Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DNI Whistleblower Tip About Trump Phone Call Alarms Former Intel Officials

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • jgarden
    replied
    Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    Wonder why the so-called Whistleblower doesn't want to testify in the House investigation?

    Because he was involved in the Ukrainian interference in the 2016 Presidental election.

    But he will be forced to testify in the Senate hearings. And his testimony will prove that it was the Democrats and not the Republicans who were responsible for foreign interference in the 2016 election.

    This is going to backfire big time on the Democrats and they will have no one to blame but themselves.
    If Trump and the Republicans can ignore those subpoenas issued by the House, why would the Bidens and the Whistleblower cooperate with the GOP Senate?

    If more revelations during the impeachment hearing continue to drive Trump lower in the polls or the economy begins to tank, Republican Senators especially those up for re-election in 2020 could decide that their political futures require that they cut their losses and severe their ties with this President!
    Last edited by jgarden; November 2nd, 2019, 11:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    Wonder why the so-called Whistleblower doesn't want to testify in the House investigation?

    Who said he "doesn't want to testify?" Your conspiracy sites?

    Mark Zaid, who along with Andrew Bakaj is an attorney for both the original whistleblower and the second whistleblower, told the Washington Examiner the legal team was willing to work with lawmakers so long as anonymity is ensured. “We remain committed to cooperating with any congressional oversight committee's requests so long as it properly protects and ensures the anonymity of our clients,” Zaid said.

    Because he was involved in the Ukrainian interference in the 2016 Presidental election.

    But he will be forced to testify in the Senate hearings. And his testimony will prove that it was the Democrats and not the Republicans who were responsible for foreign interference in the 2016 election.

    This is going to backfire big time on the Democrats and they will have no one to blame but themselves.
    Insanity.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Shugart
    replied
    Originally posted by tcdeliveries2017 View Post
    Ok i just read the report. Can so.eone please explain what exactly is wrong with it. For the life of me i. Missing the punch lines i guess.
    The only punch line is the one which the delusional Democrats have invented.

    There is no there there but somehow the Democrats have tricked their minds into believing that a crime can be found in the phone call.

    Leave a comment:


  • tcdeliveries2017
    replied
    Ok i just read the report. Can so.eone please explain what exactly is wrong with it. For the life of me i. Missing the punch lines i guess.

    Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    Perfect. Just absolutely perfect.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Shugart
    replied
    Wonder why the so-called Whistleblower doesn't want to testify in the House investigation?

    Because he was involved in the Ukrainian interference in the 2016 Presidental election.

    But he will be forced to testify in the Senate hearings. And his testimony will prove that it was the Democrats and not the Republicans who were responsible for foreign interference in the 2016 election.

    This is going to backfire big time on the Democrats and they will have no one to blame but themselves.

    Leave a comment:


  • ffreeloader
    replied
    I have to wonder why no one has pointed out the obvious underlying facts in this thread. I've known this from the start, but waited to see if anyone else would point to the obvious.

    All these "former intel officials" are Democrats. Most of them worked for the Obama administration. They are just parroting the Democrat party line. You can "build" quite a "case" when you quote partisan sources who are afraid their own felonious behavior is going to be exposed by Trump.

    All it takes is a minimal amount of research to refute these fantastic allegations.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Ryan GoodmanVerified account @rgoodlaw

    Sondland is in deep, deep legal trouble.



    Lieutenant Colonel Vindman's opening statement:



    Gordon Sondland's opening statement:

    Leave a comment:


  • jgarden
    replied
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    Ok, so what is the crime he's been convicted of?

    I mean, I'm all for impeachment, but hasn't the holdup on the part of the dems been a lack of criminal offenses?

    Provable criminal offenses?


    According to Lindsey Graham during the 1999 Clinton Impeachment, the President doesn't have to commit or be convicted of a "criminal offense" to impeached by Congress!

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Army Officer Who Heard Trump’s Ukraine Call Reported Concerns

    The top Ukraine expert at the White House will tell impeachment investigators he twice reported concerns about President Trump’s pressure tactics on Ukraine, acting out of a “sense of duty.”

    WASHINGTON -- A White House national security official who is a decorated Iraq war veteran plans to tell House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that he heard President Trump appeal to Ukraine's president to investigate one of his leading political rivals, a request the aide considered so damaging to American interests that he reported it to a superior.

    Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman of the Army, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, twice registered internal objections about how Mr. Trump and his inner circle were treating Ukraine, out of what he called a "sense of duty," he plans to tell the inquiry, according to a draft of his opening statement obtained by The New York Times.

    He will be the first White House official to testify who listened in on the July 25 telephone call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine that is at the center of the impeachment inquiry, in which Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    Originally posted by ffreeloader View Post
    Show the evidence that Trump has taken any money from the Saudis. No, not just accusations/assertions, but actual evidence. Show the money trail and the quid pro quo. But, I know you won't as there has never been any evidence showing such a thing. Oh, the accusations and assertions abound, but evidence, actual evidence, has never been shown.
    Trump talked tough about Saudi Arabia during the 2016 election:
    Donald of Arabia

    But after the election, Trump has acted like he is bought and paid for by Saudi Arabia. If you don't know that, you haven't been paying attention.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Neal Katyal: "Supreme Court lawyer; law professor; extremist centrist. Former U.S. Acting Solicitor General"


    Neal KatyalVerified account @neal_katyal
    This is the textbook definition of an impeachable offense, and the White House Chief of Staff has just admitted it.


    John HarwoodVerified account @JohnJHarwood
    Mulvaney concedes that Trump’s desire to investigate “DNC server” was part of the reason Ukraine aide was held upreporter: so it was a quid pro quo…
    10:27 AM - 17 Oct 2019

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Fiona Hill, Trump's former top Russia adviser, testified for over ten hours today.

    She told impeachment investigators on Monday that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump, according to a person familiar with her testimony.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Peter BakerVerified account @peterbakernyt

    Breaking: Bolton instructed aide to report Giuliani pressure campaign to White House lawyer. “I am not part of whatever drug deal Rudy and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Bolton said, according to testimony to House investigators.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X