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.

 

Pelosi's Leadership Team: Impeachment "Doesn't Fit The Holiday Spirit"

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

My guess is that she'd pick Arbor Day or "Take Your Cat To Work Day" if it was convenient.

Either way it's bad optics, making the democrats and their leadership appear even weaker.

They (in my opinion) were hoping for a Hail Mary Pass in the hearings before the IG report came out.

They got nothing and they'll be on the defensive from now on.




posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Honestly, I think the real thing is ... they weren’t thinking. There was no logic in doing any of this now.

No logic at all really, as the Senate would acquit.

None of it matters because the dumb $#@!% managed to say the 2nd dumbest thing she’s ever said and invalidate the whole mess.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

She heard about Krampus. She isn’t really sure what Krampus is but was able to comprehend that it was bad, did things to bad people and might have something to do with cramps. Which as she knows, adds frown lines and crows feet.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: DBCowboy

Honestly, I think the real thing is ... they weren’t thinking. There was no logic in doing any of this now.



They were thinking, with the best pea brains they
have all put together. The corruption is a decay
spreading to their brain.

And yet you somehow think they will take
back The White House in 2020?



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: chr0naut

...he's not a commentator, he's the congressional reporter. You know how there is a press gaggle that follows trump and his advisors? This guys job is to stalk congress critters. He named his source, pelosi's leadership team.


And that's good enough for you, knowing the number of completely speculative and propagandist articles that Fox puts out.

Surely if this was actually coming from Pelosi's leadership team, they have their own press people, who'd put their own spin on it. Look where it came from and what is implied in it.

This is so obvious!



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


edit on 3/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.

Not sure I'd go that far. It took them a while to realize Trump could actually win. Heck, it was only a few weeks before the election that they realized Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania were in play, and by then it was way too late to change the momentum.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.

What witnesses? A witness has first-hand knowledge of what he/she is testifying to. Repeating what someone else told you they heard is hearsay (rumors), and is not evidence.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.

What witnesses? A witness has first-hand knowledge of what he/she is testifying to. Repeating what someone else told you they heard is hearsay (rumors), and is not evidence.

We had first hand witnesses. They all said no laws were broken and Trump did noting wrong.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.


No witness brought before the senate impeachment inquiry said any such thing.

What every witness did say was that they believed that there was an expectation of quid pro quo implicit in the words and actions of Trump.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.

What witnesses? A witness has first-hand knowledge of what he/she is testifying to. Repeating what someone else told you they heard is hearsay (rumors), and is not evidence.

We had first hand witnesses. They all said no laws were broken and Trump did noting wrong.


None of the witnesses said that.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.


No witness brought before the senate impeachment inquiry said any such thing.

What every witness did say was that they believed that there was an expectation of quid pro quo implicit in the words and actions of Trump.

I don't know anything about the Senate. I only know about the House inquiry. Every witness said there was not. Maybe you need to switch to a different news source?

I don't know how you can seriously make this stuff up, it's simply wrong.

“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday's afternoon hearing.

Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."

Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."

Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., covered similar ground in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"

"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.

"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"

"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.

www.foxnews.com...

Those are firsthand witnesses. Please tell me what firsthand witness has said Trump did something illegal and what law was broken. Good luck.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I think Sondland and vindman can be indicted for lying to Congress. Their opening statements said Trump was guilty, while their testimony said Trump was innocent of quid quo pro.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

This is a busy time of year for Nancy Pelosi... she still has to reveal her true, horned and goat legged form before she starts shoving children into sacks and beating them with birch branches.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I think Sondland and vindman can be indicted for lying to Congress. Their opening statements said Trump was guilty, while their testimony said Trump was innocent of quid quo pro.


I presumed, I presume, Presumed, presuming, presume .... but Trump said he did not want anything when I got around to asking him, ok Sondland we get it, you made it up in your head.

And "I don't know who the whistlebower is, but if I tell you who I told you will figure it out so I can't tell you, but trust me I don't know who it is" Vindland ... his willingness to to give the name of one person he told and not the other leaves little doubt he is lying.
edit on 3-12-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ZenTam

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Who cares? Pelvis PELOSI herself has invalidated the ENTIRE PROCESS of impeachment by making dumb-ass comments to her caucus that boiled down to “the American people are too stupid to be allowed to decide this by an election.”

That was the straw that broke the back of the whole fing Ark in my opinion.

ETA: Oopse

The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump, literally since the moment he won the election. It can't possibly be more obvious that this is about politics, not any law Trump supposedly broke.


Actually they have been trying to stop him since the moment he started to run for president.


Of course they have been. He is their political opponent.

And Trump has been saying all sorts of negative an accusatory things against them from the start, too.

It is political, but the impeachment is about laws they allege that he broke, as well.


What law. Every single witness has said no law was broken.


No witness brought before the senate impeachment inquiry said any such thing.

What every witness did say was that they believed that there was an expectation of quid pro quo implicit in the words and actions of Trump.

I don't know anything about the Senate. I only know about the House inquiry. Every witness said there was not. Maybe you need to switch to a different news source?


Sorry, a typo, I meant to type "Congressional".


I don't know how you can seriously make this stuff up, it's simply wrong.

“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday's afternoon hearing.

Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."

Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."

Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., covered similar ground in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"

"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.

"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"

"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.

www.foxnews.com...

Those are firsthand witnesses. Please tell me what firsthand witness has said Trump did something illegal and what law was broken. Good luck.


The first question posed by Devin Nunes was not about the President, who was the one being investigated. The question carries the implication that the witness may have done something illegal - a sly attempt to impugn the character of and discredit a witness by a defense counsel, and has no bearing on the case against the accused. If it had been asked during the witness examination, Nunes would have been reprimanded for it.

Also, since Volker stood as witness on the 3rd October and Morrison stood as witness on 31st October, the Fox News Narrative that concatenates the questioning as it does, is clearly shown to be cherry picking its information and not portraying the true and chronological framing of the questions and answers.

A text search of the transcripts of both Morrison's and Volkers testimonies do not have the phrase "bribe or extort", the word "extort" and only Volker's transcript has the word "bribe". For this reason, I strongly doubt that the Fox opinion piece is credible.

Search the transcripts for yourself, they are available online. Also, please take note of Fox's modus operandi. It is becoming more and more blatantly propagandist an false (don't trust any of the other MSM either. They aren't worth your trust).

edit on 3/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I notice you still can't tell me what law they said he broke. Nice try, but a fail.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
Also, since Volker stood as witness on the 3rd October and Morrison stood as witness on 31st October, the Fox News Narrative that concatenates the questioning as it does, is clearly shown to be cherry picking its information and not portraying the true and chronological framing of the questions and answers.

A text search of the transcripts of both Morrison's and Volkers testimonies do not have the phrase "bribe or extort", the word "extort" and only Volker's transcript has the word "bribe". For this reason, I strongly doubt that the Fox opinion piece is credible.

How can anyone be as wrong as you so often. They both stood witness on November 19th, which is when the questions were asked.


Stefanik: "And there was no quid pro quo, correct?"
Morrison: "Correct."
Stefanik: "No bribery?"
Morrison: "Correct."
Stefanik: "No extortion?"
Morrison: "Correct."

She repeated the same line of questions for Volker whose answers mirrored those given by Morrison.

www.cnn.com...

Just stop, it's an embarrassment.




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join