Ukrainegate - Page 61 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Red Rackham
#15050175
Hindsite wrote:I did not say it was inappropriate, but since I have 20 years experience on active duty in the U.S. Army, I remember being taught to address my concerns up the chain of command first. LTC Vindman did not provide that courtesy to the next above him in his chain of command, seeming to indicate a lack of respect.


Hindsite, I respect the fact that you're not only a serviceman but a 20 year serviceman. May I ask, what regiment are you in?..
By Hindsite
#15050179
Atlantis wrote::lol:

If the Trump ass-kissers can pull their head out off his colon just for one sec. ...
That is even more appropriate for the lying (shifty) Adam Schiff ass-kisser. :lol:



I did listen to all the public hearings and have never even listened or read Breitbart in my life. Two plus two may not always equal four. It depends on what you are adding. So it is erroneous to presume facts that are not there. I hope the Left hasn't deteriorated to the point of convicting someone based on another person's presumptions, instead of proven facts.

Red Rackham wrote:Hindsite, I respect the fact that you're not only a serviceman but a 20 year serviceman. May I ask, what regiment are you in?..

Signal Telecommunications.
By Red Rackham
#15050182
Hindsite wrote:Signal Telecommunications.


Your not very talkative, I spent a couple of years attached to a signals squadron, that was a long time ago. In later years and in a completely different roll I served alongside your fellow countrymen.
By Hindsite
#15050183
jimjam wrote:Everyone in this inquiry has been clear. We are doing exactly what the Russians want. The President is doing more for Russian interests than he is for the security interests of the United States of America. Then these Republicans turn cry babies and use terms like 'Never Trumpers'.

Fiona Hill may have been the best witness I’ve ever seen in a hearing. At times it was comical watching the GOP members as she thoroughly debunked their conspiracy theories. Eventually they just gave up asking her questions and just gave speeches. :lol: I noticed Nunes was fairly subdued while questioning her. I reckon he knew she'd tear him apart if he tried anything like the tactics he has used on others. She owned the room.

https://youtu.be/i4Dg00JxxkM

I was impressed with Fiona Hill too, but not with this portion of her testimony. She starts off repeating the false claim she apparently heard from the lying "shifty" Adam Schiff that the Republicans were denying that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. However, the Republicans set her straight on that point.

Red Rackham wrote:Your not very talkative, I spent a couple of years attached to a signals squadron, that was a long time ago. In later years and in a completely different roll I served alongside your fellow countrymen.

I served one tour at S.H.A.P.E. Belgium with some NATO members, including the British. I ran in a track meet a couple years there winning several gold and one bronze metal in my off duty time. I remember that there were some good British and German runners there.
By late
#15050187
Hindsite wrote:
I did not say it was inappropriate, but since I have 20 years experience on active duty in the U.S. Army, I remember being taught to address my concerns up the chain of command first. LTC Vindman did not provide that courtesy to the next above him in his chain of command, seeming to indicate a lack of respect.



You need more than "seeming".

At his level, he has to talk to a lot of people, and getting things right (which is why he needs to talk to others) is part of his job.

Sounds like the usual..
By late
#15050189
Hindsite wrote:
I was impressed with Fiona Hill too, but not with this portion of her testimony. She starts off repeating the false claim she apparently heard from the lying "shifty" Adam Schiff that the Republicans were denying that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. However, the Republicans set her straight on that point.




Trump and his cronies have been saying it was Ukraine, not Russia.

"The new-ish Trump Republican theory about Ukraine and the Democratic National Committee goes like this: The Democrats teamed up with the cyber-security firm CrowdStrike to hack the DNC server in 2016 in order to frame Russia, while also somehow sabotaging Trump’s campaign. A key component to this theory is the false claim that CrowdStrike’s founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is Ukrainian."

This was still the mantra just last week...

"Not surprisingly, the CrowdStrike theory is 100 percent, unpasteurized nincompoopery. (Reportedly, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky didn't know what Trump was talking about; his aides had to look up this nonsense on the internet.)"

"According to the FBI’s memo of Gates’ April 2018 interview, Gates told Mueller’s office that the idea that Ukraine was involved was a theory pushed by Konstantin Kilimnik.."

That last bit is a hint.

https://www.salon.com/2019/11/19/trumps ... come-from/
By Hindsite
#15050193
late wrote:Trump and his cronies have been saying it was Ukraine, not Russia.

"The new-ish Trump Republican theory about Ukraine and the Democratic National Committee goes like this: The Democrats teamed up with the cyber-security firm CrowdStrike to hack the DNC server in 2016 in order to frame Russia, while also somehow sabotaging Trump’s campaign. A key component to this theory is the false claim that CrowdStrike’s founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is Ukrainian."

This was still the mantra just last week...

"Not surprisingly, the CrowdStrike theory is 100 percent, unpasteurized nincompoopery. (Reportedly, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky didn't know what Trump was talking about; his aides had to look up this nonsense on the internet.)"

"According to the FBI’s memo of Gates’ April 2018 interview, Gates told Mueller’s office that the idea that Ukraine was involved was a theory pushed by Konstantin Kilimnik.."

