Printable View
FYPQuote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
Nice talking point, but they're impeaching him for using military aid to pressure Ukraine to announce an investigation of Biden and the DNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
(Because Trump only cares about the optics of such an announcement, not necessarily an actual investigation.)
everything i said is true. and i really believe grandpa biden is going to be the big loser in all of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanNice talking point, but they're impeaching him for using military aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate Biden and the DNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
I don't think they'd 'railroad' him for jaywalking.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvaeverything i said is true. and i really believe grandpa biden is going to be the big loser in all of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
And everything I said is true.
They’re impeaching him for bribery.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanNice talking point, but they're impeaching him for using military aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate Biden and the DNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
https://youtu.be/zd1zpizMNi4
So isn’t it a fair point to wonder why zero of the democrats have asked zero of the witnesses testifying if bribery occurred?
over the past few pages, you just keep repeating that there's nothing to see here yet you go to amazing lengths to avoid actually discussing anything substantive.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvaeverything i said is true. and i really believe grandpa biden is going to be the big loser in all of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
you are perfectly representative of every trump supporter i know (and in this thread).
i'm thinking of a way to be respectful but i'm on the verge of losing it. no that would not be a fair point. whether he committed bribery is a legal conclusion. you don't ask fact witnesses to make legal conclusions. also, quid pro quo, depending on what is being exchanged, can absolutely be bribery, without using the word "bribery."Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefishThey’re impeaching him for bribery.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
https://youtu.be/zd1zpizMNi4
So isn’t it a fair point to wonder why zero of the democrats have asked zero of the witnesses testifying if bribery occurred?
i'm about to lose my fucking mind with you people.
bribery,,dat's it...we're going wit dat one now. we have a zero % chance of any of this stuff sticking, but let's not lose sight of our main goal of wasting money and trying to take election points away from our bitter rival.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blakei'm thinking of a way to be respectful but i'm on the verge of losing it. no that would not be a fair point. whether he committed bribery is a legal conclusion. you don't ask fact witnesses to make legal conclusions. also, quid pro quo, depending on what is being exchanged, can absolutely be bribery, without using the word "bribery."Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
You don’t need to be a legal scholar to give an eye witness opinion on bribery. The interviewers stray from the facts consistently so why would they act any different here? The dude interviewing right now called it a “shake down”, what the hell is the difference?
Also, lol, if you find this thread stressful go nap it out. Communicating with people with different opinions is scary business nowadays.
Btw, I do think some form of bribery occurred but I think Trump has done 100s of more sketchy things since coming into office. Impeaching Trump for this call is the equivalent of Capone going to prison for tax evasion.
Small doses Blake. PFA isn’t a real place. Neither is Twitter or Facebook. Arguments can’t be won or lost here.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
we agree on your ultimate conclusion as to what trump didQuote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefishQuote:
Originally Posted by blake
You don’t need to be a legal scholar to give an eye witness opinion on bribery. The interviewers stray from the facts consistently so why would they act any different here? The dude interviewing right now called it a “shake down”, what the hell is the difference?
Also, lol, if you find this thread stressful go nap it out. Communicating with people with different opinions is scary business nowadays.
Btw, I do think some form of bribery occurred but I think Trump has done 100s of more scatchy things since coming into office. Impeaching Trump for this call is the equivalent of Capone going to prison for tax evasion.
but prosecutors don't ask witnesses "so did he commit extortion?" or "would you say that's embezzlement?" please don't buy into the sean hannity spin. he assumes you're an idiot.
lawyers ask the witnesses what they saw, not to give a conclusion. like, "what did rudy tell you to do next?" then what? etc., etc.
i'm sorry but the most frustrating part of this discussion is that literally the entire line of questioning today was about bribery (or quid pro quo, whatever you want to call it).
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
“Was there a quid pro quo? The answer is yes.”
- Sondland
do u stil operate sonatine's site.something or other?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
“Was there a quid pro quo? The answer is yes.”
- Sondland
i miss those cascading cats with bugles
Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvado u stil operate sonatine's site.something or other?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
i miss those cascading cats with bugles
we moved it to the VIP forum but we may open up the books again.
also fun fact:
root@knowledge:/var/www# whois sonatine's site.com |grep Creation
Creation Date: 2010-03-13T10:05:01Z
root@knowledge:/var/www# whois pokerfraudalert.com |grep Creation
Creation Date: 2012-03-01T01:46:19Z
lol @ todd brazenly ripping off my site. unbelievable.
more memory lane
root@glory:~/www.donkdown.com# ls -al
total 20
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Jun 7 2015 .
drwx------ 14 root root 4096 May 30 2018 ..
