Jump to content
b_m_b_m_b_m

~~ PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT! || Millions of Impeaches, Impeaches for Me || House Impeachment Hearings OT ~~

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

Isn't it Rasmussen? Which is essentially a made up number anyway.

I don't know if they release partisan info, but Daniel Dale routinely fact checks this claim, and he's usually in the mid to low 80s with the reliable pollsters. He had 90 with a CNN poll a few weeks ago and that was the highest he had seen in a while. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we care about there even being a quid pro quo? Solicitation alone is illegal. Trump is done in a legal sense. The rest is politics.

 

But a quid pro quo isn't even necessary. Solicitation is enough guys. Also there has clearly been quid pro quo so . . . 

 

But I'm really tired no one is mentioning the solicitation, which is irrefutable at this point and just as illegal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Why are we trusting this person who was in the bank while it was being robbed? They’re biased!”

 

Republican logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, finaljedi said:

Is Hunter the new buttery males?

Wouldn’t he be the toast for the buttery emails. Isn’t the theory that Ukraine also has her emails on a secret server in Ukraine. Maybe that is why Hunter was hired, to keep her emails safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MarSolo said:

I can’t wait for Jim Jordan’s questions.

 

ARE YOU PURSUING A BOOK DEAL?!?!?! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's also pissing his pants because Schiff is going to release the testimony transcripts.  He's urging the GOP members to release their own versions of the transcripts:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Growing number of GOP senators consider acknowledging Trump’s quid pro quo on Ukraine

 

Quote

A growing number of Senate Republicans are ready to acknowledge that President Trump used U.S. military aid as leverage to force Ukraine to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his family as the president repeatedly denies a quid pro quo.

 

In this shift in strategy to defend Trump, these Republicans are insisting that the president’s action was not illegal and does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense as the Democratic-led House moves forward with the open phase of its probe.

 

But the shift among Senate Republicans could complicate the message coming from Trump as he furiously fights the claim that he had withheld U.S. aid from Ukraine to pressure it to dig up dirt on a political rival, even as an increasing number of Republicans wonder how long they can continue to argue that no quid pro quo was at play in the matter. 

 

It's kind of amazing to me that you can go from, "No quid pro quo," to, "Well there was but it's OK." Not that we haven't seen them do that, but why would you even take someone seriously who shifts goal posts that hard, especially when simply asking for a foreign government to investigate a political rival is wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sondland acknowledges 'quid pro quo' in revision to Trump-Ukraine testimony.

 

Posted from Zerohedge because Zerohedge is generally brazenly pro-Trump, so seeing this on its newsfeed means even Trump boosters are having trouble spinning this one.  The article also has transcripts embedded in it.

 

Read the comments at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Signifyin(g)Monkey said:

Sondland acknowledges 'quid pro quo' in revision to Trump-Ukraine testimony.

 

Posted from Zerohedge because Zerohedge is generally brazenly pro-Trump, so seeing this on its newsfeed means even Trump boosters are having trouble spinning this one.  The article also has transcripts embedded in it.

 

Read the comments at your own risk.

 

Just now, PaladinSolo said:

Ohh that quid pro quo, yeah we totally did that, also gave up pence, lol. 

 

 

 

:feelsgood:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the chances that the House impeaches Pence as well?

 

He'd be the first VP ever impeached (though Agnew would have been if he didn't resign).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News articles need to point out that "major revision" means "he committed perjury the first time around". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...