Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 47
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 10:54:10 AM EST
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but do you have a learning disability?

I'm being serious, because I can't fathom the disconnect from reality you have to infer what you're claiming after reading the transcript.
View Quote
I think he assumes the worst, and has to twist reality to make that possible.....b/c his whole trump hate thing is built on that.  Its a matter of pride for these people.  They put ALL their eggs into that basket.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 10:54:29 AM EST
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

You're confused too.
I'm against gun grabbers, you make excuses for them and cheer them on.
That is what a liberal like you does.

Oh and look at that join date...
View Quote
This post is literally pure nonsense. Now you are actually trying to derail the tread. It's clear you take in and soak up liberal talking points like a sponge then come here to regurgitate them. It's what you do. Everyone here knows it. You can deflect all you want.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 11:19:37 AM EST
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Discussing the latest news, especially big news is not the same as pushing anything. That is what is fucking weak.

You guys try as hard as you can to have a trump safe place where all news is fake if it reveals the emperor is naked. That is what is weak. Minded.

Did you miss the part where that guy thinks Trump hasn't done any gun control?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Way to not pay attention.

blah, blah, blah...
In all that you did not mention one anti-gun legislation he has signed or specific gun he has banned.
YGBSM. Fucking really?

A fucking fantasy in Wolkenkukuksheim is your argument? You need help seriously.
If you don't believe in something, you'll fall for anything.
You fell for the Mueller bullshit and you're falling for this one hugh.
No, I paid attention to the Mueller investigation because I like to stay informed on world events. I'm still doing that.

Ignorance is bliss I hear though...
This is weak, even for you.
Discussing the latest news, especially big news is not the same as pushing anything. That is what is fucking weak.

You guys try as hard as you can to have a trump safe place where all news is fake if it reveals the emperor is naked. That is what is weak. Minded.

Did you miss the part where that guy thinks Trump hasn't done any gun control?
Maybe, and this might be hard for you to comprehend, I just don't give a fuck because I already made peace with it when I voted for Trump.

Nothing about Trump has surprised me. Maybe you got duped and are now realizing it. I don't know. I can understand the rage and anger you have against Trump, in that case.

I base my decisions on actions in the past. Still voted for Trump.

You bought the Russian Collusion narrative, hook, line and sinker. Not surprised you're buying Ukraine Whistleblower hook, line and sinker either.

People always seek validation. It's just a sad thing that you seek it from the Liberals.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 11:19:39 AM EST
[#4]
The problem with the anti-Trumper arguments made here is that Trump has multiple layers of defense.  First, there was most certainly no explicit quid pro quo, which is adequate to entirely erode the foundation of the Democrats' arguments.  Furthermore, even if there had been, Trump's efforts to obtain cooperation with an investigation of Biden's corruption falls squarely within the law enforcement responsibilities of his office.  The argument that he stood to benefit politically from this investigation is also a non starter, because it is well understood that just about every official action a politician takes is designed to produce a political benefit.  It would be another story if Trump asked Ukraine for a monetary campaign contribution or asked them to perform a corrupt investigation, but neither of these things happened.  Rather, what was asked for, quite explicitly, was the performance of an honest investigation, something that cannot be rightfully criticized.

The Trump critics here should also consider the overall factual circumstances that brought us here and why impeachment proceedings are taking place now.  It appears that Ukraine was an epicenter of anti-Trump corruption and has now flipped governments, creating an opportunity to expose that corruption.  It is fear of that investigation that motivates the impeachment proceedings.  As we all know, he origins of the Mueller investigation were palpably corrupt, including foreign involvement through Steele and Fusion GPS, among many others.  The facts relating to it have long needed to be investigated, and Trump is doing so, as he has promised to do publicly.  The notion he is hiding anything is nonsense.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it should be remembered that the outrageous FISA warrants and Fusion GPS dossier were products of the Democrats.  The astounding FBI corruption (McCabe, Strzok, Page) was also a product of pro-Hillary provocateurs.  If Trump cannot initiate an honest investigation (even if politically motivated) when Democrats get away with corrupt ones, what does that say about the future of our democracy?  Think about it, and oppose these impeachment efforts even if you do not like Trump.  Indeed, I myself have a number of misgivings about Trump, but I will not abide the bullshit that is the basis of these impeachment efforts.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 11:25:04 AM EST
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Dude, it's not worth it.