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jun 7 2015 icons
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 574 Aug 16 2014 robots.txt
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Jun 7 2015 wp-content
They’re not in a court of law and there aren’t any prosecutors.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakewe agree on your ultimate conclusion as to what trump didQuote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
but prosecutors don't ask witnesses "so did he commit extortion?" or "would you say that's embezzlement?" please don't buy into the sean hannity spin. he assumes you're an idiot.
lawyers ask the witnesses what they saw, not to give a conclusion. like, "what did rudy tell you to do next?" then what? etc., etc.
i'm sorry but the most frustrating part of this discussion is that literally the entire line of questioning today was about bribery (or quid pro quo, whatever you want to call it).
you ignored every word i said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefishThey’re not in a court of law and there aren’t any prosecutors.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
After you ignored every word I said, you are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeyou ignored every word i said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
What do you think the purpose of this inquiry is? NP got in front of the world and said that it’s because the president committed bribery and she wants to give transparency to the American people, end game being impeachment. The only way an impeachment will be successful is for the Dems to convince the American people that Trump should be removed from office and in turn the senate republicans might turn on Trump. She’s claiming bribery and has a bunch of eye witnesses. Doesn’t it make a better case when going for impeachment if you can say we have 10 eye witnesses who testified under oath that they believe there was bribery? If that doesn’t carry any weight then why is the whistleblowers opinion so valuable? The battle that really needs to be won is in the court of public opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefishAfter you ignored every word I said, you are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
What do you think the purpose of this inquiry is? NP got in front of the world and said that it’s because the president committed bribery and she wants to give transparency to the American people, end game being impeachment. The only way an impeachment will be successful is for the Dems to convince the American people that Trump should be removed from office and in turn the senate republicans might turn on Trump. She’s claiming bribery and has a bunch of eye witnesses. Doesn’t it make a better case when going for impeachment if you can say we have 10 eye witnesses who testified under oath that they believe there was bribery? If that doesn’t carry any weight then why is the whistleblowers opinion so valuable? The battle that really needs to be won is in the court of public opinion.
you don't get it. the democrats would be laughed at for asking sondland, "so, did trump commit bribery?" why is that for him to decide? why does his opinion even matter? you don't ask witnesses these questions. wtf is wrong with you?
and my god, if he actually said "yes," how badly would the republicans (justifiably) murder him for showing obvious bias? you actually think sondland giving his opinion that trump's a criminal would help the democrats? you don't see a problem with an impartial witness acting as the judge?
jesus christ
So you don’t think any of the eye witnesses’ opinions matter yet the whistleblower’s opinion which isn’t first hand somehow matters? What the hell are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeQuote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
you don't get it. the democrats would be laughed at for asking sondland, "so, did trump commit bribery?" why is that for him to decide? why does his opinion even matter? you don't ask witnesses these questions. wtf is wrong with you?
and my god, if he actually said "yes," how badly would the republicans (justifiably) murder him for showing obvious bias? you actually think sondland giving his opinion that trump's a criminal would help the democrats? you don't see a problem with an impartial witness acting as the judge?
jesus christ
It’s hilarious that you refuse to admit the Dems are making mistakes. In line with Trump supporters who can’t admit he lies.
That's not what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
Whistleblowers opinion doesn't matter.
Fact witnesses opinions don't matter.
The facts matter.
Without the whistleblower’s opinion there would be no impeachment inquiry. How can you say his opinion doesn’t matter?Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanThat's not what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
Whistleblowers opinion doesn't matter.
Fact witnesses opinions don't matter.
The facts matter.
So if every witness under oath said they believed what they witnessed was bribery that wouldn’t matter to you? You don’t think that would be a talking point on every liberal news channel? Their opinions matter because these are highly respected officials who are experienced in these situations and are under oath. Their opinion definitely carries weight with me and would with many other Americans who are on the fence about the impeachment and removing Trump from office. Once again, they have to win the court of public opinion not in a court of law.
Just like this: The whistleblowers opinion doesn't matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
Someone told the whistleblower something bad was happening, so he passed the info up the chain of command. That's all. His opinion doesn't matter. The facts do matter.
The only opinions that matter, at least in terms of impeachment, are the opinions of the people who we elected to represent us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefishSo you don’t think any of the eye witnesses’ opinions matter yet the whistleblower’s opinion which isn’t first hand somehow matters? What the hell are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
It’s hilarious that you refuse to admit the Dems are making mistakes. In line with Trump supporters who can’t admit he lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanThat's not what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
Whistleblowers opinion doesn't matter.
Fact witnesses opinions don't matter.
The facts matter.
:this
sondland testified that giuliani gave him a message to convey to zelensky: publicly announce an investigation into biden or there would be no white house meeting (and implicitly, no foreign aid).
sondland characterized this as a quid pro quo. the lawyers (and senators) can debate if this constitutes bribery or is otherwise impeachable
i could care less if sondland -- a non-lawyer -- believes or doesn't believe trump's conduct meets the legal definition of bribery (if he somehow knew what elements constitute the crime of bribery. which he wouldn't).
and why you care about sondland's legal conclusions is beyond me.
