me X” that would not be actionable unless it was an intentional lie uttered with malice. If he said “Trump told me Ukraine’s biggest military vulnerability is Y” then yes, I could see him getting into trouble with that. In any event, whether sworn or just said on tv, it’s the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top