gangstonc
Member
When he said he was going to nuke fellow Americans, I didn't think he meant this way.
Haaaa. I wonder if it was him or the host!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
When he said he was going to nuke fellow Americans, I didn't think he meant this way.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump revisits old fictions about Iran money
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is recycling familiar fictions concerning the Iran nuclear deal as he lashes out at a Republican senator who criticized him and a U...apnews.com
Note the line about the 1.8 billion. They paid, we didn't deliver. Do you have any sources?
Either way, it’s probably the most intelligent sound to ever come from either one of them while on camera.Haaaa. I wonder if it was him or the host!
Once again, you and i don’t agree. Vindman did the right thing. The republican line of questioning again didn’t focus on the facts of bribery, but rather the process and personal attacks.Vindman is being eviscerated today. He was the leak to Eric Ciaramella, the WB. I believe he just perjured himself.
Once again, you and i don’t agree. Vindman did the right thing. The republican line of questioning again didn’t focus on the facts of bribery, but rather the process and personal attacks.
And since he doesn’t know who the whistleblower is, didn’t name a name in case that person was the whistleblower.
Once again, you and i don’t agree. Vindman did the right thing. The republican line of questioning again didn’t focus on the facts of bribery, but rather the process and personal attacks.
And since he doesn’t know who the whistleblower is, didn’t name a name in case that person was the whistleblower.
I think he does know who the Whistleblower is, Why would Adam Schiff stop a line of questioning several times stating that he wanted to protect the identity of the WB if Mr. Vindman Uhhum I mean the Lt COL if he didn't know who the WB is? If LT COL Vindman is the whistleblower, that is the only way any of this is legit.
Riddle me this.... why does it matter if he knows the whistleblower or not? It seems to me that we have multiple confirmations from various career professionals and political appointees with firsthand knowledge that the allegations that were made in the complaint have been verified. Wouldn't the unmasking of the whistleblower be mute at this point and only serve as an agenda for reprisal?He knows the WB. He was the source for the WB. That's why Schiff intervened when Vindman was asked about the second person he talked to that was not on the call. One was Kent and the second person he said was an a qualified source in the IC. It was Eric Ciaramella.
Could have been the whistleblower. The idea is to not even narrow it down to two people.He knows the WB. He was the source for the WB. That's why Schiff intervened when Vindman was asked about the second person he talked to that was not on the call. One was Kent and the second person he said was an a qualified source in the IC. It was Eric Ciaramella.
True but I think Trump may actually owe the whistleblower a deal of thanks. It sounds like the complaint went public and he released the money before the Ukrainian President could actually follow through with any of the actions that he had been asked to complete in exchange for the money. In other words the whistleblower basically protected Trump from himself.WesL, I don't think the president has to break the law to be impeached, but I'm not sure of the legality of what all officially constitutes a bribe.
Yes, because some people don't seem to get the idea that an attempted crime is still a crime.True but I think Trump may actually owe the whistleblower a deal of thanks. It sounds like the complaint went public and he released the money before the Ukrainian President could actually follow through with any of the actions that he had been asked to complete in exchange for the money. In other words the whistleblower basically protected Trump from himself.
For most people... that aren't President of the United States... at least while they are still in office... now Rudy is a whole other story...Yes, because some people don't seem to get the idea that an attempted crime is still a crime.
Oh it's still a crime, it's just the only punishment is impeachment and removal...For most people... that aren't President of the United States... at least while they are still in office... now Rudy is a whole other story...
This is exactly where I wish the Founding Fathers had either been a bit more detailed in their thinking but alas there is no way they would have ever imagined the situation we are in today. Must have been nice.Oh it's still a crime, it's just the only punishment is impeachment and removal...
Riddle me this.... why does it matter if he knows the whistleblower or not? It seems to me that we have multiple confirmations from various career professionals and political appointees with firsthand knowledge that the allegations that were made in the complaint have been verified. Wouldn't the unmasking of the whistleblower be mute at this point and only serve as an agenda for reprisal?
Furthermore, because we have this sworn testimony of those who were on the calls and those with knowledge of the proceedings, shouldn't the focus be on what happened and if any laws were broken. Don't get me wrong I think all the stuff that Trump and Rudy were involved in was shady, but not quite sure they breech barrier of the law yet.
Vindman is being eviscerated today. He was the leak to Eric Ciaramella, the WB. I believe he just perjured himself.
Explain this to me. Sorry not able to watch/listen today so just getting chunks here and there.I do not think it matters who the Whistleblower is or not. I do however believe it does matter that he may have perjured himself.