Xann Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted January 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2020 Schumer claims there are 10/12 Republicans who want to hear witnesses and Turtle head McConnell has admitted he doesn't have the votes. Things will get interesting if Bolton is called in to testify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 On 27/01/2020 at 23:37, Xann said: Its a turd! Its insane! No! Its...Stupourman! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AXD Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 14 hours ago, TheAuthority said: Schumer claims there are 10/12 Republicans who want to hear witnesses and Turtle head McConnell has admitted he doesn't have the votes. Things will get interesting if Bolton is called in to testify. So he claims. I don’t think the republicans are going to break ranks. They want to wrap this up and claim the democrats wasted time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 This utter moron is his lawyer, apparently. Quote One of Trump’s lawyers, Alan Dershowitz, made the controversial argument that the president’s request for Ukraine to investigate Democrats was in the public interest because Trump considered his reelection to be in the public interest. Many commentators responded by pointing out that such logic could justify nearly any action carried out by a sitting president. I've heard stronger and more intellectually rigorous arguments from three-year-olds, admittedly not on the same issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted January 30, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted January 30, 2020 Dershowitz was friends with Epstein, (as was Trump.) Part of me thinks the establishment (Dem & Rep) wants to keep Trump there because if he's ousted he might go rogue. It's entirely possible that he has dirt on lots of powerful folks and he's unhinged enough to blab about it. His cult following (sorry I mean base) are unhinged enough to believe anything he says. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Douchewitz has always been a **** disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 9 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said: Douchewitz has always been a **** disgrace. As slimy as they come, and maybe even a pedo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted January 30, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted January 30, 2020 11 minutes ago, maqroll said: As slimy as they come, and maybe even a pedo Maybe? He decided to defend one and helped get him a ridiculously light sentence. Quote When Jeffrey Epstein found out in 2005 that he was being investigated by police for the sexual abuse of underage girls, he called Alan Dershowitz. A Harvard Law School professor and high-profile defense lawyer, Dershowitz helped negotiate a “non-prosecution agreement” under which Epstein served just 13 months in a county jail, much of it spent on “work release” in an office. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/30/20746983/alan-dershowitz-jeffrey-epstein-sarah-ransome-giuffre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 29 minutes ago, TheAuthority said: Maybe? He decided to defend one and helped get him a ridiculously light sentence. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/30/20746983/alan-dershowitz-jeffrey-epstein-sarah-ransome-giuffre More to the point, he appears to have been a frequent attendee at Epstein's parties. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 How is this legal at all: Rand Paul writes down a question with the alleged whistleblower's full name mentioned, and hands it to the judge to be read aloud. Judge thankfully refuses since it contains confidential information, so Rand Paul proceeds to just tweet his question instead with the name listed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 2 hours ago, Czechlad said: How is this legal at all: Rand Paul writes down a question with the alleged whistleblower's full name mentioned, and hands it to the judge to be read aloud. Judge thankfully refuses since it contains confidential information, so Rand Paul proceeds to just tweet his question instead with the name listed. What whistleblower? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted January 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 30, 2020 Smug. Vile. Nasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 6 hours ago, Czechlad said: How is this legal at all: Rand Paul writes down a question with the alleged whistleblower's full name mentioned, and hands it to the judge to be read aloud. Judge thankfully refuses since it contains confidential information, so Rand Paul proceeds to just tweet his question instead with the name listed. Paul's strings are being pulled by Trump and/or Putin. He is trashing the Senate with this stunt, such an abhorrent character. Kentucky has given us two absolute words removed from Hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 11 hours ago, maqroll said: Paul's strings are being pulled by Trump and/or Putin. He is trashing the Senate with this stunt, such an abhorrent character. Kentucky has given us two absolute words removed from Hell. Compare his question to the question that actually got asked by Roberts and which Shiff answered. Identical, except the accepted multi-senator(R) endorsed question didn't explicitly name the publicly known name of the whistleblower. Kabuki theatre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 31, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) This statement just sums up the whole R party. Quote “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate. https://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&id=AA7E4960-6788-43A9-AF03-5DC456A0D448 Trump can do whatever he wants, and the people will decide whether what he did was bad enough. The heavily manipulated, gerrymandered and brainwashed people. And anyway, I thought Trump didn't do it? I thought the whistleblower was a fraud? I thought it was a perfect phone call? Nah, the defence is now 'he did it, but whatever'. Edited January 31, 2020 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: This statement just sums up the whole R party. https://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&id=AA7E4960-6788-43A9-AF03-5DC456A0D448 Trump can do whatever he wants, and the people will decide whether what he did was bad enough. The heavily manipulated, gerrymandered and brainwashed people. And anyway, I thought Trump didn't do it? I thought the whistleblower was a fraud? I thought it was a perfect phone call? Nah, the defence is now 'he did it, but whatever'. The Imperial presidency must not be imperiled! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) Victory for Trump day incoming. Huge thanks to Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi, without whose hard work and dedication, none of this would have been possible! Edited January 31, 2020 by villakram that's VT day just so we all can feel happy... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted February 1, 2020 Author Share Posted February 1, 2020 Unless there's a massive leak (hehe) this weekend, it's game over until November. Sad day for America that only 2 republican senators voted for witness testimony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts