It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

republicans got their ass handed to them

page: 17
43
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Auth3nt1k

Name the law that Trump broke.

Quick.

3. . . 2. . .


He ignored a subpoena...pretty common law



I know its hard for some of you, who dont know how law works, or civics, but he is well within his right to do that............

Take a civics class.........

I repeat to all these leftists who cant figure out how the law actually works............

Take..........A ....CIVICS...........CLASS


Unless scotus rules against him. Then he would definitely get impeached for that right?




posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually, the other witness also said she heard Burisma in the call. But that changes nothing important about the call, because everyone knew the company referred to Burisma,



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.

Kind of convenient they left it out huh?

Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


You seriously think they left out Burisma intentionally?

You do realize nobody at the time ever thought this call would be unclassified. It’s unprecedented.

I swear you guys do not understand logic.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k


Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.


Yet others whom were listening to the call, including Morrison, don't agree...


originally posted by: Auth3nt1k
Kind of convenient they left it out huh?


Yet Vindman stated he didn't think it was a "purposeful omission."


originally posted by: Auth3nt1k
Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


It is called "the right to discovery" by the counsel of the accused...

Criminal Discovery: The Right to Evidence Disclosure

BTW, it doesn't mean "guilty." The counsel of the accused has a right to finding all evidence even if that evidence is in another country...

Or are you one of those whom wants to deny due process and rights to POTUS Trump like the lying sack of Schiff and other socialists/democrats want?



How does right to evidence disclosure apply anytime before the whistleblower or impeachment inquiry? That just doesn't make sense...please explain.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.

Kind of convenient they left it out huh?

Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


You seriously think they left out Burisma intentionally?

You do realize nobody at the time ever thought this call would be unclassified. It’s unprecedented.

I swear you guys do not understand logic.


There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.

Kind of convenient they left it out huh?

Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


You seriously think they left out Burisma intentionally?

You do realize nobody at the time ever thought this call would be unclassified. It’s unprecedented.

I swear you guys do not understand logic.


There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?

You don't seriously think that Trump and Pence don't talk to each other about important issues do you? I think it would be safe to say that Trump briefed Pence on exactly what he knew.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?


Look at the transcript, trump mentioned Biden and his son, then Zelinsky says he will look into specifically the company that you mentioned.

Does Biden’s son work for another corrupt Ukrainian company? I think everyone with access to google can easily figure out Burisma is the company being referred to without including its name.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: mtnshredder

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.

Kind of convenient they left it out huh?

Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


You seriously think they left out Burisma intentionally?

You do realize nobody at the time ever thought this call would be unclassified. It’s unprecedented.

I swear you guys do not understand logic.


There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?

You don't seriously think that Trump and Pence don't talk to each other about important issues do you? I think it would be safe to say that Trump briefed Pence on exactly what he knew.


From what I understand Pence uses the notes of staffers more than word of mouth from trump.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe most states don't have the loophole New York had. Most states you can be charged by the state and the federal government. I believe it actually happens quite frequently.


Yet in New York you only need to be linked to POTUS Trump to be denied rights. New York didn't just abolish "double jeopardy," they changed the law so that "they can deny double jeopardy if you are linked to POTUS Trump." Which means New York made it legal for the law not to apply equally to everyone, but to punish those whom have any connections to POTUS Trump...


originally posted by: Auth3nt1k
And yes I know they put a hold on it. Then they ruled that he had to hand them over. Now it has gone to Scotus who has placed a hold....lmao


Why don't they demand the real tax returns linked to the Clinton foundation which received millions of dollars from a Russian bank linked to the Kremlin meanwhile Hillary helped pass deals under the Obama administration that were favorable to Russia and Iran, but unfavorable to the U.S.? Such as the approval for Russia to buy a percentage of U.S. uranium yields?...

I don't see any demands for such an investigation when we have evidence this happened...






edit on 20-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

How does right to evidence disclosure apply anytime before the whistleblower or impeachment inquiry? That just doesn't make sense...please explain.


You forget that socialists/democrats have wanted to impeach POTUS Trump since 19 minutes after he was officially POTUS...
Schiff/dems/socialists were working on this, and other attempts at impeachment from before the "not a whistleblower' was used as the latest excuse to impeach...


...
In fact, a mere 19 minutes after President Trump took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2017, a headline in the Washington Post heralded that “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.”
...

Democrats need to abandon their impeachment inquisition

Even several socialists, like Tlaib, called for impeachment from the start of the Trump administration and without having any evidence of wrongdoing.

Since then socialists/democrats have been using any and every excuse to try to impeach the POTUS...



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?


Look at the transcript, trump mentioned Biden and his son, then Zelinsky says he will look into specifically the company that you mentioned.

Does Biden’s son work for another corrupt Ukrainian company? I think everyone with access to google can easily figure out Burisma is the company being referred to without including its name.


Yeah it's pretty interesting that trump doesn't mention a company at all in the memo and yet Zelinsky says "He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue."

You are assuming that Zelinsky knew or cared about Joe Bidens son before his assistant met with Rudy.

And apparently not everyone can connect the dots. Volker testified today he spent months and had no clue investigating Burisma= investigating Bidens.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Just found out that a former apprentice contestant is suing Donald Trump for sexual assault now. They see this not working so now they go the Kavanagh route.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
I know the majority of this site are trump supporters, like he can do no wrong supporters. Typical republicans.

Today I watched the hearings and the republicans got their ass handed too them.

For the most part they just did a rant and rave, jim jordan, but what questions the counsel asked did not get the answer he wanted.

Just my take on the hearings...

Nunes is an idiot... and a liar.

You guys cry about the witness was not there, but that was the majority of the questions.,,republicans were grasping at straws that were not even there.

They made a fool of themselves,


That's nuts...It was a slam dunk for the Republicans...



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: mtnshredder

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

No one's saying that.


Really?...



Vindman is claiming that he recalls better than those whom wrote what they heard in the call, and in specific he just mentions Burisma, but that he did not think it was a "purposeful omission." Yet Morrison, whom was Vindman's old boss and whom listened to the call, has stated that the transcript is accurate to the best of his recollection. So Vindman apparently heard a word, Burisma, that neither Morrison nor those whom were part of writing the transcript heard. The others heard "the company" instead of "Burisma."

Since Vindman is the one claiming this, while the others don't, isn't it possible that it is Vindman whom is wrong?

BTW, that's the only thing that Vindman seems to claim was different from what he heard. One word the others whom listened to the call didn't hear.





Actually....the woman literally sitting next to him today said she heard it too. Except in a different place.

Kind of convenient they left it out huh?

Specially seeings how President Z. Says on the july 25th call one of his assistants had talked to Rudy.

What do you think Rudy talked to his assistant about? General corruption?


You seriously think they left out Burisma intentionally?

You do realize nobody at the time ever thought this call would be unclassified. It’s unprecedented.

I swear you guys do not understand logic.


There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?

You don't seriously think that Trump and Pence don't talk to each other about important issues do you? I think it would be safe to say that Trump briefed Pence on exactly what he knew.


From what I understand Pence uses the notes of staffers more than word of mouth from trump.

Actually Trump stopped getting the daily briefings every single day and delegated that job to Pence. I'm not sure if that still holds true but it was that way at least for awhile. I'm sure Trump goes when he needs to go. I don't necessarily agree with that but apparently he has the option. It's a good possibility that Pence could be more informed on first hand info than Trump. That being said I'm sure Pence informs Trump immediately on anything of great importance and vice versa.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Just found out that a former apprentice contestant is suing Donald Trump for sexual assault now. They see this not working so now they go the Kavanagh route.


Of course they are. They know they cannot make, or keep the promises as POTUS Trump has. The economy under them will tank. Unemployment will soar again to higher levels, including minority unemployment. Millions of people would have to resort once again to food stamps if the socialists, i mean democrats, are elected etc. The only thing they can do is to keep on trying to smear POTUS Trump in the hope that this will stop people from voting for him once more.


edit on 20-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yeah sure, Democrats were elected on impeaching the president. I get it. Still doesnt support your argument about what Rudy was was doing.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yeah sure, Democrats were elected on impeaching the president. I get it. Still doesnt support your argument about what Rudy was was doing.


It actually does because impeachment of the POTUS didn't begin with the "not a whistleblower" claims...

The Ukrainians stated to have had evidence that the Obama administration was in cahoots with the former Ukrainian administration into making up dirt on Trump, and affecting the 2016 election in favor of Hillary...

I gave evidence corroborating my argument... Giuliani is, and has been the POTUS' counsel, and his impeachment began a mere 19 minutes after Trump became POTUS officially on January 20th 2017...


...
Sworn statements from two Ukrainian officials admitting that their agency tried to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton. The effort included leaking an alleged ledger showing payments to then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort;

Contacts between Democratic figures in Washington and Ukrainian officials that involved passing along dirt on Donald Trump;
...

Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don't you want our evidence on Democrats?

Do you forget the so called "Mueller report" which Mueller didn't write or even read?...
Do you forget the other attempts at impeaching the POTUS with other lies including Russian lies?




edit on 20-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment, excerpt and link.



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 01:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Auth3nt1k

There are a lot of people that normally have access to calls like this in order to conduct foreign policy. The people listening are not the only people who had access to the memo. I mean hell the VP was given a copy that didn't have the name Burisma. You don't think it's a problem if the vp and president are on different pages? Shouldn't the vp know if president Z. Had brought up Burisma?


Look at the transcript, trump mentioned Biden and his son, then Zelinsky says he will look into specifically the company that you mentioned.

Does Biden’s son work for another corrupt Ukrainian company? I think everyone with access to google can easily figure out Burisma is the company being referred to without including its name.


Yeah it's pretty interesting that trump doesn't mention a company at all in the memo and yet Zelinsky says "He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue."

You are assuming that Zelinsky knew or cared about Joe Bidens son before his assistant met with Rudy.

And apparently not everyone can connect the dots. Volker testified today he spent months and had no clue investigating Burisma= investigating Bidens.
:

Who gives a spit? Is Burisma untouchable, because an ex VP's son's on the board? Or, is it untouchable because a Democrat Presidential candidate's son was on the board? Which one makes.them untouchable?

I'm genuinely curious. Which, of the two scenarios, makes this particular company above investigation?
edit on 20-11-2019 by SourGrapes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 02:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Auth3nt1k

even IF scotus rules against him senate will never convict but keep the dream alive i guess?



posted on Nov, 20 2019 @ 03:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

Actually, the other witness also said she heard Burisma in the call. But that changes nothing important about the call, because everyone knew the company referred to Burisma,


Yeah, but is it possible their perception of what was said changed as there were many allegations made by socialists democrats from the start?

Morrison, Vindman's old boss, and those people whom wrote what they heard of the call, seem to agree that the word used was "the company." Again, with all the time that has passed since that call, and with socialists/democrats making claims from the start about Burisma/Biden, did the perception of what was said in the call changed for Vindman and Ms Williams? That's also a possibility.




edit on 20-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.




top topics



 
43
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join