ADVERTISEMENT

Cover up

Are you a masochist? You post all kinds of stuff that doesn't even resemble English, stuff that makes absolutely no sense. I thought you were going to Chuckie Cheese and had to go? That's what you told us like an hr ago so we could all plan our evening around your return
WHAT ???
“THEYLL GO AFTEE PENCE!! “
“ HUH !!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
Are you a masochist? You post all kinds of stuff that doesn't even resemble English, stuff that makes absolutely no sense. I thought you were going to Chuckie Cheese and had to go? That's what you told us like an hr ago so we could all plan our evening around your return
If it makes no sense to you, why don't you just go pester another poster ? I'll do my best to somehow get along without your attention.
 
Just showing you what an idiot you look like .
Got a question: are you anticipating acting like a complete fool, on here, for the next 10 years ?
For what purpose do you do your pest routine ? Why don't you post something other than this kind of stuff ?
 
If it makes no sense to you, why don't you just go pester another poster ? I'll do my best to somehow get along without your attention.
Because you are such a prick that puts themselves front and center on every post on this board and you never shut up. You started it man and then I saw what a jackass bully you are
 
Got a question: are you anticipating acting like a complete fool, on here, for the next 10 years ?
For what purpose do you do your pest routine ? Why don't you post something other than this kind of stuff ?
Because you are a complete a$$hole and invite it. You do this to anyone that dare defy your twisted view and I throw it right back at you. If you werent a complete a$$hole we wouldnt have this problem
 
WTF !!
" They'll go after Pence" ?? Who's "they" ??
" Go after him how ? "
By IMPEACHING Pence ??
How long have you been suffering from delusions ? This s___ is crazy.
Lighten up. Fore !!!
You know Dubs....I can see it now. All winter long from the last putt last year....until the first drive of the new year....I can see you practicing this as you walk through the house.

maxresdefault.jpg
 
I have trouble believing any of these alleged facts (hearsay) without the main witness not identified or being called to testify. That’s what is black and white to me. Until this happens it’s no more than Democrats not liking Trump. Nothing you or anyone else could add to make me or many understand this impeachment until this happens.
You're saying the whistleblower was a witness? To what?
 
You're saying the whistleblower was a witness? To what?
Exactly, he complains about hearsay testimony and then says he can’t believe anything else until he hears from the whistleblower, but the whistleblower put in their report that they weren’t a firsthand witness. It’s like Skydog has heard he has to hear from the whistleblower but the propaganda never really told him why.
 
Last edited:
Exactly, he complains about hearsay testimony and then says he can’t believe anything until he hears from the whistleblower, but the whistleblower put in their report that they weren’t a firsthand witness. It’s like Skydog has heard he has to hear from the whistleblower but the propaganda never really told him why.
You're saying the whistleblower was a witness? To what?
Well if he wasnt a witness to anything what did he blow the whistle on? Has your brain just rotted away watching this crap?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SKYDOG
As I replied to 35 who provided the same basic response. Predictable response and Mr. Gullible. Y'all are just too easy to trigger.
Hell, I thought you were a 13 yr. old upon reading your 1st posts.
Now that it's become obvious that you're more like a developmentally challenged adult.....
it'll be easier to deal with the capacity deficiency.
 
You know Dubs....I can see it now. All winter long from the last putt last year....until the first drive of the new year....I can see you practicing this as you walk through the house.

maxresdefault.jpg
Y'know....speaking of golf...….I was trying to calculate your 5ft. putt choke number.....based upon the composure you exhibit trying to respond to simple questions, here....

I figure anything over $5.00 from five feet.....and you couldn't even catch the lip.....
 
