Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-12-2019, 5:58 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesos View Post
Rod, with a straight face you come on here and claim the President is anti-corruption and is dedicated to stamping it out XD

I'm guessing you didn't read the actual details of the settlement of Trump's slush fund foundation:

“Chiefly, Mr. Trump admits to personally misusing funds at the Trump Foundation, and agrees to restrictions on future charitable service.” The judge said quote "Mr. Trump breached his fiduciary duty to the Foundation” by “allowing his campaign to orchestrate the Fundraiser, allowing his campaign, instead of the Foundation, to direct distribution of the Funds, and using the Fundraiser and distribution of the Funds to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign."
We will see what it looks like after appeal. If this is the same one I am thinking of, he distributed over $1 million more than he took in. At this point, I have seen so many hit jobs by activists, I don't trust any of them any more.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-12-2019, 6:00 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
I don't think you know what a "payroll tax" is. They are for SS/Medicare and have nothing to do with funding the federal govt except in the sense that the govt borrows the money as payable on demand T bills.
Ok, however it is still money that companies and/or employees will have to pay out correct?
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-12-2019, 6:08 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Oh for sure that is a big danger, nothing suck a person's motivation to be productive more than curing their cancer or educating them.
Yes, because we all know that having socialized medicine has cured cancer or educated them. We also know that adding more tax burden to the producers increases motivation to exceed.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-12-2019, 6:14 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeshmoe View Post
So, for you, if he takes his pension, that is perfectly OK? Not me! When he gets his pension, he is saying he was actually being paid for being president. If he is Not getting a salary now, why in the world would he get a pension? I'm sure the republican elected officials have made much more money once they left office than democrats, but you only demonize the democrats, talk about blinders!
Why do you even care if he gets a pension or not? Did he perform the job? This is such a stupid argument.

Don't know if a Republican has made more money after office that democrats. We only have the last 4 or 5 to look at. The last 2 democrats came in relatively broke and now are fabulously wealthy. That is a fact. The last 2 or 3 Republicans came in rich. Don't know if Bush made more money. It is not documented that he is out on the payback circuit flying around the world at pay for speaking engagements. At this point, we know that Trump has taken a hit on his businesses and overall wealth. It is what it is. At this point it does not matter. If you were against corruption, how is it that people (presidents and congress criters) end up filthy rich off of upper middle class wages?
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-12-2019, 11:20 AM Reply   
Quote:
At this point, we know that Trump has taken a hit on his businesses and overall wealth. It is what it is. At this point it does not matter.
We don't actually "know" this. Why do you assume he has taken a hit?
Are you aware of all the emoluments suits currently? Have you read the dozens of stories of foreign and domestic governments and businesses staying in his Washington hotel for preferential treatment? Did you hear him call the Emoluments clause of the constitution Fake?
It may be one of the articles of impeachment.

Quote:
how is it that people (presidents and congress criters) end up filthy rich off of upper middle class wages?
I don't disagree. My issue is that trump is doubling down on all these things you and I are upset about. He says he is working to stop corruption, then he sends Rick Perry into Ukraine to set up donors with a big 50 year Gas deal. That is corruption, not fighting it.
https://apnews.com/6d8ae551fb884371a2a592ed85a74426
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-12-2019, 1:48 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
We don't actually "know" this. Why do you assume he has taken a hit?
Are you aware of all the emoluments suits currently? Have you read the dozens of stories of foreign and domestic governments and businesses staying in his Washington hotel for preferential treatment? Did you hear him call the Emoluments clause of the constitution Fake?
It may be one of the articles of impeachment.



I don't disagree. My issue is that trump is doubling down on all these things you and I are upset about. He says he is working to stop corruption, then he sends Rick Perry into Ukraine to set up donors with a big 50 year Gas deal. That is corruption, not fighting it.
https://apnews.com/6d8ae551fb884371a2a592ed85a74426

We will see. Preferred treatment is still an opinion. That is a label. I can say people just stayed there. Many people got preferential treatments in the Lincoln bedroom. I am not worried one bit about people staying in a hotel.

I read an Article that I believe one of your side posted about his net worth going down since becoming president. He may or may not recover. He will be fine.

Presidents send people to make all sorts of deals. We can go back to Biden. He was in charge of America's Ukraine policy and his son ended up on the board of a gas company in a country that he is not even familiar with the language. Illegal? No. Corrupt? more than likely. Did I care before all this. Never even worried my little head about it. Did I care that Trump set Perry over? Nope. Is it illegal. Nope. Did you care about Biden or Perry until you were looking for things to complain about Trump about? Nope. The American public does not care either. 99% of them could not even pick the Ukraine out on a map.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       11-12-2019, 2:32 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
We will see what it looks like after appeal. If this is the same one I am thinking of, he distributed over $1 million more than he took in. At this point, I have seen so many hit jobs by activists, I don't trust any of them any more.
Rod, wth are you talking about? Trump settled (after swearing up and down he would never settle) and signed the statement declaring he "breached his fiduciary duty to the Foundation” by “allowing his campaign to orchestrate the Fundraiser, allowing his campaign, instead of the Foundation, to direct distribution of the Funds, and using the Fundraiser and distribution of the Funds to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign." They had to dissolve the foundation and his adult children also have to go to mandatory training to learn how not to self-deal. There's no "acitivist" involved.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 5:10 AM Reply   
What's the point of these impeachment hearings? Does anybody doubt Trump asked ukraine to investigate a political opponent? People who hated him before aren't suprised and everybody who loves him don't care. The democrats should just focus on policy and trumps failure to deliver his promises, they are not going to win the election with this nonsense.

