Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Impeachment Hearings Begin...
#41
How do you like your covfefe...? I mean coffee. Now is it coffee or cofer, and if it's the latter,
then do you like your cup of Joe -or Cofer, Black?
tinywondering
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#42
(11-23-2019, 01:45 PM)BIAD Wrote: How do you like your covfefe...? I mean coffee. Now is it coffee or cofer, and if it's the latter,
then do you like your cup of Joe -or Cofer, Black?
tinywondering

Covfefe means, "I will stand up".  Google and Wikipedia wiped it off the internet to make President Trump look stupid.

True story!   smallnotamused
Reply
#43
(11-23-2019, 06:54 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote:
(11-23-2019, 01:45 PM)BIAD Wrote: How do you like your covfefe...? I mean coffee. Now is it coffee or cofer, and if it's the latter,
then do you like your cup of Joe -or Cofer, Black?
tinywondering

Covfefe means, "I will stand up".  Google and Wikipedia wiped it off the internet to make President Trump look stupid.

True story!   smallnotamused

Yep...! So I heard. But I was trying to be enigmatic by vaguely hinting at the name 'Joseph Cofer Black'!!!!
(Re Burisma Director's Board & ex-CIA) Link.
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#44
(11-23-2019, 07:03 PM)BIAD Wrote:
(11-23-2019, 06:54 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote:
(11-23-2019, 01:45 PM)BIAD Wrote: How do you like your covfefe...? I mean coffee. Now is it coffee or cofer, and if it's the latter,
then do you like your cup of Joe -or Cofer, Black?
tinywondering

Covfefe means, "I will stand up".  Google and Wikipedia wiped it off the internet to make President Trump look stupid.

True story!   smallnotamused

Yep...! So I heard. But I was trying to be enigmatic by vaguely hinting at the name 'Joseph Cofer Black'!!!!
(Re Burisma Director's Board & ex-CIA) Link.

Oh, Sorry!   Went right over my head. Probably because this post was first on the page and I had no reference to look back on.


mediumfacepalm
Reply
#45
(11-23-2019, 07:10 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: Oh, Sorry!   Went right over my head. Probably because this post was first on the page
and I had no reference to look back on.


mediumfacepalm

No problems... I was trying to be amusing as well!!
*Note to self: you are not amusing*

tinybiggrin
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#46
[Image: gary_varvel_gary_varvel_for_nov_17_2019_5_.jpg] They are absolute Children.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#47
Here ya go - 9 hours of a shit show.  I can't believe how unfair this hearing is.
Wait... Yes, I can. It's how the democrats do things because it's the only way they can win.
Bullies on the playground, so to speak.




Reply
#48
Demos play dirty ball in politics; always have, always will. It's just who they are, only now they are being exposed.

BREAKING: Dems Caught OMITTING Pro-Trump Evidence From New Impeachment Transcript

Quote:On Saturday, the Democratic lead House Intelligence Committee released parts of the transcript of National Security Council official Tim Morrison and purposely left out key information to continue their anti-Trump witch hunt.

The House Democrats purposely waited until Saturday to release the transcript because they knew it made President Trump look good and even when they did release it, they purposely left out key information.

Check out what Breitbart reported:
Quote:First, the committee withheld the transcript since October 31, only releasing it after the first public hearings began last week. Morrison’s testimony was rumored to be very good for President Donald Trump’s defense — Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) had described Democrats in the room during the closed-door hearing as “sucking lemons” — and Republicans would have made good use of it, had they had the transcript available. But it was not provided.

In the interim, Democrats had sole possession of the document. Schiff does not allow copies of the transcripts to be released to Republicans, either in paper or electronic form. If they want to read transcripts, they must do so one by one, in the presence of a Democrat committee staffer. Not only is that rule humiliating, but it also allows Democrats to control the flow of information and to prepare their public arguments with no fear of timely Republican rebuttal.