Indy....slow down a bit. The only people defiling or spitting on the Constitution are those you quote and support. Trump, according to the Constitution of the United States has done nothing that is an impeachable offense. Every Prez has withheld aid at one time or another, and that is not and never has been something they can be impeached about. There have been no high crimes either. As someone said above, and as I've been trying to tell for a long time, you can't impeach the Prez on a whim brought about by losing the election to that person. If he were to get defeated this year, that's the only way to get him out of office.
You should probably read the constitution......and maybe Federalist 68 Foreign intervention was a big deal to the founding fathers.
If you think this Impeachment is just about withholding foreign aid you haven't been paying attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doubleyous
Hell, I thought you were a 13 yr. old upon reading your 1st posts.
Now that it's become obvious that you're more like a developmentally challenged adult.....
it'll be easier to deal with the capacity deficiency.
Thats the W go to! He is a total a$$hole but any one defy him and they are mentally challenged or insane or whatever. You are such a worthless POS Why dont you go somewhere that people like you? I know it will be hard to find.
 
Thats the W go to! He is a total a$$hole but any one defy him and they are mentally challenged or insane or whatever. You are such a worthless POS Why dont you go somewhere that people like you? I know it will be hard to find.
What's much more difficult to find would be someone even 1/13th as disturbed as you, on a message board, anywhere.
 
Coming from the guy who deems Lev Parnas credible. You are truly a loyal Marxist. This is impressive. Mind control is real.
It’s the documentation that he has that determines his credibility. I know that’s a weird concept for a right winger, needing documentation to determine something.
 
It’s the documentation that he has that determines his credibility. I know that’s a weird concept for a right winger, needing documentation to determine something.
I can document that I went on a date with Kim Kardashian. Does that mean it happened?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SKYDOG
Why don't you actually answer the question? What is he going to testify to?
Why don't you actually answer the question? What was the WB a witness to?
Eric Ciaramella? Say his name, Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.

He didn’t witness anything and wouldn’t be even considered a WB unless he had a little influence from some folks. But let’s not bring that up and please, let’s not release the identity of the WB. Trump bad. Trump bad. Establishment good. Establishment good.

Marxist zombie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
Hearsay?
Sondland, Hill, Kent, Taylor, Morrison, Holmes, Vindman......almost all are career government employees who have served under dems and pubs.....and they are all saying the same thing.
If you don't like "hearsay", why not hear from the individuals who have direct knowledge?
Executive privilege right? Which gives trump the privilege of denying us the right to decide whether he committed impeachable acts or not.

You do realize all but one of the folks you listed are giving their opinion? Right?

Are you just trolling, Bob?
 
You're saying the whistleblower was a witness? To what?

The whistleblower was a political operative who met with Schiff to plot the scheme. Given the recent reporting, that is obvious.

If the whistleblower wasn't witness to the impeachable act he is by definition second hand.....

Right? You saw the Politico reports, right?

That leaves us with Schiff altering text transcripts this week. You saw that, right?

What is going on with Schiff?

Should he be investigated?
 
The whistleblower was a political operative who met with Schiff to plot the scheme. Given the recent reporting, that is obvious.

Right? You saw the Politico reports, right?

That leaves us with Schiff altering text transcripts this week. You saw that, right?
Uh oh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
Uhhh....the same way they do it every other time. Just like every other time every executive branch said no. You should also read up about the difference between asking for and subpoenaing documents/witnesses. The house didn't even subpoena everything they are crying about now.

Jesus, Bob....come on. You realize "obstruction of congress" isn't a thing, right? There is contempt, and that has statutory relief. And it isn't impeachment. Good grief....

Do a little learning, google Holder and Lerner to learn about how this is goes down.

Your second paragraph isn't worth addressing. Wow.
Ah, Mr condescending know it all has returned.
When the WH flat out refused to cooperate, what's the point of more subpoenas?
Who has the freakin power here? It isn't the house. Only someone who loves being the victim would claim the house has any power over the outcome.

Obstruction of Congress is one of the articles of impeachment. What is "A thing"? Call it contempt or call it obstruction. Are you saying the name of the article changes anything? The definition of contempt of Congress literally includes obstruction.
 
Hell, I thought you were a 13 yr. old upon reading your 1st posts.
Now that it's become obvious that you're more like a developmentally challenged adult.....
it'll be easier to deal with the capacity deficiency.