So many modern "Conservatives" have the attention span of a fruit fly.

For decades the guy will be best/greatest and the next minute everyone hates him and calls him a RINO/GOPe/Deep State, etc..

Usually it's nothing more than going against Trump.

I mean, do we need a list? Romney, Dubya, Sessions, Paul Ryan, Bannon, Mattis, Kelly, etc...etc...  We heard years and years of praise for these individuals from so-called Conservatives before turning their back on them because they slighted Trump in some way (I've always respected Mattis btw and still do).

Basically comes down to "Orange man good, if you say anything that isn't Orange Man Good, you're now Bad Man."

It's very apparent there is a common denominator in this dumpster fire. Most of these were labeled the "best/greatest" when hired too.
You can't "drain the swamp" if all the people you're "draining" are the ones you invited into the swamp.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Trump_administration_dismissals_and_resignations
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Trump appoints leaders of those agencies with the advice and consent of the senate.

Trump has to appoint people that will be confirmed.

And even those appointees have limited power. Just look at Jeff Sessions.

Things are not remotely as you are portraying them.
No, to be fair, Trump has picked some questionable people who I believe were totally outclassed by those they were up against...….the classic example was Sessions.

And...…...possibly Barr.
Barr outclassed? He is a founding member of the modern swamp! LOL!!!!

And Sessions was a damn fine conservative senator that Trump ruined and then fumbled the endorsement for his seat!
Short memories here...
Dude, it's not worth it.

So many modern "Conservatives" have the attention span of a fruit fly.

For decades the guy will be best/greatest and the next minute everyone hates him and calls him a RINO/GOPe/Deep State, etc..

Usually it's nothing more than going against Trump.

I mean, do we need a list? Romney, Dubya, Sessions, Paul Ryan, Bannon, Mattis, Kelly, etc...etc...  We heard years and years of praise for these individuals from so-called Conservatives before turning their back on them because they slighted Trump in some way (I've always respected Mattis btw and still do).

Basically comes down to "Orange man good, if you say anything that isn't Orange Man Good, you're now Bad Man."

It's very apparent there is a common denominator in this dumpster fire. Most of these were labeled the "best/greatest" when hired too.
You can't "drain the swamp" if all the people you're "draining" are the ones you invited into the swamp.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Trump_administration_dismissals_and_resignations
If that is what you actually think is the reason, no wonder you get relentlessly mocked.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 11:32:17 AM EST
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

If that is what you actually think is the reason, no wonder you get relentlessly mocked.
View Quote
Lol no shit. Trump clearly represents an existential threat to Democrats as a party, demonstrated by how badly they want to destroy him, but he's one of them, dont you get it.


Absurd.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:17:12 PM EST
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

YGBSM. Fucking really?

A fucking fantasy in Wolkenkukuksheim is your argument? You need help seriously.
If you don't believe in something, you'll fall for anything.
View Quote
The only ones that need help are nevertrumpers like you who don't understand that it could be the democrats nominating supreme court judges.

The long game does not give a flying fuck about your feelings or concerns.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:24:24 PM EST
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Wrong. It’s all facade.
View Quote
But you like the commie propaganda cartoons.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:25:39 PM EST
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I don’t know and I didn’t say what he said or what he didn’t say. All I know is that when it comes to .gov, there’s always someone either reading your ako emails or listening to what you say on the phone, true or not?
View Quote
Didn't matter what he said, they make it up as needed.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:31:34 PM EST
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

The only ones that need help are nevertrumpers like you who don't understand that it could be the democrats nominating supreme court judges.

The long game does not give a flying fuck about your feelings or concerns.
View Quote
To be fair, the guy you are responding to is a leftist, and he probably doesn't want conservative judges.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:39:17 PM EST
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Try this:

You need to borrow my truck and call me up and talk about how you can't wait to borrow my truck.

I say, I've gotta ask for a favor though as my first response to your words.

In what language does that mean what you are miracling it to mean?

And you're trying to do what McCarthy tried to do on 60 minutes interview and leave out the word "though."

Not buying what you're selling. We'll have to agree to disagree.
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:46:13 PM EST
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
NeverTrump translator: Reeeeeeeeee RRReeeEeeEeeee
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 12:59:34 PM EST
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

NeverTrump translator: Reeeeeeeeee RRReeeEeeEeeee
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 1:04:13 PM EST
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
But you like the commie propaganda cartoons.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Wrong. It’s all facade.
But you like the commie propaganda cartoons.
And you like gun restrictions.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 1:18:42 PM EST
[#15]
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 3:32:32 PM EST
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

This is where Hugh gets stuck between the leftist narrative he is pushing and the reality of the situation....

There was no crime committed.
View Quote
Well, if Hugh admitted to anything different, orange man bad would not be super guilty of some crime in Hughs mind..Can't have orange man bad getting away with being  president, that could destroy what's left of his fragile ego...Evidently he fell for Ukrainian treason even harder that Russian treason..unfortunately for him its all the same corrupt POS BS being promoted for their propaganda machine......but Hugh is blind to that...cause otherwise there is no way for Hugh's dreams to come true..orange man bad perp walked out of the White House and cruz given the presidency......dude needs serious help...
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 3:54:33 PM EST
[#17]
This is classic Trump "rope-a-dope." The left gets outraged over something and wildly attacks. They punch themselves out and Trump starts counter-punching. Trump is truly the Floyd Mayweather and Muhammad Ali of politics. The left hasn't been able to lay a glove on him since 2016! They certainly won't do it this time.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 4:03:16 PM EST
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
To be fair, the guy you are responding to is a leftist, and he probably doesn't want conservative judges.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

The only ones that need help are nevertrumpers like you who don't understand that it could be the democrats nominating supreme court judges.

The long game does not give a flying fuck about your feelings or concerns.
To be fair, the guy you are responding to is a leftist, and he probably doesn't want conservative judges.
And more lies. Sigh...
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 4:33:27 PM EST
[#19]
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 4:59:08 PM EST
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

And you like gun restrictions.
View Quote
Name one
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:02:51 PM EST
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
View Quote
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:06:38 PM EST
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is classic Trump "rope-a-dope." The left gets outraged over something and wildly attacks. They punch themselves out and Trump starts counter-punching. Trump is truly the Floyd Mayweather and Muhammad Ali of politics. The left hasn't been able to lay a glove on him since 2016! They certainly won't do it this time.
View Quote
The counterpunch that is coming is the conclusion of several investigations into their (Dems/swamp) 2015 and 2016 shenanigans with the election.

This ties back into pretty much the entire Obama presidency and pay to play Clinton antics.

So, they paint Trump as themselves and say it was him the entire time doing what they did.

The impeachment threat is a distraction and also leverage.  Let's see how far they go against Barr in the next week or two.  I don't think he's like John Roberts.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:13:36 PM EST
[#23]
First, "bipartisan" means Dems + never_Trumpers, which is the swamp.

Both have much to lose ($trillions) if Trump keeps draining the swamp and uncovering vast corruption by both groups, not to mention he keeps digging into the beginnings of the Russia hoax which involves the FBI CIA and NSA which are now used against Americans to support anti-white globalism by elitist DC swampers.

Plus they know that no Dem candidate can beat Trump and he will pick who replaces RBG when she croaks soon (here comes common sense border rulings and immigration, there goes anti-white replacement)....so now is all or nothing for the swamp. They are going full kamikaze now.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:16:29 PM EST
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
Yes I know that what I was saying is the report sent to Congress by the ICIG said the WB didn't have first hand knowledge now the ICIG is saying the WB did have first hand knowledge.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:31:54 PM EST
[#25]
Interesting read of the last three pages.

LoL at Hugh
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 5:36:01 PM EST
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
But now it’s being reported that’s not true and the IG said it wasn’t changed and it’s all a republican conspiracy?

Was it changed or not?  Who’s lying?
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:02:38 PM EST
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
But now it's being reported that's not true and the IG said it wasn't changed and it's all a republican conspiracy?

Was it changed or not?  Who's lying?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
But now it's being reported that's not true and the IG said it wasn't changed and it's all a republican conspiracy?

Was it changed or not?  Who's lying?
This story is worth reading in its entirety.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/01/intel-community-admission-of-whistleblower-changes-raises-explosive-new-questions/

On Monday, the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) admitted that it did alter its forms and policies governing whistleblower complaints, and that it did so in response to the anti-Trump complaint filed on Aug. 12, 2019. The Federalist first reported the sudden changes last Friday. While many in the media falsely claimed the ICIG’s stunning admission debunked The Federalist’s report, the admission from the ICIG completely affirmed the reporting on the secretive change to whistleblower rules following the filing of an anti-Trump complaint in August.

The ICIG also disclosed for the first time that the anti-Trump complainant filed his complaint using the previously authorized form, the guidance for which explicitly stated the ICIG’s previous requirement for firsthand evidence for credible complaints. The Federalist reported last week that it was not known which form, if any, the complainant used, as the complaint that was declassified and released to the public last week was written as a letter to the two chairmen of the congressional intelligence committees...

...The anti-Trump complaint that was released last week, which congressional Democrats are using as the basis for impeachment proceedings against the president, is riddled not with evidence directly viewed by the complainant, but repeated references to what anonymous officials allegedly told the complainant: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials,” “officials have informed me,” “officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me,” “the White House officials who told me this information,” “I was told by White House officials,” “the officials I spoke with,” “I was told that a State Department official,” “I learned from multiple U.S. officials,” “One White House official described this act,” “Based on multiple readouts of these meetings recounted to me,” “I also learned from multiple U.S. officials,” “The U.S. officials characterized this meeting,” “multiple U.S. officials told me,” “I learned from U.S. officials,” “I also learned from a U.S. official,” “several U.S. officials told me,” “I heard from multiple U.S. officials,” and “multiple U.S. officials told me.”

In fact, the ICIG admitted in its Aug. 26 letter to the DNI that its office never even reviewed the transcript of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky prior to determining whether the complainants hearsay allegations about the phone call were credible.

“As part of its preliminary review, the ICIG did not request access to records of the President’s July 25, 2019, call with the Ukrainian President,” Michael Atkinson, the ICIG, wrote.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:09:23 PM EST
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yes I know that what I was saying is the report sent to Congress by the ICIG said the WB didn't have first hand knowledge now the ICIG is saying the WB did have first hand knowledge.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
Yes I know that what I was saying is the report sent to Congress by the ICIG said the WB didn't have first hand knowledge now the ICIG is saying the WB did have first hand knowledge.
Well ICIG Atkinson was previously the head lawyer for previous NSD Head John Carlin, who approved/signed off on the FISA and started this whole rogue bogus investigation to start with. John Carlin was also Bob Mueller's chief of Staff back in the day.

There's a likelihood that the ICIG is deep state, never Trump, or just someone made a horrendous mistake in vetting & recommending him for promotion to POTUS Trump.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:12:17 PM EST
[#29]
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:18:33 PM EST
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
View Quote
Well, that should wind some folks up.  
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:30:08 PM EST
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
View Quote
I think the hammer is gonna drop on all the dem illegal shit.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:44:09 PM EST
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:48:39 PM EST
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I think the hammer is gonna drop on all the dem illegal shit.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the hammer is gonna drop on all the dem illegal shit.
Still hoping and waiting.

Feels like its getting closer
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 7:54:14 PM EST
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Still hoping and waiting.

Feels like its getting closer
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the hammer is gonna drop on all the dem illegal shit.
Still hoping and waiting.

Feels like its getting closer
I don’t think hed just throw that out there without having a TRUMP card. Everything he does he forces his opponents hand.

Look at what he did realeasing the transcript. Under 24 hours of fake news bullshit...boom!  Drop privileged president to president phone conversation.

Is that a man who has something to hide?  Think about that...he declassed and released to public transcript of the call they’re trying to impeach him on.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:00:01 PM EST
[#35]
State Dept inspector general requests 'urgent' Ukraine briefing on Capitol Hill

?
The State Department’s inspector general is expected to give an "urgent" briefing to staffers from several House and Senate committees on Wednesday afternoon about documents obtained from the department’s Office of the Legal Adviser related to the State Department and Ukraine, sources familiar with the planned briefing told ABC News.

Details of the briefing, requested by Steve Linick, the inspector general at State, remain unknown. Linick is expected to meet with congressional staff in a secure location on Capitol Hill.

(MORE: Democratic chairmen subpoena Giuliani for documents in impeachment probe )

The unusual nature and timing of the briefing – during a congressional recess – suggests it may be connected to a recent intelligence community whistleblower allegation which describes, in part, the State Department’s role in coordinating interactions between Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, and Ukrainian officials.
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:07:10 PM EST
[#36]
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:13:11 PM EST
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Well ICIG Atkinson was previously the head lawyer for previous NSD Head John Carlin, who approved/signed off on the FISA and started this whole rogue bogus investigation to start with. John Carlin was also Bob Mueller's chief of Staff back in the day.

There's a likelihood that the ICIG is deep state, never Trump, or just someone made a horrendous mistake in vetting & recommending him for promotion to POTUS Trump.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the whistle blower said they didn't have firsthand knowledge and that was what was reported to Congress by the ICIG and now he comes out and says the WB did have first hand knowledge?
They changed the rules during the summer to let it happen.  In fact they updated definitions last week to ensure it would be "legal."
Yes I know that what I was saying is the report sent to Congress by the ICIG said the WB didn't have first hand knowledge now the ICIG is saying the WB did have first hand knowledge.
Well ICIG Atkinson was previously the head lawyer for previous NSD Head John Carlin, who approved/signed off on the FISA and started this whole rogue bogus investigation to start with. John Carlin was also Bob Mueller's chief of Staff back in the day.

There's a likelihood that the ICIG is deep state, never Trump, or just someone made a horrendous mistake in vetting & recommending him for promotion to POTUS Trump.
Who said Trump should keep Rosenstein, Dana Boente...and possibly even Huber?  Someone from the R side either knew they were shady and said use them anyway or they knew outright these people were compromised from the start and were perfectly OK with it.

This Atkinson character was properly compromised prior to entering the ICIG position for the ODNI.  Imagine how many others have made choices in their .gov careers and are now being asked to participate.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:15:39 PM EST
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Interesting.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
It is tied to this:

Remember, elected officials and those appointed by them are only temporary.  Bureaucrats are 4-life.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:16:29 PM EST
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I don’t think hed just throw that out there without having a TRUMP card. Everything he does he forces his opponents hand.

Look at what he did realeasing the transcript. Under 24 hours of fake news bullshit...boom!  Drop privileged president to president phone conversation.

Is that a man who has something to hide?  Think about that...he declassed and released to public transcript of the call they’re trying to impeach him on.
View Quote
Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 8:32:55 PM EST
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

It is tied to this:

Remember, elected officials and those appointed by them are only temporary.  Bureaucrats are 4-life.
View Quote
I think you're misunderstanding Pompeo's tweet.  Read the included letter he sent.

Schiff is not following the rules and accusing Pompeo of refusing the request.

Schiff mentioned a subpoena,  but there isn't one.

He also mentioned a deposition,  but this requires advanced notice with a scheduled date. Again he didn't follow the rules.

This is about disparaging Pompeo and making more fake accusations
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:06:55 PM EST
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yet another thread disrupted by leftists/NTers.
View Quote
You know who the OP is right? So that's sorta how it was going to go....
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:13:18 PM EST
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
View Quote
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:15:43 PM EST
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
Underscore confirmed.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:16:04 PM EST
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
Fake narrative

Are you a parrot
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:16:45 PM EST
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Fake narrative

Are you a parrot
View Quote
Lol ok
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:16:56 PM EST
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Underscore confirmed.
View Quote
And?
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:20:03 PM EST
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

:snip:
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

:snip:
Elaborate on that statement...

Is exposing corruption from a potential president putting himself before the country?
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:23:25 PM EST
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Elaborate on that statement...

Is exposing corruption from a potential president putting himself before the country?
View Quote
Exposing corruption? Wtf are you talking about?

I like how you snipped the gun safety talk he wanted to have with Pelosi. The mofo was ready to throw gun owners under the bus to save his ass.
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:33:12 PM EST
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Just wait, the Demorats next play is to declare that Trump is inciting a civil war.
View Quote
I've already heard some kooks saying exactly that
Link Posted: 10/1/2019 9:35:16 PM EST
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

No, they pretty much got him by putting himself and his interests before the country.

The whistleblower was on the money on everything, so someone in his administration spilled the beans.

And never mind that he wanted to talk “gun safety” with Pelosi. Anything and anybody under the bus to try save his ass.
View Quote
Wow this surprises me coming from an Under_Score

I happen to think that uncovering ALL of the corruption in the last administration serves this country quite well, thank you.
Page / 47
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top