whistleblower's complaint wasnt just about the call, apparently s/he has a laundry list of 'serious instances'.
Printable View
whistleblower's complaint wasnt just about the call, apparently s/he has a laundry list of 'serious instances'.
-185 the whistleblower is a right wing plant, and all this was to goad the democrats into mobilizing trump's base for 2020.
the hypocrisy is just kinda nuts. for the longest time we heard from the hannity crowd that obama used an investigation to take down a political rival and influence an election, and here we have trump admit: 1) he urged ukraine to investigate biden; and 2) he stopped money for military aid from going there.
frankly, even without the "quid pro quo", urging ukraine to investigate your chief rival for obvious political reasons should be impeachable.
i don't get how anyone can rationalize this as normal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
i'm not saying he did it, though he obv did cause he doesn't think before speaking. i'm just asking would you have a problem with it, even if he did.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
the transcript is coming out tmrw why would I speculate on possibilities if i'll have way more answers in short time, i'm a mans man not some gasbag gossiping fag. that's some atine shit, look at the guy throwing out predictions all over the place LMAO
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
i hope he treats you right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Just remember:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Wait to see what the whistleblower actually claims, and then decide how relevant the transcript is.
the dems may look dumber than Smollett tmrw ya lets see this thing
Just remember:Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Wait to see what the whistleblower actually claims, and then decide how relevant the transcript is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanJust remember:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Wait to see what the whistleblower actually claims, and then decide how relevant the transcript is.
what moron? why does some guys opinion matter more than seeing with ur own eyes what actually happened
trump is even meeting with Ukraine tmrw, this is set up nicely for the dems to look like MUH UKRAINE BAFOONS
i can't even get dish to say that the theoretical concept of trump pressuring ukraine over biden would be a bad thing.
lol this country
note that this administration has an established history of releasing doctored transcripts, btw.
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...r-second-time/
https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...script/565385/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/white...b0d1ebe0e41d3b
whats going to be meaningful is if the whistleblower can confirm or deny that the transcripts are undoctored.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
moron the transcript is out tmrw what are u talking about. ya I want to set myself up to look like a moron being completely wrong when I have new information literally tmrw are u nuts. THATS FOR ATINE MORON. we are talking about a whistleblower saying he heard corruption happened, seriously this guy wasn't even in the room. the dems will look like stooges tmrw, there has to be a way to make money on this predictit.org
i think the NYTimes or the washington post said he did this like 8 separate timesQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Why don’t you try with Druff. That would be a better barometer of whether any meaningful number of Republicans in Congress will agree with the Dems that Trump should be impeached if objective information confirms the allegation.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
yeah ok, as a clarification, i'm well aware that no matter what you see tomorrow, you'll say "see, no big deal." none of us are in suspense waiting for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedishQuote:
Originally Posted by blake
moron the transcript is out tmrw what are u talking about. ya I want to set myself up to look like a moron being completely wrong when I have new information literally tmrw are u nuts. THATS FOR ATINE MORON. we are talking about a whistleblower saying he heard corruption happened, seriously this guy wasn't even in the room. the dems will look like stooges tmrw, there has to be a way to make money on this predictit.org
in dish's defense, he did admit trump was the antichrist and even apologized after trump ordained himself as chosen by god.
also quick reminder the republicans stood behind nixon 100% until they totally, utterly didnt like over the course of about 12 hours.
Notice I didn't attack her personally (even though she'll never read any of this, nor will anyone who knows her personally).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloppy JoeWhen you can't refute anything she says, attack her Asperger's or her age.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
The right is completely devoid of basic decency at this point.
Attacking her age is completely fair because she is incredibly young, lacks life experience, lacks education, and basically is not an expert on anything. Having an interest in climate change and learning about it from adults doesn't make you an expert on it.
Furthermore, there are many complex economic issues related to the climate change argument, as well as many scientific concepts I doubt she understands.
How young is too young to speak? What if a 10-year-old spoke? Would that be deserving of respect?
What about a 6-year-old? What about a 3-year-old?
There's obviously some point where everyone agrees that it's absurd for a child to be up there speaking to the UN. So, yes, it is fine to criticize her age, and 16 is far too young to be lecturing anyone, especially about a complex issue like this.
While I believe that climate change is a legitimate passion for this girl, it was adults who decided to allow her to come speak at the UN, and those adults allowed this for manipulative purposes.
I've heard the defense, "Well, it's her generation who will have to live with this", but why not have a 26-year-old speak -- preferably one who has extensively studied these issues as part of doctoral research? The 10 year age difference there would be mostly negligible regarding what they'll have to "live with" in their later years on this earth. So why parade a kid up there? It's because a kid speaking is more dramatic and attention-grabbing, which was the entire point of this. An innocent-looking 16-year-old chiding adults, "You stole my childhood" is a much better sound byte than a 26-year-old droning on about their climate change research.
