The NYT leak of the Bolton book is another B.S. story

a reply to: Sillyolme
Just reported...

Bolton was notified by the National Security Council on January 23rd that his manuscript contained too much classified material.

On January 26th a leaker within the National Security Council, probably Alexander Vindmans twin brother, leaked part of the manuscript to the New York Times.

a reply to: carewemust

Seems like a case of being given a sufficient quantity of rope to hang oneself.

a reply to: Sillyolme

He received Money from one of the most CORRUPT energy companies in the Ukraine with no knowledge and no experience when His Father was tasked with rooting Out corruption is said Country. By Hunters own admission He probably only got the Job because of His Name (Which means His Dad).

If that is not cause for an investigation....(wait for it) NOTHING IS!!!

Could You also STOP with the BS about a fair trial this was planned since before His inauguration

HAHA winning by a landslide as Highly unlikely as Him winning the 1st Election?

a reply to: ATruGod
Yes, it stinks. But I should be investigated by our government agencies, not a volunteer lawyer with shady connections.

It should be dealt with by our diplomats, not the Potus himself, he should have more important things to do. He should delegate to official diplomats, not his personal lawyer so that our government agencies can keep track of it all, not carried out under cover of secrecy.

And far as stinky goes, Trump stinks to high heaven to half the country yet the other half have no noses.

"Major Poll Leader" what exactly does that mean nowadays. Was He the Major Poll Leader like Hillary was going to win by 98% of the votes.

What matters here is what did it mean to a raging narcissist with little impulse control like Trump.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Bolton did not submit a manuscript with classified information in it. This is his sixth book and he knows better.

This is just plain ludicrous. Trump wanting to insure national security when an agent from foreign nation like Parnas manages to get close enough to him to have his picture taken with him and or his family members numerous times and also to secretly record a diplomatic meeting he was having.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Congratulations! So even just the fact it should be investigated makes Trumps action justified, the fact You and the Ones who planned the impeachment don't like his methods is another story.

Maybe You could go ahead and admit now...no matter what Trump did He was going to get impeached in some way.

a reply to: ATruGod

And that is the whole point here, just as you point out. His methods. Are they legal or are they not. This is what the impeachment exercises are about. Was his method legal or was it not. And here, a main issue is his intent, what was his motive. You assume his motive was specifically in the national interests while others assume they were primarily personal. That is the case being made.

So yes, I am fine with admitting that beyond his personal motive there could be found this ''cover'' motive of national interest is possible. And by the same token, are you willing to admit that it could have been his personal interest that was the primary motive here?

a reply to: TerryMcGuire
Absolutely...if They hadn't been planning to impeach Him since His election. Don't You think that if Biden truly is as Dirty as it looks then it should be investigated before He has a chance to become POTUS *snickers*. It was good enough for Trump Why not Biden?

Didn't Obama start the New era of investigating Your Political Rival if They are a bad person? He just did it for His would be Successor.

At this point I just want to know the truth. This is crazy. Let the man testify or just release the book. Then I check Trump's twitter page and here we go again. Let him testify. Trump is attacking the man left and right now but they had the book for over a month! Now they are saying his information is classified. What is really going on? lol I will admit this is more entertaining that old school WWF Wrestling!

a reply to: Sillyolme

Kickbacks for favorable policies, loans, aid with the money funneled back through his son.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: butcherguy

America is four years wiser now.

Which is precisely why he will win in a landslide, as well as the R's retaking the House in a bigger way than the '94 landslide.

The dems have revealed their true fascist/socialist/communist colors, and no amount of 'walking it back' in the general election can undo the damage. They are toast - well done, crispy and slightly burnt (just the way I like it)....

a reply to: ATruGod

''Planning to impeach him since the election''

Now this is a pretty meme that is being passed around conservative circles. Trump himself is pushing this. Why, didn't he even at one point say in at least one rally that this plan to impeach him started before he was elected?

You can believe that if you want, of course, but I have numerous problems with believing that.

One, Trump did not think he would be elected. He even gave a speech shortly before election day claiming how the election was ''rigged' against him. And as you pointed out, the polls did not give him a chance to win, wasn't that percentage of polling that you mentioned standing at 98% for Clinton?

So if no one expected him to win, even himself, how could they be planning an impeachment before he was elected.

Also there is the small but significant fact that when he took office, the Republican Party controlled both houses of the legislature. And controlled it for two years. So where was this impeachment going to come from if the House was Republican controlled?