In the Morrison case, Democrats released “key excerpts” that highlighted the few facts in his testimony that, they believe, help push the case for impeachment. Chief among these is that Morrison confirmed that he heard U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland claim that he told a Ukrainian official, in a private “sidebar” meeting, that aid would be released if the Ukrainian prosecutor general would publicly announce an investigation into Burisma.

But that is just hearsay evidence, as is Morisson’s confirmation of Charge d’affairs William Taylor’s testimony (repeated in public last week) that Sondland, after speaking to President Trump, “there was no quid pro quo, but President Zelensky must announce the opening of the investigations and he should want to do it.”

Schiff purposely left out key quotes from Morrison that made President Trump look good.

“I was not concerned that anything illegal was discussed” Morrison said while talking about the July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This quote doesn't even show up in the Democrats' “key excerpts” document.

Check out the transcript below:
Quote:THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. I just wanted to follow up a bit on this.
One of the concerns, and there may be an overlap between the first two concerns you mentioned about the caII, and if the call became public. First, you said you were concerned how it would play out in Washington’s polarized environment and, second, how a leak would affect bipartisan support for our Ukrainian partners.
Were those concerns related to the fact that the President asked his Ukrainian counterpart to look into on investigate the Bidens?

MR. MORRISON: No, not specifically.

THE CHAIRMAN: So you didn’t think that the President of the United States asking his counterpart to conduct an investigation into a potential opponent in the 2020 election might influence bipartisan support in Congress?

MR. MORRISON: No.

THE CHAIRMAN: And you weren’t concerned that the President bringing up one of his political opponents in the Presidential election and asking a favor with respect to the DNC server or 2016 theory, you weren’t concerned that those things would cause people to believe that the President was asking his counterpart to conduct an investigation that might influence his reelection campaign?

MR. MORRISON: No.

THE CHAIRMAN: That never occurred to you?

MR. MORRISON: No.

THE CHAIRMAN: Did you recognize during the — as you listened to the call that if Ukraine were to conduct these investigations, that it would inure to the President’s political interests?

MR. MORRISON: No.

Check out some more fact highlighted by Breitbart:
Quote:
  • Morrison contradicted Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the Democrats’ star witness in the closed-door hearings, who reported to Morrison directly. Morrison testified that while he admired his subordinate’s patriotism, he was irritated that Vindman failed to report concerns about the call directly to him. He said Vindman never raised concerns that something illegal had happened. He also said he accepted all of Vindman’s proposed edits to the call record, contrary to Vindman’s testimony. And while he did not think that Vindman was a leaker, he testified: “I had concerns that he did not exercise appropriate judgment as to whom he would say what.” He said that Vindman’s sloppy practices were partly the result of his own predecessor at the NSC, Dr. Fiona Hill — another one of the Democrats’ star witnesses, who, like Morrison, is due to testify publicly this week.

  • Morrison testified that other foreign aid being offered by the U.S. at the time was reportedly under review — not just to Ukraine. And he confirmed earlier testimony that the aid being held up did not include the essential Javelin anti-tank missiles, which were being delivered to Ukraine through a separate procurement process.

  • Morrison testified that he had no concerns that President Trump asked President Zelensky, during the July 25 phone call, to meet with his personal attorney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

  • Morrison kept NSC lawyers informed about what was going on — not because he was concerned Trump had done anything wrong, but because he wanted “to protect the president” from whatever Sondland was doing.
Reply
#49
Quote:[/url]Rep. Doug Collins
@RepDougCollins
[url=https://twitter.com/RepDougCollins]
The minority hearing day must take place before the #JudiciaryCommittee considers articles of impeachment. The demand has been made, and the rules are clear.

Quote:[Image: ELHhhsWWwAA3Obs?format=png&name=900x900]
Reply
#50
Well, what about that!  The only witness the Republicans called to join the hearing scam last week got attacked, and he's not even a Republican; he isn't even a Trump supporter. Regardless, he appeared to be the only one testifying without bias in my opinion. The other three have ties to the Deep State Swamp. If you go digging on them, you'll find it.