Last edited by ralph; 11-13-2019 at 5:13 AM.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 5:12 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Yes, because we all know that having socialized medicine has cured cancer or educated them.
Works in other countries, USA's ineptitude and political corruption is the problem not the system.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 5:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
What's the point of these impeachment hearings? Does anybody doubt Trump asked ukraine to investigate a political opponent? People who hated him before aren't suprised and everybody who loves him don't care. The democrats should just focus on policy and trumps failure to deliver his promises, they are not going to win the election with this nonsense.
That's just it. Dems can't win anything based on policy. The country doesn't want what they're selling. That's why they have to go the way they are.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 6:00 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesos View Post
Rod, wth are you talking about? Trump settled (after swearing up and down he would never settle) and signed the statement declaring he "breached his fiduciary duty to the Foundation” by “allowing his campaign to orchestrate the Fundraiser, allowing his campaign, instead of the Foundation, to direct distribution of the Funds, and using the Fundraiser and distribution of the Funds to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign." They had to dissolve the foundation and his adult children also have to go to mandatory training to learn how not to self-deal. There's no "acitivist" involved.
Then it is what it is. They will get the training and it will be over. He fought the fight now it is over. Sounds like it is an account/ management error. They still put out a million dollars more than they took in. Were you this concerned of the Clinton Foundation?
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 6:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
What's the point of these impeachment hearings? Does anybody doubt Trump asked ukraine to investigate a political opponent? People who hated him before aren't suprised and everybody who loves him don't care. The democrats should just focus on policy and trumps failure to deliver his promises, they are not going to win the election with this nonsense.
I agree this is not going to help defeat him.

I don't believe he asked to investigate a political rival. I just read an article the yesterday that explained exactly what I said on the board when I read those statements by the witnesses. They are all talking about what happened when influences by 3rd party talking points.

How can the democrats defeat him on policy. It really seems for the first time that a president has actually taken on the things that a president running for office said they would take on. Those were very important matters to the people who voted for him. Trade, environazi policies, taxes, regulations, illegal immigration. You clearly don't agree with those policies being taken on, but they were exactly what his voters wanted and he is trying to deliver.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 6:07 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Works in other countries, USA's ineptitude and political corruption is the problem not the system.
No it doesn't. We have socialized medicine in every state and county. It is called the county hospitals. What you are hearing are the people who want their socialized medicine to be what people are paying for private medicine. Europe and others are able to piggy back off the American private medical expenditures for research and development.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 6:29 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
I don't believe he asked to investigate a political rival.
Delusional. You only have to listen what he says, there is no reading between the lines required.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 6:31 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
Dems can't win anything based on policy.
How did they win the popular vote with the worst candidate Satan belched out?
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 6:44 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
What you are hearing are the people who want their socialized medicine to be what people are paying for private medicine.
Correct, I am hearing them, 70% of people want this.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 7:50 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Delusional. You only have to listen what he says, there is no reading between the lines required.
You apparently don't know what he said. 4 people can all see and hear the same thing and come up with 5 different versions. That is a known fact of human nature. If you want to say said investigation of Biden as getting to the bottom of the on going criminal investigation which may include Biden, then I can get behind that. You guys are adding political rival to the narrative. Biden is not his rival.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 7:51 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
How did they win the popular vote with the worst candidate Satan belched out?
California pretty much made up the total amount of popular vote difference. Good thing the whole country is counted and not just 3 states.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 7:52 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Correct, I am hearing them, 70% of people want this.
70% of who wants this? We will see at the polls. 70% of the people don't know what it will cost them either. They just like the idea but don't know what it will cost them.

The irony, the people on socialized medicine in America don't like it, but they want everyone to be on that system. How about they raise their standards vs destroying the others.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 8:39 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
You apparently don't know what he said.
And you have absolutely no idea as you previously have said you have never heard him talk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Biden is not his rival.
You keep saying this but I can't get my head around the rational, care to explain?
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 8:41 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
70% of who wants this?
70% of people polled.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 9:20 AM Reply   
Quote:
=ralph;1993226]And you have absolutely no idea as you previously have said you have never heard him talk.
I have read both of the transcripts of the witnesses provided on this post.

I am not the one who is trying to convince people he needs to be thrown out of office. It also sounds like many of the "witnesses" are turning out to never heard him talk but where relaying their concern about what they believe is politics vs what they believe the policy should be. Then going on that they heard in hallway conversation that the president was trying to do something political and expressing their concern if that was the case. All hearsay.

Of the 2 position (you or me). My position is that of neutrality on the matter aka status quo vs your position that changed needs to be taken based on these so called conversations. The burden is on your side. Technically not your side as you are simply a foreign person trying to influence our elections, however people that are like minded as you. I am the one saying, stop your political bull crap.
Quote:
You keep saying this but I can't get my head around the rational, care to explain?
Is Hunter Biden running against Trump? Nope

Was Trump the one who got him on a board pulling down $50,000 a year in a gas company in a country that he does not even understand the language or have any expertise in? Nope

Was it Trump that had the prosecutor fired that was investigating Hunter Bidens company? Nope.

Was it Trump that came up with the phony Russian Hoax that happened to use sources from Ukraine to make up the fake document that led to the Russian Hoax? Nope.

Was it Trump who was in charge of Ukraine energy policy when Hunter Biden was given that job? Nope that was Joe Biden

Bottom line Hunter Biden is not a rival of Trump. Hunter Biden would be the inquiry of corruption if they are investigating that. You guys have sat here time after time saying Obama and everyone was worried about Ukraine's corruption. Even explained that Joe Biden was able to threaten to withhold $1 billion in voted for aid. Why can't Trump be concerned by it and why can't they be investigated if America was contributing to that corruption. Especially as it turns out that an actual criminal investigation is underway and evidence has actually led them to the Ukraine.