You dipdhits still don’t get it. You keep bringing up legal standards that don’t pertain to this discussion.
To say the opinions of high ranking officials testifying under oath doesn’t matter is borderline retarded. These are expert witnesses that are highly experienced in foreign affairs, policies and procedures. In this situation, their unbiased opinion is basically fact.
Once again, let it sink in, the road to impeaching and removing the president goes through the Dems creating overwhelming public opinion to do it. You’re crazy If you think the way Dems are handling things will result it that removal.
what a shocking plot twist; pfa's team retard are, in fact, learning disabled.
Sweetie, Take it easy on them. They’re just emotional and can’t think it through.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
the last like 2+ pages:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mulvaimpeached..lol it means nothing to win 1/2 an impeachment because of partisan politics...once or if the gop senate get their turn they'll kick it right out and he'll stay in office.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
that's still not gonna stop the media from big bold font saying trump impeached, and every jackass that doesn''t know how this stupid shit goes down to either clap or cry because of this. but once they find out that he won't be removed until another vote they will feel duped and trump will only get stronger as the dems and the msm becomes more transparent
Hey, dummy! After Trump gets bounced from office, through a conviction or election loss, he can still be prosecuted in criminal court for any wrong-doing discovered in the impeachment process, even if tried in the Senate and acquitted. Why? Because the Senate trial is not a criminal trial, so there is no issue of double jeopardy.
So suck on that for awhile, bud. Your boy Trump is going to go to prison, one way or another...if he doesn’t die of a stroke beforehand caused by the stress of battling the legal firestorm that is brewing for him as we speak.
In the meantime, enjoy this bit of karma.
Not to Donald Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanThat's not what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
Whistleblowers opinion doesn't matter.
Fact witnesses opinions don't matter.
The facts matter.
https://pics.me.me/facts-i-dont-like...d-21431147.png
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/75/5f/83/7...06072fa3c3.jpg
1) you appear to be genuinely brain damaged. i no longer think you're ignoring me. i just don't think you understand me. (i'm typing this response for everyone else here.) this is why there is no path to impeachment. trump's supporters will never leave him. doesn't mean they shouldn't try, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
2) sondland's entire testimony was about bribery, but because you didn't hear that specific word, you didn't realize it. what a letdown for you!
3) sondland has no foreign affairs experience. he bought an ambassadorship by donating $1,000,000 to trump's campaign.
4) to recap, you're disappointed that sondland (the hotel owner) failed to give his legal conclusion on whether trump committed a crime. don't you see how frustrating this must be for me?
1) when did I say one word about Sondland? When I was talking about high ranking, experienced people testifying under oath you thought I was talking about him?Quote:
Originally Posted by blake1) you appear to be genuinely brain damaged. i no longer think you're ignoring me. i just don't think you understand me. (i'm typing this response for everyone else here.) this is why there is no path to impeachment. trump's supporters will never leave him. doesn't mean they shouldn't try, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmarefish
2) sondland's entire testimony was about bribery, but because you didn't hear that specific word, you didn't realize it. what a letdown for you!
3) sondland has no foreign affairs experience. he bought an ambassadorship by donating $1,000,000 to trump's campaign.
4) to recap, you're disappointed that sondland (the hotel owner) failed to give his legal conclusion on whether trump committed a crime. don't you see how frustrating this must be for me?
2) what the hell are you talking about? Again.
Given Giuliani’s bromance with Trump, snd Sondland identifying him as co-conspirator in Trump’s Ukraine extortion affair, I’m wondering whether this Giuliani’s theme song regarding this matter.
https://youtu.be/Gx6Fu-7dAXc
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
was taught in law school it literally means "this for that."
'Russia did it, it is beyond dispute'
Funny how the only people that don't think Russia did it
# 1 Watch Fox "news" only
# 2 Don't believe in Climate change
# 3 Think Trump isn't a criminal, but is truthful.
# 4 Think the Mueller report cleared him
# 5 Think Obama was born in Kenya and Hillary is a child predator, etc etc etc etc
Edit : Believe the Seth Rich Story
it is whack job shit.
Best part of these being on TV is Fox can't hide from their viewers they are, (& have been from day 1), full of shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyG_415
yes Russia dispatched horrible twitter trolls and even worse facebook memes that were probably a net negative just like the no passion DNC correct the record trolls
now that that's settled, shouldn't u change ur avatar to myles garrett
hard right wing scumbag Netanyahu will be indicted for bribery, fraud and breach of trust.
Him and Trump should be sharing a cell till they both die. Scumbags
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/21/m...ntl/index.html