My aren't you the tolerant liberal. Do you need a hug? You and 35 realize that, in reality, there is no basis for an impeachment, the only way to take the WH in 2020 is to impeach Trump and all the Democratic Party has to offer is a Geriatric socialist, a corrupt bumbling ex-vice president, with an equally corrupt family and a candidate that can't help but lie about her heritage and her policies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
Eric Ciaramella? Say his name, Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.

He didn’t witness anything and wouldn’t be even considered a WB unless he had a little influence from some folks. But let’s not bring that up and please, let’s not release the identity of the WB. Trump bad. Trump bad. Establishment good. Establishment good.

Marxist zombie.
I'm a Marxist......... because I'm asking you the same question 3 times when you won't answer? Because I don't bow down to our exalted leader?
Why are you people so angry and so quick to call people names?
 
You do realize all but one of the folks you listed are giving their opinion? Right?

Are you just trolling, Bob?
I don't troll.
No, they weren't just opinions. They gave facts of they did and what they and others said.
A few gave opinions based on those conversations and their actions.
Did you actually listen to or watch the testimony in the house?
 
I'm a Marxist......... because I'm asking you the same question 3 times when you won't answer? Because I don't bow down to our exalted leader?
Why are you people so angry and so quick to call people names?
Do you read any of the sh*t your comrades W and 35 post? I bet you bowed down and kissed the floor Obama walked on though. So I asked you why the WB isn't a witness? If he doesnt have anything to be a witness to , he has nothing to blow a whistle on. Seriously how dumb are you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlboiler2156
I'm a Marxist......... because I'm asking you the same question 3 times when you won't answer? Because I don't bow down to our exalted leader?
Why are you people so angry and so quick to call people names?
What’s there to answer? Eric Ciaramella. Say it, Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella didn’t witness anything.

I’ve never bowed to a political figure like you leftists do. Government, government, and more government.

I’m not angry at all. You’re kicking and screaming on a message board defending a losing proposition. Take the L and head home Bob. He’s not going anywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
I don't troll.
No, they weren't just opinions. They gave facts of they did and what they and others said.
A few gave opinions based on those conversations and their actions.
Did you actually listen to or watch the testimony in the house?
They gave facts? None of them were fact witnesses. How’s that possible?

Come on, Bob. Say it, Eric Ciaramella. It’s not hard.
 
Ah, Mr condescending know it all has returned.
When the WH flat out refused to cooperate, what's the point of more subpoenas?
Who has the freakin power here? It isn't the house. Only someone who loves being the victim would claim the house has any power over the outcome.

Obstruction of Congress is one of the articles of impeachment. What is "A thing"? Call it contempt or call it obstruction. Are you saying the name of the article changes anything? The definition of contempt of Congress literally includes obstruction.

Do you understand what a subpeona is and how they are adjudicated?

Start there.

When you are done with that move on to executive priv, dating back to George Washington. Then read the lit surrounding EP.

And yes, words have meaning in jurisprudence. It isn't about who has "the power". We have co-equal branches of government that work together and more times than not, offer statutory remedy for most problems. Saying it is contempt or obstruction (confusing those two terms) shows a misunderstanding of the law in question. Please, do the homework.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glidresquirrel
The whistleblower was a political operative who met with Schiff to plot the scheme. Given the recent reporting, that is obvious.

If the whistleblower wasn't witness to the impeachable act he is by definition second hand.....

Right? You saw the Politico reports, right?

That leaves us with Schiff altering text transcripts this week. You saw that, right?

What is going on with Schiff?

Should he be investigated?
So where did the information that the WB presented.......and has been shown to be mostly correct, come from? Why would Schiff need a WB if he had been given the info? Please link the "recent reporting".

Who is witness to the impeachable act? You're saying in order to prove Trump did all these things we have to have someone testify who actually heard him say it? Really? If 8 people who were responsible for instituting this policy are all saying the same thing, you think there "second hand" info means nothing? Lawyer much? Why don't you call it hearsay and really show your stupidity.

No and no. Show me. Or come back with your usual excuses for not showing your work.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT