Former ambassador to Ukraine says Trump pushed to oust her

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I have no idea what you are talking about. Trump fired someone that is accused of corruption by Ukrainians and was actively working against Trump. He has every right to fire her.

Then the liberal posting the story makes it out to be Trump did something wrong.

He didn't. Next story.

a reply to: Oraculi

I'd love to see Trump fire all fed prosecutors like Clinton did and watch the lefts heads explode like a bunch of lemmies.

a reply to: Oraculi


even i know you can't talk sh@@ about your boss and do things against his will and keep your job.
what the hell did she expect.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Which is exactly what I mean by you calling anything and everything against Trump "fake news" without a second thought.

You are proving my point. 😂

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

The Ukraine claims she was denying them visas for no reason for political reasons and giving them a list of name of people they can't prosecute. Somehow the left loves her .. big surprise.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Which is exactly what I mean by you calling anything and everything against Trump "fake news" without a second thought.

You are proving my point. 😂

It's fake news. When Trump does what his job entitles him to do and people say he is going to be in trouble for it .. it's fake news. What in this story "is pretty damning" as the OP said?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

That's what you say to literally everything that looks bad for Trump whether true or not. This is fake news but Q is gospel. 🤣🐑

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

That's what you say to literally everything that looks bad for Trump whether true or not. This is fake news but Q is gospel. 🤣🐑

Stop making stuff up. Please show me anywhere saying anything about Q. I will wait. I love you also can't explain how the OP's assertion that "is pretty damning" is correct ... but this is not fake news even though you can't explain how it's not.

Thanks for the laugh.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Jonjonj

Yes, it's the woman the Ukrainian prosecutor claims gave him a list of names of people he could not go after.

Is it the same Ukrainian prosecutor that retracted that statement?

You read the OPs links right? That is in there.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I'm exclusively talking about your bias here. Not sure what you're not getting about that. I didn't say anything about whether the story is true or not and honestly I could care less because it's not going to convince me that the guy who had the president of Citizens United run his campaign isn't corrupt. 🤣

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I'm exclusively talking about your bias here. Not sure what you're not getting about that. I didn't say anything about whether the story is true or not and honestly I could care less because it's not going to convince me that the guy who had the president of Citizens United run his campaign isn't corrupt. 🤣

So I called fake news fake news, but I am bad for doing so because you think I love Q.

Got it. Thanks for playing.

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Jonjonj

Yes, it's the woman the Ukrainian prosecutor claims gave him a list of names of people he could not go after.

Is it the same Ukrainian prosecutor that retracted that statement?

You read the OPs links right? That is in there.

So he claimed he was being pressured. Then later retracted the statement. Is it possible the retraction was due to similar political pressures he claimed were happening? I really don't know. But iirc multiple Ukrainians have claimed this woman had a political bias, and she is clearly anti-Trump. So why would Trump keep her on?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
ITT: People dismissing anything and everything that might incriminate Trump while accepting anything and everything that might incriminate Democrats.

Like clockwork. 😂

You mean like how investigating Biden is somehow illegal because it might affect how people think about him leading up to an election, but investigating Trump for trying to investigate Biden is okay?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I'm just pointing out you and many others' blatant bias around here. Trump is owned by special interests, otherwise why did he have the president of Citizens United run his election campaign? You don't think David Bossie knows a thing or two about propaganda? He fought for the ruling classes right to buy the loyalty of our politicians.

a reply to: timequake

Who said anything about that? You must be confusing me with someone else because I don't like Biden anymore than I do Trump. 😂

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
ITT: People dismissing anything and everything that might incriminate Trump while accepting anything and everything that might incriminate Democrats.

Like clockwork. 😂

It's so fun to watch.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I have no bias, and I didn't vote for Trump. My bias is one against fake news. It's not my fault 99% of the news against Trump is fake through either outright lying or through twisting things making something normal appear ominous (as the OP did).

Here you are attacking me for calling the OP fake news .. when you admit as far as you know it is fake news. Thanks!

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
ITT: People dismissing anything and everything that might incriminate Trump while accepting anything and everything that might incriminate Democrats.

Like clockwork. 😂

It's so fun to watch.

It is. So here is your chance.What in this story "is pretty damning" as the OP said?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The waters are so muddy around any story that comes out that even you don't know if it's true or not, you just choose to believe whichever side you want. Literally every "scandal" that the MSM shoves down people's throats these days had enough ammo for both sides to claim "victory", literally every one. Not a coincidence.

And yeah, you absolutely do have a bias. Quit denying the obvious.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: timequake

Who said anything about that? You must be confusing me with someone else because I don't like Biden anymore than I do Trump. 😂

I'm sorry, but did you not say:

People dismissing anything and everything that might incriminate Trump while accepting anything and everything that might incriminate Democrats.

I was simply using a current real-life example that succinctly contradicts your claim.