Are you saying we should not ask Ukraine to allow our investigators to investigate a potential criminal act that happened to us from their country? Are you suggesting Hunter Biden is Trumps rival? Are you saying that if Hunter is investigated that it would actual include Joe Biden? Joe Biden is a private citizen. He does not even have the nomination of his party. His is rival of Bernie Sanders and that fake native woman who wants to spend $59 trillion to bankrupt the healthcare system. He is not even running against Trump and frankly is not the Biden that would be in position to be investigated.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 9:21 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
70% of people polled.
They did not ask me or the people in my circle. We would have said no. That is 100% of the people I know. Sounds like you may have a biased poll if you ask me.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-13-2019, 9:39 AM Reply   
Wow, what a flop & a backfire. They might as well have drug Mueller back out.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 9:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
I have read both of the transcripts of the witnesses provided on this post.

I am not the one who is trying to convince people he needs to be thrown out of office. It also sounds like many of the "witnesses" are turning out to never heard him talk but where relaying their concern about what they believe is politics vs what they believe the policy should be. Then going on that they heard in hallway conversation that the president was trying to do something political and expressing their concern if that was the case. All hearsay.

Of the 2 position (you or me). My position is that of neutrality on the matter aka status quo vs your position that changed needs to be taken based on these so called conversations. The burden is on your side. Technically not your side as you are simply a foreign person trying to influence our elections, however people that are like minded as you. I am the one saying, stop your political bull crap.


Is Hunter Biden running against Trump? Nope

Was Trump the one who got him on a board pulling down $50,000 a year in a gas company in a country that he does not even understand the language or have any expertise in? Nope

Was it Trump that had the prosecutor fired that was investigating Hunter Bidens company? Nope.

Was it Trump that came up with the phony Russian Hoax that happened to use sources from Ukraine to make up the fake document that led to the Russian Hoax? Nope.

Was it Trump who was in charge of Ukraine energy policy when Hunter Biden was given that job? Nope that was Joe Biden

Bottom line Hunter Biden is not a rival of Trump. Hunter Biden would be the inquiry of corruption if they are investigating that. You guys have sat here time after time saying Obama and everyone was worried about Ukraine's corruption. Even explained that Joe Biden was able to threaten to withhold $1 billion in voted for aid. Why can't Trump be concerned by it and why can't they be investigated if America was contributing to that corruption. Especially as it turns out that an actual criminal investigation is underway and evidence has actually led them to the Ukraine.

Are you saying we should not ask Ukraine to allow our investigators to investigate a potential criminal act that happened to us from their country? Are you suggesting Hunter Biden is Trumps rival? Are you saying that if Hunter is investigated that it would actual include Joe Biden? Joe Biden is a private citizen. He does not even have the nomination of his party. His is rival of Bernie Sanders and that fake native woman who wants to spend $59 trillion to bankrupt the healthcare system. He is not even running against Trump and frankly is not the Biden that would be in position to be investigated.

There are right ways of doing things and wrong ways to do things. You need money, go to a bank and make a withdrawal, that's the right way. Go into a bank with a note saying give me the money in this bag, that's the wrong way. If trump was concerned with Corruption in Ukraine, he calls his AG and asks them to investigate. That's the right way. If you extort the new president of a country dependent on US assistance, that's the wrong way. Trump was only interested in dirty laundry of a political opponent so he had no choice but go the wrong route. If you don't understand trumps legal options to investigate corruption you should research it, right now you are just writing error filled lunacy and in no way is that "neutrality".
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 10:03 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
How did they win the popular vote with the worst candidate Satan belched out?
That's not what wins the prez election, you dolt! Go ahead and break your hands as you keep pounding on that brick wall of tough luck for liberals. TDS clearly is a world-wide disease. #winning!
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 10:04 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
Wow, what a flop & a backfire. They might as well have drug Mueller back out.
HAHA! No kidding! I love it.
Old     (dougr)      Join Date: Dec 2009       11-13-2019, 10:04 AM Reply   
my neighbors cousins best friends girlfriends dog walker (btw, loves german shepards) heard a call across the table, at dinner, with 6 other people talking, about a thing that was related to another thing that said that he heard that she heard her neighbor heard something about it too. So we decided to kill the dog!

Sounds like this!
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 10:26 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
That's not what wins the prez election, you dolt!!
Didn't say it was. Just pointing out even with a terrible candidate the dems almost won the last election.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 10:27 AM Reply   
Its incredible, Trump says he isn't watching his impeachment yet somehow manages to tweet a dozen times about it. He and that Guiliani guy....Genius I tell you.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 10:35 AM Reply   
How long until Trump denies he knows who Giuliani is?
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 10:35 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougr View Post
my neighbors cousins best friends girlfriends dog walker (btw, loves german shepards) heard a call across the table, at dinner, with 6 other people talking, about a thing that was related to another thing that said that he heard that she heard her neighbor heard something about it too. So we decided to kill the dog!

Sounds like this!
Weird, LawandCrime called it Credible, compelling and devastating.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...nvestigations/
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 11:12 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
They did not ask me or the people in my circle. We would have said no. That is 100% of the people I know. Sounds like you may have a biased poll if you ask me.
You don't really understand how polls work huh?
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 11:19 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
You don't really understand how polls work huh?
Hey man, you don't understand, his position is one of neutrality.

And for mark, cause trump is playing 4D chess on all us idiots. Great lawyers have confirmed his call is perfect.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/87829...s-commentators
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 11:53 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
There are right ways of doing things and wrong ways to do things. You need money, go to a bank and make a withdrawal, that's the right way. Go into a bank with a note saying give me the money in this bag, that's the wrong way. If trump was concerned with Corruption in Ukraine, he calls his AG and asks them to investigate. That's the right way. If you extort the new president of a country dependent on US assistance, that's the wrong way. Trump was only interested in dirty laundry of a political opponent so he had no choice but go the wrong route. If you don't understand trumps legal options to investigate corruption you should research it, right now you are just writing error filled lunacy and in no way is that "neutrality".
Actually the correct was followed. The AG tells the president that he needs to go to a country to continue an investigation (this case the Ukraine). AG actually works for the President by definition. The President then calls up the President/ Prime Minister of the country requested by the AG to take the investigation into. Our President then asks their leader about doing this and ask their leader to introduce their people to our people. That is the way that is done. It was done with several countries by Trump. I believe the Australians commented on this very thing. That is the right way.