So, tell me again who the violent party is?  It's always the Left...always!


Quote:Jonathan Turley, the sole Republican witness during the House Judiciary Committee's first public impeachment hearing Wednesday, said he was "inundated with threatening messages" after his testimony, which argued that Democrats do not have enough evidence to support articles of impeachment against President Trump.

"Before I finished my testimony, my home and office were inundated with threatening messages and demands that I be fired from George Washington University for arguing that, while a case for impeachment can be made, it has not been made on this record," Turley wrote in an op-ed for The Hill on Thursday.

The law professor at George Washington University Law School appeared alongside three other legal scholars with opposing views Wednesday and warned that Democrats would be ill-advised to rush to a vote on impeachment articles because they do not have a complete record of witness testimonies and supporting evidence to prove that Trump abused his power to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open an investigation into 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden's business dealings there in exchange for military aid.

"My objection is not that you cannot impeach Trump for abuse of power but that this record is comparably thin compared to past impeachments and contains conflicts, contradictions and gaps, including various witnesses not subpoenaed," Turley said.

"I suggested that Democrats drop the arbitrary schedule of a vote by the end of December and complete their case and this record before voting on any articles of impeachment," he added. "In my view, they have not proven abuse of power in this incomplete record."

Despite his testimony, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Thursday that Democrats will proceed with articles of impeachment against Trump.

"I remain concerned that we are lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger," Turley said.

Wednesday's hearings elicited fiery remarks from both sides of the aisle. Republican lawmakers decried the impeachment proceedings as a sham, and testimony by Democratic witness and Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan derailed the caucuses' efforts to expose potential abuse of power by Trump after she made remarks jabbing at the president's youngest son, 13-year-old Barron.

Turley called out Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., for his "heated attacks" after Swalwell tried to use the professor's prior record as the attorney for Judge Thomas Porteous, who was impeached and removed from office in December 2010, against him.

He also criticized the negative news coverage of his testimony, writing that MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank "attack[ed] my credibility."

"There is an intense 'rancor and rage' and 'stifling intolerance' that blinds people to opposing views. My call for greater civility and dialogue may have been the least successful argument I made to the committee," Turley said.

Source: Jonathan Turley 'inundated with threatening messages' after testimony opposing Trump impeachment
Reply
#51
tinylaughing tinylaughing tinylaughing tinydrroling 

Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall right now and see the hissy fits going on at the Biden's household?

How will this affect the Trump Impeachment?  Seems that call led to some REAL crimes, right? Only problem for the Left is that the crimes were committed on "their" side.  Oh yes, just wait. This will all lead back to Daddy Bidden and Obummer too. 

smallgreenbananadancer minusculemooning 




https://youtu.be/9xb4HJmUxdo
Reply
#52
(12-08-2019, 07:53 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: tinylaughing tinylaughing tinylaughing tinydrroling 

Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall right now and see the hissy fits going on at the Biden's household?

How will this affect the Trump Impeachment?  Seems that call led to some REAL crimes, right? Only problem for the Left is that the crimes were committed on "their" side.  Oh yes, just wait. This will all lead back to Daddy Bidden and Obummer too. 

smallgreenbananadancer minusculemooning 




https://youtu.be/9xb4HJmUxdo

This IS FANTASTIC,,,, Now if only the MSM would tell the Truth and report this to the Sheeple.
Don't Hold Your Breath!
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#53
Here is the entire Impeachment Hearing from yesterday. I only watched about 15 minutes and turned it off. It's mind-blowing what they are trying to get away with.



https://youtu.be/ixLKVjYajMQ
Reply
#54
Nadler announces his two articles of impeachment to move forward with the Dems scam on American voters.

Hurry, let's get this to the Senate so we can bring our own witnesses and get this BS done and over!  At least the Republicans will do a FAIR trial, and the democrat party will go down the drain afterwards.   tinywondering



Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)