The left needs to quit using children as frontmen for their causes-du-jour, and the whole "We're the younger generation and are going to be the agents of change" nonsense doesn't really hold up if you really think about it.
Also, there's all this bitching about Trump's tweet about the speech, but it wasn't even that bad.
He saw the manipulative motivations behind the entire thing, tweeted a sarcastic commentary on it, and that was that. He did not insult the girl or her appearance/condition. He knew this was a ridiculous show by the left, exploiting teenagers for sympathy/attention, and he wasn't buying it.
Also, after being criticized for wearing an Antifa t-shirt, she apologized and claimed that she "borrowed" it from a friend.
Yet here's a picture of her parents:
http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/u...t-20.28.03.png
Whoops!
No brainwashing here.
I didn’t think it was possible for the Democrats to do more than they already were to guarantee a Trump second term but here we are...
Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
lol wow, one of my libtard original muh Russia friends just text me "Russia. wait, I mean Ukraine, wait. porn stars."
huh we just recalled our ambassador to ukraine. im sure its just a misunderstanding.
one thing for sure it had nothing to do with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffNotice I didn't attack her personally (even though she'll never read any of this, nor will anyone who knows her personally).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloppy Joe
Attacking her age is completely fair because she is incredibly young, lacks life experience, lacks education, and basically is not an expert on anything. Having an interest in climate change and learning about it from adults doesn't make you an expert on it.
Furthermore, there are many complex economic issues related to the climate change argument, as well as many scientific concepts I doubt she understands.
How young is too young to speak? What if a 10-year-old spoke? Would that be deserving of respect?
What about a 6-year-old? What about a 3-year-old?
There's obviously some point where everyone agrees that it's absurd for a child to be up there speaking to the UN. So, yes, it is fine to criticize her age, and 16 is far too young to be lecturing anyone, especially about a complex issue like this.
While I believe that climate change is a legitimate passion for this girl, it was adults who decided to allow her to come speak at the UN, and those adults allowed this for manipulative purposes.
I've heard the defense, "Well, it's her generation who will have to live with this", but why not have a 26-year-old speak -- preferably one who has extensively studied these issues as part of doctoral research? The 10 year age difference there would be mostly negligible regarding what they'll have to "live with" in their later years on this earth. So why parade a kid up there? It's because a kid speaking is more dramatic and attention-grabbing, which was the entire point of this. An innocent-looking 16-year-old chiding adults, "You stole my childhood" is a much better sound byte than a 26-year-old droning on about their climate change research.
The left needs to quit using children as frontmen for their causes-du-jour, and the whole "We're the younger generation and are going to be the agents of change" nonsense doesn't really hold up if you really think about it.
Why not have the scientists speak? The most qualified in the world?
Oh they did already. It doesn't matter.
Very fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedishQuote:
Originally Posted by devidee
lol wow, one of my libtard original muh Russia friends just text me "Russia. wait, I mean Ukraine, wait. porn stars."
so apparently pelosi isn't planning to hold a vote on impeachment anytime soon and her statement announcing an "official impeachment inquiry" is legally meaningless.
whistle blower = bolton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
she held an informal ballot basically and 0 republicans are going for it and 30-odd dems are also saying no (all from red areas of course). that constitutes an official inquiry.
but again the question is; what happens when the dust settles?
even if they somehow have the votes to impeach, i'm guessing 0.0% chance of his being removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by blake
she held an informal ballot basically and 0 republicans are going for it and 30-odd dems are also saying no (all from red areas of course). that constitutes an official inquiry.
but again the question is; what happens when the dust settles?
unless pelosi thinks it will somehow be politically beneficial, it's hard to imagine she'll do it
why tf is tyde still banned?
lol friendsQuote:
Originally Posted by TellafriendVery fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
She killed it on Game of Thrones. Amirite?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloppy JoeWhen you can't refute anything she says, attack her Asperger's or her age.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
The right is completely devoid of basic decency at this point.
Beat me to it. They can’t stop stepping on their own dicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
it really depends what comes out and who brings it. its much too soon to tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeeven if they somehow have the votes to impeach, i'm guessing 0.0% chance of his being removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
unless pelosi thinks it will somehow be politically beneficial, it's hard to imagine she'll do it
bolton swings a big political dick, for example.
like just for example, if bolton says trump sidelined our ambassador to the ukraine so rudy could run a shadow agenda to compromise biden while threatening to withhold 400m in foreign aid, its going to be night of the long knives for anyone who thinks trump can protect them.
and all those unique components _appear_ to be out there, waiting to be entered into the record.
or... nothingburger. but its odd that trump would phone pelosi begging to 'make a deal' about a nothingburger.