What is the wrong way is a bunch of people hearing from democrats in the hallways saying that the President is doing such and such and convincing the other people that must have been what the conversation was about then dragging them in and asking them how those people feel about the president doing these things. Not that they heard the conversation but that they were concerned that the president is bringing politics into what they believe the policy should be. Even though the President IS the policy. All circular hearsay.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 11:56 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Didn't say it was. Just pointing out even with a terrible candidate the dems almost won the last election.
All the big cities will vote democrat no matter who is the candidate. That has no bearing on Trump or anyone else. That is just the facts. You may have had many others motivated by the potential to vote in the first woman president like many who voted for Obama wanted to vote in the first black president. It increases turn out and captures the A-political who don't believe in R's and D's.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 11:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
You don't really understand how polls work huh?
Sure. Those were the things that all said Hillary would win. Those polls?
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 11:59 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Hey man, you don't understand, his position is one of neutrality.

And for mark, cause trump is playing 4D chess on all us idiots. Great lawyers have confirmed his call is perfect.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/87829...s-commentators
come back to us in January or February when he is still your president. Come back again in 2024 when Trump is getting ready to retire from this.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 12:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Its incredible, Trump says he isn't watching his impeachment yet somehow manages to tweet a dozen times about it. He and that Guiliani guy....Genius I tell you.
OH no. Maybe we can get 67 more posts on this topic alone and get an impeachment inquiry that Trump was not truthful to the democrats that he was not watching the impeachment hearings.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-13-2019, 12:14 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Actually the correct was followed. The AG tells the president that he needs to go to a country to continue an investigation (this case the Ukraine). AG actually works for the President by definition. The President then calls up the President/ Prime Minister of the country requested by the AG to take the investigation into. Our President then asks their leader about doing this and ask their leader to introduce their people to our people. That is the way that is done. It was done with several countries by Trump. I believe the Australians commented on this very thing. That is the right way.

What is the wrong way is a bunch of people hearing from democrats in the hallways saying that the President is doing such and such and convincing the other people that must have been what the conversation was about then dragging them in and asking them how those people feel about the president doing these things. Not that they heard the conversation but that they were concerned that the president is bringing politics into what they believe the policy should be. Even though the President IS the policy. All circular hearsay.
Interesting spin. Assume it's true. Barr's testimony corroborating that would be very helpful. Should we expect that he'll testify and put it to bed?

Secondly the fact that the President's chosen political appointees are the ones out spreading the misinformation (Sondland, Taylor), how does that reflect on the President's leadership? I get what you are laying down that the buck ultimately stops with the president and he sets policy. But if he flips back and forth and back and forth on a daily basis and doesn't effectively communicate policy to those in the field who are charged with implementing policy, is he a good leader??
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 12:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Actually the correct was followed. The AG tells the president that he needs to go to a country to continue an investigation (this case the Ukraine). AG actually works for the President by definition. The President then calls up the President/ Prime Minister of the country requested by the AG to take the investigation into. Our President then asks their leader about doing this and ask their leader to introduce their people to our people. That is the way that is done. It was done with several countries by Trump. I believe the Australians commented on this very thing. That is the right way.

What is the wrong way is a bunch of people hearing from democrats in the hallways saying that the President is doing such and such and convincing the other people that must have been what the conversation was about then dragging them in and asking them how those people feel about the president doing these things. Not that they heard the conversation but that they were concerned that the president is bringing politics into what they believe the policy should be. Even though the President IS the policy. All circular hearsay.
You didn't get anything right. AG represents the USA. "by definition".
https://www.justice.gov/ag/about-office


This is no hallway talk impeachment. The witnesses had to fly back from Ukraine for the Impeachment. This is lifelong professionals who know right from wrong. They arnt political, they just want to do what is right for US foreign interests. Who exactly are they "convincing" of anything? The reason smart people hire professionals is because they know their job. That is why their "opinion" out ranks ours. The presidents* policy did not jive with actual US Foreign Policy, that's why they spoke up. your circular hearsay theory was blown up today along with most of the GOP conspiracy theories.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 12:19 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Sure. Those were the things that all said Hillary would win the popular vote. Those polls?
There, fixed it for you. Yes those ones.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 12:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
There, fixed it for you. Yes those ones.
Not fixed. No one cares about the popular vote when trying to elect a President. It is about who is going to win the presidential race. A race that is for Elector College victory. Unfixed.......
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-13-2019, 12:28 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Not fixed. No one cares about the popular vote when trying to elect a President. It is about who is going to win the presidential race. A race that is for Elector College victory. Unfixed.......
Lol, your point was the polls were inaccurate and my point was the polls were right but asked the wrong question. So you fire back with a completely unrelated point. Typical.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 12:31 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
Interesting spin. Assume it's true. Barr's testimony corroborating that would be very helpful. Should we expect that he'll testify and put it to bed?

Secondly the fact that the President's chosen political appointees are the ones out spreading the misinformation (Sondland, Taylor), how does that reflect on the President's leadership? I get what you are laying down that the buck ultimately stops with the president and he sets policy. But if he flips back and forth and back and forth on a daily basis and doesn't effectively communicate policy to those in the field who are charged with implementing policy, is he a good leader??
Funny, Taylor just admitted under oath that he has never spoke to Trump and that he was not on the phone call. Met with the Ukraine president 3 times and this topic of what he supposedly was required to do to get the aid never came up. That section is at about 5:45 of the interview. Watch the whole thing. It is a real riot.