It was only because the people voted to change the controlling party in the House that the impeachment could only be accomplished. And even then, Pelosi stated over and over again that she was not in favor of impeaching but only as a last resort. Of course that could just have been a ploy on her part, but why.

The Republicans lost the House because too many people were beginning to smell the stink coming out of the White House. That stink continued to grow as the stink got worse and worse so that even the moderate Democrats had to do something.

Trump has forced this on himself by being a blithering idiot who is fooling enough of the people into believing that he is their champion and making America great again.

Have I forgotten to mention that I am opposed to impeachment? I was, and I am. But you know what? It is what it is. He has been impeached and now the Senate is hearing the lawyer's smooth talk from both sides of the isle and the power play between the Republicans and their lackeys are locked in a push me pull me charade with the Democrats and their lackeys to gain more power.

What we both fight, you and I, is totalitarianism. Authoritarianism. What many conservative saw in Obama and clearly saw in Clinton. Many were fooled and continue to be fooled by both of them. Yet it still amazes me that those who could see it so clearly in the case of those two cannot see it in this clown. Maybe he entertains his supporters better.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire


www.npr.org...

Two Democratic congressmen filed the first article of impeachment against Trump back in July 2017.

When Democrats won a majority in the House after the 2018 elections, impeachment talk grew louder and more, well, colorful. Sherman and Green reintroduced their article of impeachment on Jan. 3, and that same day, freshman Democrat Rashida Tlaib, at a MoveOn reception on Capitol Hill, proclaimed Democrats would "impeach the motherf*****."

yep
impeach the mfer......

pretend the past 3 years didnt happen all you like
npr says it did

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Uh "since His Election", not Before like You are implying...Do you dispute there was talk of impeaching Him before He actually took office?

Were formal efforts started in 2017 (His first year) by Al Green and Brad Sherman?

Did Mark Zaid (The Whistle blowers Attorney) Post in January of 2017 "The Coup has started and Impeachment will follow" literally 10 days after Trump took office.

Just noticed Shooterbrody said the same thing.

a reply to: ATruGod

Did Mark Zaid (The Whistle blowers Attorney) Post in January of 2017 "The Coup has started and Impeachment will follow" literally 10 days after Trump took office.

thanks for that
there were many of these types of comments in the media, i looked but couldn't find them

the calls from the house started from green
I disagree with him but he is at least a stand up guy as he has not stopped his quest

a reply to: ATruGod

Sure I dispute that there was talk of impeachment prior to his election. Don't you dispute it? No one believes there was talk to impeach him prior to the election, yet still, Trump claimed there was.....

And yes, there were a couple of congressmen who wanted to impeach him before the Dems took control, but they were ignored. Then when the House turned Dem,, they put their bill up again and the freshman woman called for it. But still they were pretty much held in check by the leaders of the party. It was because more and more people were coming to understand what a goofball Trump is that impeachment got momentum.

As far as Zaid, I don't know about him. For sake of this conversation I will go look him up.

a reply to: ATruGod

So I see that Zaid did tweet out those comments. And I also see that he is one of a team of advisers for the whistle blower, not the "(The Whistleblowers Attorney) like you make out. You make it out by the capitalization there that he is a big wheel or something when in reality he is just a little cog who tweeted stuff to be grabbed onto by Fox pundits and repeated as proof of the ''coup'' that conservatives can use in defense of their own conflated narrative.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

So I see that Zaid did tweet out those comments.

but he didnt really mean it.....
cheese and rice
"i was wrong" is not that hard.......

a reply to: shooterbrody

So he did mean it. So what? Is he a big mover and shaker in the Dem party? I think not. ATG made him out to be ''The Whistleblowers Lawyer'' as if this guy is going to be setting agendas when in reality he is just one lawyer on a team of lawyers who advise the whistle blower. Why is what he says in a tweet any more important than , say Parnas, who has infiltrated the Guilinai crowd and is close enough to Trump at least once that he has the ability to record Trump making statements that he was trying to keep quiet.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: shooterbrody

ATG made him out to be ''The Whistleblowers Lawyer'' as if this guy is going to be setting agendas when in reality he is just one lawyer on a team of lawyers who advise the whistle blower.

Uh a simple Google search will show Why I came up with that line...every hit on that comment Says "Whistleblowers Lawyer" except the ones explaining it away.

Again I never said before the election I said after elected...Trump probably believed it based on everything that already happened to Him. Not an unreasonable assumption.

Just the simple fact Zaid is involved in the whistleblower looks shady af...after that line. Look what its achieved.