Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

A lot of this "can't recall" from Sondland around contacts and scheduling etc. is hedging in the event the phone(s)/devices he turned over to State Dept. end up with Congress.  I'm sure those devices would provide a surprisingly adequate memory refresher to fill in the gaps not already accounted for by other witnesses.

I'm assuming that any evidence that surfaces from Mr. Pompeo will be manufactured to miraculously support the President. Barr has not been globe trotting and in on this for nothing. He is one of the puppet masters and his name has been conspicuously absent from most of the day-to-day testimony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I'm assuming that any evidence that surfaces from Mr. Pompeo will be manufactured to miraculously support the President. Barr has not been globe trotting and in on this for nothing. He is one of the puppet masters and his name has been conspicuously absent from most of the day-to-day testimony.

Or they'll selectively release information/documents to paint a favorable picture for them. Exactly in the same way that barr did to steal the sting from the Mueller report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Trump: Tell him there is no quid pro quo, but that he must do what I ask or there will be no aid!

Trumpkins: See! He said no quid quo!

Me: Do y'all know what "quid pro quo" means? 

Yeah, that's the unbelievable part of that purported exchange.  No way Trump ever said quid pro quo before this investigation began.  He had no idea what that means.  Heck he still might have no idea what that means.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

So if R's are going to make statements about Hunter Biden rather than ask substantive questions, why do the D's not get it in the record that the corrupt prosecutor Joe Biden got removed was actually NOT pursuing an active investigation into Burisma? 

And that the reason we wanted him removed was BECAUSE he was not pursuing an investigation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it that the party who cannot spell correctly, display proper apostrophe usage, and harangues opponents in debates about elite uber wealthy educations is suddenly amazingly concerned with the proper semantics and definitions of words and terms such as "quid pro quo," "bribery," "extortion," and "explicitly state?" You would think that the same elite educations would have prepared them for moments such as these. Moments when the meaning of those words is as crystal clear as the lies they and Sondland (Mr. Equivocator) tell. Most of them have law degrees and yet haven't practiced since they graduated law school. I think Gym Jordan never passed the bar IIRC. Sad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, shakahorn said:

Yeah, that's the unbelievable part of that purported exchange.  No way Trump ever said quid pro quo before this investigation began.  He had no idea what that means.  Heck he still might have no idea what that means.

That, and it happened the day they learned of the whistleblower complaint. The only thing missing is Trump ending the conversation with "... must do what's right. If you know what I mean. But no pro quid quo, or whatever that thing is they told me earlier today I did!". 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

Holy shit.  I just assumed it was a shop.  He needed simpleton notes to keep him from saying the wrong thing?  How, on god’s green earth, did this man get voted into the top post in the nation?  It continues to boggle the mind.  

Social Media. Social Media. Social Media. 

Racism. 

Idiocy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

He's a little testy on twitter, or at least his staff is.

 

If Rudy has no financial interests in Ukraine it's only because a) he hasn't picked up his paycheck or b)his friends got picked up before he could pick up his paycheck"

A lot of the names are being left out. They really should recall some of the players and grill them about that because I think they could trip them up. The problem is, as fascinating as I would find it, most folks don't want that kind of detail. While the bribe/aid/investigation is the big stick, the gas corruption is the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Fact: murder is not illegal unless you shout “MALICE AFORETHOUGHT!” before killing your victim.

I'm going to rob a bank tomorrow, all while shouting "I'M NOT ROBBING THE BANK!!!!"    Make off with the cash, and no crime was committed.  Easy, peasy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bama Chick said:

 


Yup and a few months back one of the usual Republican morons tried to talk shit to her about gun violence and she lit him up.

She rarely speaks about her experience at Jonestown but she did that day.

I’ll see if I can find the video.

 

This was her response to Nunes a few weeks ago.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zombie said:

The Democrats are being redundant in their questions. It gives Sondland and Republicans the opportunity to disassemble and misrepresent his prior answers that already confirmed the quid pro quo etc.... 

If the Democrats are being redundant, then what the hell do you call whatever the hell the Republicans are doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

If the Democrats are being redundant, then what the hell do you call whatever the hell the Republicans are doing?

Oh, they're evil pieces of shit. I'm saying the Democrats are not helping their position, which is the right position. 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...