Rep. Jim Jordan Roasts 'Star Witness' Amb. Taylor

https://www.newsmax.com/headline/wil.../13/id/941498/

https://youtu.be/FJcv2pQ1PsU
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 12:37 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Lol, your point was the polls were inaccurate and my point was the polls were right but asked the wrong question. So you fire back with a completely unrelated point. Typical.
Please. The polls are always about who is going to win the presidential race. I have yet to ever hear that a poll about who is going to win the presidential race is parced by who do you think is more popular but who do you think will really win. I think you like revisionist history. The pollsters based on their information project a winner. That winner was Clinton. That is why they are paid pollsters.

Maybe, by your logic, your poll is asking the wrong question.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 12:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
You didn't get anything right. AG represents the USA. "by definition".
https://www.justice.gov/ag/about-office


This is no hallway talk impeachment. The witnesses had to fly back from Ukraine for the Impeachment. This is lifelong professionals who know right from wrong. They arnt political, they just want to do what is right for US foreign interests. Who exactly are they "convincing" of anything? The reason smart people hire professionals is because they know their job. That is why their "opinion" out ranks ours. The presidents* policy did not jive with actual US Foreign Policy, that's why they spoke up. your circular hearsay theory was blown up today along with most of the GOP conspiracy theories.
No one said anything about hallway talk about impeachment. Hallway talk about the telephone call and what was asked. Turns out your star witness has never heard the call, talked to Trump and got his information second hand from another person who was not on the call. Taylor talked to the Ukraine President 3 different times and the subject of the Ukraine meeting Trump's requirements being fulfilled for releasing aid never came up. It could not come up because their were no requirements. This is all a fabrication.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-13-2019, 12:52 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
HAHA! No kidding! I love it.
You know your case is **** when a prosecutors opening witnesses are two guys with no direct knowledge but heard a rumor. then a drag queen shows up! What a flipping clown show the left has become.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 12:55 PM Reply   
You appear to place a lot on "the call". Problem is "the call" is just part of the evidence against the grifter. Did anyone ever state Taylor was on the call? Then why does it matter? Its the grifter sending Guiliani, Sondlund, Perry, Volker to do your dirty work. They had to oust the current Ukraine ambassador thru tactics because she would not allow trumps illegit activity. Sondland admitted that the assistance and WH meeting were contingent on publicly stating they were opening investigations. Taylor verified it. Volker confirmed it, Mulvaney confirmed it. How many more do you need because there ARE more that have confirmed this fact. Gym Jordan is a nutcase. If you think Taylor is the "Star" witness...you are once again under informed.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 1:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
You know your case is **** when a prosecutors opening witnesses are two guys with no direct knowledge but heard a rumor. then a drag queen shows up! What a flipping clown show the left has become.

Your breakdown of todays Impeachment is lacking.

You know your case is **** when …
When the facts are on your side, pound the Facts
When the law is on your side, pound the law
When neither facts nor law are on your side, pound the table.
Gym Jordon
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 1:07 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
Interesting spin. Assume it's true. Barr's testimony corroborating that would be very helpful. Should we expect that he'll testify and put it to bed?

Secondly the fact that the President's chosen political appointees are the ones out spreading the misinformation (Sondland, Taylor), how does that reflect on the President's leadership? I get what you are laying down that the buck ultimately stops with the president and he sets policy. But if he flips back and forth and back and forth on a daily basis and doesn't effectively communicate policy to those in the field who are charged with implementing policy, is he a good leader??
While it seems to matter to 95, it does not matter to the proceedings what so ever. Trump is in charge of US foreign policy. See above post about the constitutional authority of the President.

Depends on what he is reacting too. I would say that if a leader changes course faster than people can react it is not an effect leadership style. However I have worked under a couple people that absolutely believe in leading by chaos. There are actually books written on the subject and it is a leadership style. I do not like that style, however it is a style and is effective under some conditions. It makes people have to be prepared and ready for any situation I guess, but it is a style.

Taylor served by democrats and republicans. Trumps administration appointed Taylor. The president does not get involved in every single affair. Taylor himself says he never met Trump in the testamony.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 1:21 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
You appear to place a lot on "the call". Problem is "the call" is just part of the evidence against the grifter. Did anyone ever state Taylor was on the call? Then why does it matter? Its the grifter sending Guiliani, Sondlund, Perry, Volker to do your dirty work. They had to oust the current Ukraine ambassador thru tactics because she would not allow trumps illegit activity. Sondland admitted that the assistance and WH meeting were contingent on publicly stating they were opening investigations. Taylor verified it. Volker confirmed it, Mulvaney confirmed it. How many more do you need because there ARE more that have confirmed this fact. Gym Jordan is a nutcase. If you think Taylor is the "Star" witness...you are once again under informed.
Yep. He is a nutcase. he got your witness to admit that he never heard the conversation. Got him to admit that he got his "clear" information from Sondlund. Then proceeded to submit to record Sondlund's extremely confusing clarification that really was not a clarification.

Funny, you keep saying money was contingent on the Ukraine do these investigation, yet not a single thing that was allegedly requested in fact did not happen at all. Nor was it ever brought up in any meeting (3 times with Taylor). Turns out that Trump as admitted to by the Ukrainians, that his level of aid is actually greater in their war against Russia than that of Obama.

Yep. That devil Trump. This is whole hoax by the democras is getting worse and worse.
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 1:32 PM Reply   
Schiff's witness Taylor on the stand:

Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-13-2019, 1:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Yep. He is a nutcase. he got your witness to admit that he never heard the conversation. Got him to admit that he got his "clear" information from Sondlund. Then proceeded to submit to record Sondlund's extremely confusing clarification that really was not a clarification.

Funny, you keep saying money was contingent on the Ukraine do these investigation, yet not a single thing that was allegedly requested in fact did not happen at all. Nor was it ever brought up in any meeting (3 times with Taylor). Turns out that Trump as admitted to by the Ukrainians, that his level of aid is actually greater in their war against Russia than that of Obama.

Yep. That devil Trump. This is whole hoax by the democras is getting worse and worse.
Where was it opined he was on the call? Did Schiff lie and say he was on the call? That conniving bastard. No one ever said he was on the call, so why is "admitting" it anything? Sondlund will be testifying, im sure we will be clear on the contingency agreement when he is on the stand. Will that clear it up for you?
Everyone was clear the assistance was tied to Burisma/Biden/Investigations. It has been repeated by about 10 of the witnesses. The fact there were no investigation and the assistance was eventually released is, as the say in court, irrelevant. You do not need to be a successful at robbing a bank to be convicted of bank robbery. Understand?
If this is such a simple open and close case, why is trump keeping all his people away from testifying? Shouldn't they show up with all their facts and just shut down those libbys? Why are all these people disobeying subpoenas?" Why is trump hiding all the experts?
Old     (DeltaHoosier)      Join Date: Mar 2018       11-13-2019, 1:56 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Where was it opined he was on the call? Did Schiff lie and say he was on the call? That conniving bastard. No one ever said he was on the call, so why is "admitting" it anything? Sondlund will be testifying, im sure we will be clear on the contingency agreement when he is on the stand. Will that clear it up for you?
Everyone was clear the assistance was tied to Burisma/Biden/Investigations. It has been repeated by about 10 of the witnesses. The fact there were no investigation and the assistance was eventually released is, as the say in court, irrelevant. You do not need to be a successful at robbing a bank to be convicted of bank robbery. Understand?
If this is such a simple open and close case, why is trump keeping all his people away from testifying? Shouldn't they show up with all their facts and just shut down those libbys? Why are all these people disobeying subpoenas?" Why is trump hiding all the experts?
Which none were on the call correct? The Victims (Ukraine) have said that the aid was not contengent on the investigations. There were ZERO actions that were performed in regards to Trumps alleged requirements to get the aid. The only people who believe that any of this was true, with no victim and no actions made, are the democrats.

Turns out by what the Ukraines have actually have said is that the aid in the name of anti tank weapons supplied by Trump is actually useful to their war compared to the blankets that Obama sent. Turns out Obama would not give them actual weapons that could help in their war against Russia. Imagine that. After all your bitching, Trump is actually giving Ukraine weapons that can kill Russians. Huh. I guess I don't know who to believe now. The Ukraines and their perspective of the aid, or yours?

None of these people were actual witnesses. In order to be a witness, you actually have had to witness something. Especially something you are being brought in to testify to congress for. So far, we have people saying that they heard something from another person, then at best describing on what they believe their policy difference may have been. This sounds like a high school rumor mill.

Dude, I certainly hope you are not a jury of someone's peers. They would be in serious trouble.

Last edited by DeltaHoosier; 11-13-2019 at 1:59 PM.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-13-2019, 3:17 PM Reply   
Taylor: "Mr chairman, what I I I I can do for you today, is tell you what I heard from other people"

I'll be back when 95s got some hard evidence he can share with Schiff

in mean time LOL, the dems are clowns & couldn't look more idiotic at this point
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-13-2019, 3:47 PM Reply   
The pubes should read rep speed wagons lyrics tomorrow. Heard it from friend a who, heard it from a friend who, heard from another you’ve been messing around.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-13-2019, 3:49 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier View Post
Yep. He is a nutcase. he got your witness to admit that he never heard the conversation. Got him to admit that he got his "clear" information from Sondlund. Then proceeded to submit to record Sondlund's extremely confusing clarification that really was not a clarification.

Funny, you keep saying money was contingent on the Ukraine do these investigation, yet not a single thing that was allegedly requested in fact did not happen at all. Nor was it ever brought up in any meeting (3 times with Taylor). Turns out that Trump as admitted to by the Ukrainians, that his level of aid is actually greater in their war against Russia than that of Obama.

Yep. That devil Trump. This is whole hoax by the democras is getting worse and worse.
Wait till they fail and the lefty circular firing squad really takes off. And when Barr strikes? Their collective heads are going to explode
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 7:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougr View Post
my neighbors cousins best friends girlfriends dog walker (btw, loves german shepards) heard a call across the table, at dinner, with 6 other people talking, about a thing that was related to another thing that said that he heard that she heard her neighbor heard something about it too. So we decided to kill the dog!

Sounds like this!
Yep. Or this. See :28

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VZXXuUEUGO0
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 7:34 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Hey man, you don't understand, his position is one of neutrality.

And for mark, cause trump is playing 4D chess on all us idiots. Great lawyers have confirmed his call is perfect.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/87829...s-commentators
I’ll trust what Greg Jarret or Mark (great name) Levin think way before any lawyer on your CNN parrot cage says.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-13-2019, 7:38 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Didn't say it was. Just pointing out even with a terrible candidate the dems almost won the last election.
Derp! You normally post mildly amusing things here. Not your best day. Get some sleep.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-14-2019, 12:04 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
I’ll trust what Greg Jarret or Mark (great name) Levin think way before any lawyer on your CNN parrot cage says.
I need to go find the clip, even CNN called it a circus and a major problem for the dems that none one of their "witnesses" ever even met Trump. Only the low IQ democrats are hanging on for the ride now, the rest know it's a farce they just hate Trump so they're on board the crazy train. Next stop, going crazy when the arrests of the hoaxsters begins
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 3:42 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
I need to go find the clip, even CNN called it a circus and a major problem for the dems that none one of their "witnesses" ever even met Trump. Only the low IQ democrats are hanging on for the ride now, the rest know it's a farce they just hate Trump so they're on board the crazy train. Next stop, going crazy when the arrests of the hoaxsters begins
You know why that is though, right? Pretty sure the dems would love to have Bolton, Mulvaney, and Pompeo sit down to testify. They aren't there because the President is forbidding them from testifying. Can't have it both ways -- complaining about "hearsay" witnesses and preventing witnesses with direct knowledge of what the president said from testifying.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 3:46 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
The pubes should read rep speed wagons lyrics tomorrow. Heard it from friend a who, heard it from a friend who, heard from another you’ve been messing around.
I don't think that song means what you think it does. Unless what you are trying to say is that where there's enough smoke there's bound to be a fire? But I don't see how that would help the republicans.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-14-2019, 3:47 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
You know why that is though, right? Pretty sure the dems would love to have Bolton, Mulvaney, and Pompeo sit down to testify. They aren't there because the President is forbidding them from testifying. Can't have it both ways -- complaining about "hearsay" witnesses and preventing witnesses with direct knowledge of what the president said from testifying.
Then perhaps your weak ass party shouldn't have built their tower of Pisa on such a week foundation. When this moves to the senate, if it ever does, lots of people are going to testify including all the names you mentioned. And then pubes will have their rights to bring in the criminals. It isn't going to get that far because there is no case & the dimwits running this circus are terrified of what will come out. No matter how much you kick & scream.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-14-2019, 3:49 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
I don't think that song means what you think it does. Unless what you are trying to say is that where there's enough smoke there's bound to be a fire? But I don't see how that would help the republicans.
I see humor is lost on the stick you have wedged up your a**
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-14-2019, 5:14 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
I don't think that song means what you think it does. Unless what you are trying to say is that where there's enough smoke there's bound to be a fire? But I don't see how that would help the republicans.
Are you really that obtuse? You don't get that it's a reference to the multiple layers of people the "story" goes through? Sheesh!
Old     (skiboarder)      Join Date: Oct 2006       11-14-2019, 6:13 AM Reply   
You guys are beyond ridiculous. Song lyrics...

Seriously though, You have a lot of respected diplomats saying their job in Ukraine is being undermined by the efforts of Sondland and Giuliani. Giuliani is Trumps private lawyer and Sondland is the ambassador to the EU (Ukraine is not an EU country). And on a phone call you have the President (per the WH supplied transcript) directing the president of Ukraine to get with Giuliani and Sondland about a favor/investigation. There is a stack of evidence showing that what he was supposed to get with them about was a public announcement of an investigation into the Bidens. According to Ukraine and the official diplomats in Ukraine, the case with Burisma (never about biden) is closed. Additionally, The diplomats working in Ukraine said that the investigation does not align with any of the US's diplomatic objectives. So, What purpose did it serve??

Hearsay is being thrown around, but this is not hearsay evidence. Trump is not on trial over a phone call. The phone call is just evidence that he had at least attempted to abuse his powers (up for dispute) for domestic political gain. Taylor and Kent discussed first-hand experiences as the rightful diplomats in Ukraine. Even when pressed about the phone call, they faded because they were not on the call. But Vidman was and their stories buttress together. That is hard to ignore.

Last, Trump/Guliani/Bolton/Pampeo/Sondland own most of the first hand information (Like most people accused of misconduct), but the WH has gagged them. Why? They have attacked the people, the rules, etc, but they refuse to attack the evidence. Why?

I am not a fan of Trump. I don't like him as a person or a leader. But I am not a democrat by a long shot. After two years, I am entitled to feel that way. The good he has done for the country is constantly being undermined by Trump himself. The democrats are just capitalizing on his arrogance/stupidity.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 6:24 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
Are you really that obtuse? You don't get that it's a reference to the multiple layers of people the "story" goes through? Sheesh!
I've only heard the single on the radio. Did the album cut have a "but it was all hearsay and I still love you gurl" chorus at the end?
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 6:34 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiboarder View Post
Last, Trump/Guliani/Bolton/Pampeo/Sondland own most of the first hand information (Like most people accused of misconduct), but the WH has gagged them. Why? They have attacked the people, the rules, etc, but they refuse to attack the evidence. Why?
Because he is not ashamed, and his core supporters don't demand addressing the evidence head on.
In the age of meme's and retweets, Trump has proven that denying the evidence, preventing those with knowledge from testifying and calling people names is enough for most of his supporters..

Since I've been old enough to vote, every election has been "the most important one yet." But man will 2020 be a gut check on where the electorate is going.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-14-2019, 6:39 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
I've only heard the single on the radio. Did the album cut have a "but it was all hearsay and I still love you gurl" chorus at the end?
you're just loving Trumps bedrooms eyes & hurt he doesn't want you around.
Old     (wombat2wombat)      Join Date: Sep 2018       11-14-2019, 6:42 AM Reply   
All the left would have to do to sink Trump is charge the Bidens then use the pretext to impeach Trump. But they can't. Because it would show the country nothing illegal happened except abusing their positions.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 7:17 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2wombat View Post
you're just loving Trumps bedrooms eyes & hurt he doesn't want you around.
;-)
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-14-2019, 7:46 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiboarder View Post
You guys are beyond ridiculous. Song lyrics...

Seriously though, You have a lot of respected diplomats saying their job in Ukraine is being undermined by the efforts of Sondland and Giuliani. Giuliani is Trumps private lawyer and Sondland is the ambassador to the EU (Ukraine is not an EU country). And on a phone call you have the President (per the WH supplied transcript) directing the president of Ukraine to get with Giuliani and Sondland about a favor/investigation. There is a stack of evidence showing that what he was supposed to get with them about was a public announcement of an investigation into the Bidens. According to Ukraine and the official diplomats in Ukraine, the case with Burisma (never about biden) is closed. Additionally, The diplomats working in Ukraine said that the investigation does not align with any of the US's diplomatic objectives. So, What purpose did it serve??

Hearsay is being thrown around, but this is not hearsay evidence. Trump is not on trial over a phone call. The phone call is just evidence that he had at least attempted to abuse his powers (up for dispute) for domestic political gain. Taylor and Kent discussed first-hand experiences as the rightful diplomats in Ukraine. Even when pressed about the phone call, they faded because they were not on the call. But Vidman was and their stories buttress together. That is hard to ignore.

Last, Trump/Guliani/Bolton/Pampeo/Sondland own most of the first hand information (Like most people accused of misconduct), but the WH has gagged them. Why? They have attacked the people, the rules, etc, but they refuse to attack the evidence. Why?

I am not a fan of Trump. I don't like him as a person or a leader. But I am not a democrat by a long shot. After two years, I am entitled to feel that way. The good he has done for the country is constantly being undermined by Trump himself. The democrats are just capitalizing on his arrogance/stupidity.
Please, you make way too much sense and trump admirers have difficulty with that. What will they say when the "herd it from a friend" guy is on the stand? When Sondlund is on the stand. That guy already has been proved to have lied twice. He isn't getting too many more chances to spill the truth. Taylor said trump was personally on the call with Sondland, Presidents don't call EU ambassadors for updates on Ukraine matters. When does trump come to testify about his perfect call? Its day one, and this is already a fun ride. Trumps escalator heading down.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       11-14-2019, 8:07 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95sn View Post
Please, you make way too much sense and trump admirers have difficulty with that. What will they say when the "herd it from a friend" guy is on the stand? When Sondlund is on the stand. That guy already has been proved to have lied twice. He isn't getting too many more chances to spill the truth. Taylor said trump was personally on the call with Sondland, Presidents don't call EU ambassadors for updates on Ukraine matters. When does trump come to testify about his perfect call? Its day one, and this is already a fun ride. Trumps escalator heading down.
The polls in November will be the ultimate F-you to you libtards. Keep wasting time on your checkers game. Fools.
Old     (dougr)      Join Date: Dec 2009       11-14-2019, 8:47 AM Reply   
this is stupidity, total waste of time, Biden will drop out before summer and all the noise will go away, Then Burisma investigations will continue, the whistleblowers name will come out, he will be partisan, everyone will see. Ukraine will continue to be as corrupt as it has been for 50 years. etc etc

Last edited by dougr; 11-14-2019 at 8:53 AM.
Old     (skiboarder)      Join Date: Oct 2006       11-14-2019, 8:49 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj View Post
The polls in November will be the ultimate F-you to you libtards. Keep wasting time on your checkers game. Fools.
Name calling nonsense. You are just following the lead of our leader.

You are right. Trump is probably going to win in 2020. Nixon was re-elected during the watergate investigation. Politics isn't some kind of game, it is our lives and livelihoods. As a person who has mostly voted Republican, I believe that if the republicans had even a shred of integrity left, they would run a good man/woman vs Trump. Or at least take the trial heading toward the senate seriously.

Before you start, I don't care for any of the Democrats either. Deflection is such BS.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 9:06 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougr View Post
this is stupidity, total waste of time, Biden will drop out before summer and all the noise will go away, Then Burisma investigations will continue, the whistleblowers name will come out, he will be partisan, everyone will see. Ukraine will continue to be as corrupt as it has been for 50 years. etc etc
Can somebody explain the "partisan whistleblower" argument to me? Or maybe explain which of the facts asserted by the whistleblower have not borne out in public testimony or released transcripts?

In what context would a whistleblower be nonpartisan?

Doug you and I don't agree on much politically, but I'd sure hope that I'd believe you enough if you told me my house was on fire that at least I'd go take a look, rather than just dismissing it as partisan noise. And if I found a fire, I don't think I'd blow it off as fake news because you and I disagree politically.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-14-2019, 9:12 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiboarder View Post
Nixon was re-elected during the watergate investigation.
Kinda, but his role in the coverup didn't really come to light until well after he was re-elected, and the impeachment inquiry certainly didn't start until after he was sworn in.

Here, trump would be reelected after an impeachment inquiry, and after all of his improprieties have been laid bare before the American people.
Old     (dougr)      Join Date: Dec 2009       11-14-2019, 9:44 AM Reply   
Its simple really, If your house was on fire, there would be smoke and flames and heat and we would see it, feel it and be able to prove it as fire. If you and I disliked each other, to the extent that you felt my intentions were to hurt you or upset your day or affect you in some way etc etc you may not believe me!
there is no fire!
there is politics at play! Employees at the white house, either agree or disagree with Trump. Gathering from all the leaking and games over the last 3 years, most do not like him or his Agenda and want to stop it. Those who do like it or agree with his actions find no issue with his agenda.

people cry wolf all the time, we see it everyday, especially when they oppose the other party.

with that being said, Those who are opposed, see an opportunity to strike at this moment. We all know that there is politics in all agenda's concerning foreign affairs. The actual term foreign affairs is political in nature. The whistleblower (or leaker or whatever you want to call him) is a pawn in this sham. He is being manipulated to help the Dem agenda. He was not on the call, got info second hand, will be exposed in due time and wants to help the Dem agenda or he would not have got involved.

Example, my neighbor said he heard our other neighbor stole money out of the church donation box. i would not go to the church and make a statement that i did not see, my neighbor was the second party to hear it, he did not go to the church and make a statement, the only person that has proof is the person who saw it happen. I would not go to the police and make a statement because my input would not be reliable. only if i had an agenda against that person, a hate for them etc etc would someone go to that extent to go that far. The second hand people did not "blow the whistle" they found some tool box to do it for them, or carry the allegations.
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us