That last bit is a hint.

https://www.salon.com/2019/11/19/trumps ... come-from/

Dr. Fiona Hill was making reference to the Republicans on that committee, not to what Trump and his cronies were saying. Listen to the beginning of the video. She says, "some on this committee" and nothing about "Trump and his cronies" in jimjam's video of a portion of her opening statement.

late wrote:You need more than "seeming".

At his level, he has to talk to a lot of people, and getting things right (which is why he needs to talk to others) is part of his job.

He apparently needed to talk or leak to the CIA whistleblower too.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15050196
late wrote:You keep making assertions without an argument to put flesh on the bones, or a source to add weight. IOW, fiction.

You'll just have to wait and see. I was really looking forward to impeachment. I thought it would be a lot more entertaining. It has been a total bore, even with Schiff conducting secret hearings, stacking the deck, controlling witnesses, controlling the rules, etc. I'm kind of amazed they've fucked it up this badly, but I wasn't expecting them to be able to land any real blows.

late wrote:It's smoke and mirrors that they want to use in the next election.

This is the Democrats 2020 campaign. Didn't you watch the debate last night? Republicans in 2016 were bringing in 20M viewers to their debates. Democrats only 6M this year. The Democrats are boring, strange and their views rather extreme.

late wrote:Russiagate goes back to Putin's office.

Uh huh.

late wrote:This could be a real bad day for you.

How so? I've been calling for the Democrats to impeach Trump. The Trump administration is looking for a full trial in the Senate--rejecting calls to dismiss charges. They want to wage an affirmative defense. I think that will be much more interesting than the Schiff Show.

late wrote:Fiona has been threatening to talk about how Putin leads Trump around by the nose.

Yeah. So what's your point? Is it Russia or is it Ukraine? Can you make up your mind? She didn't hear the call either. She read the transcript, just like I did.

late wrote:That's because they've not only heard it from a bunch of witnesses, "I have a favor to ask, though".

Only Vindman and that mousy broad heard the call. Neither of them claimed they witnessed anything criminal. Everyone else had to read the transcript, just like average Americans.

late wrote:We should have more witnesses, but obstruction of justice...

Oh, I think that would be wonderful! Schiff is doing such a great job. Trump should hire him as his campaign manager.

jimjam wrote:Everyone in this inquiry has been clear. We are doing exactly what the Russians want.

Really? The Russians wanted us to give arms to Ukraine? Who knew? I think the most disturbing part of this is how many foreign-born people are supposedly interested in US national security and serving on our national security counsel. Anyway, for the Trump administration, she was hired by General Flynn.

jimjam wrote:Fiona Hill may have been the best witness I’ve ever seen in a hearing.

Really? Even better than Sondland's whiplash yesterday? She testified that Ukraine didn't interfere in the US elections in 2016, even though Politico, WaPo, etc. have already reported that they did. Some expert... :roll:

I think the funniest charade in all of this is people who pretend they aren't political. It's kind of like the media back when it used to pretend it was objective. The State Department IS political. Holmes said this:

Holmes wrote:I am an apolitical foreign policy professional, and my job is to focus on the politics of the country in which I serve so that we can better understand the local landscape and better advance U.S. national interests there

So he wants to avoid Washington politics while serving in a political branch of government focusing on politics to advance US political interest. It's like saying your an attorney with no interest in the plaintiff or the defendant.

Stormsmith wrote:I think it's time the Manhattan DA's office should have a chat with Rudi (anD Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman)

Not that I expect a sensible answer, but why would a municipal government have any interest in these characters?

late wrote:Trump and his cronies have been saying it was Ukraine, not Russia.

Hillary Clinton's campaign enlisted both Russians and Ukrainians. They are trying to put up a smokescreen so people don't find out what Clinton did.
By Hindsite
#15050200
Eric Ciaramella is a CIA analyst and former National Security Council staffer who has served in both the Obama and Trump administrations as a career intelligence officer.

According to the Washington Examiner, Ciaramella is currently detailed by the CIA to the National Intelligence Committee, where he works as a deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia. He reports to Trump’s acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire. He likely works closely with Alexander Vindman, the impeachment inquiry witness who is now Ukraine director for the NSC, Ciaramella’s former role.

A former Trump official told the Examiner, “It is close to a mathematical certainty that (Vindman and the whistleblower) know one another and that (the whistleblower) is being used to provide analytical support to the National Security Council on the topics of Russia and Ukraine. And that is where they would have crossed paths. They would know who one another are.” Another former Trump official said Vindman and Ciaramella both spent time at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine during the Obama administration. And they have both been working on Ukraine issues for several years.

Eric Ciaramella, 33, is a Ukraine expert for the CIA Whose Background Matches the biographical details reported by The New York Times and other media outlets about the whistleblower. Sources told Real Clear Investigations that Ciaramella’s name has been mentioned as the whistleblower during the closed-door testimony.

Ciaramella has worked for the Central Intelligence Agency for several years and was assigned to the White House in 2015 under National Security Advisor Susan Rice in the Obama administration. He worked closely in his role as an expert on Ukraine with Vice President Biden, who was working on Ukraine issues at the end of Obama’s time in office. Ciaramella also has ties to Sean Misko, a former NSC co-worker who now works for Representative Adam Schiff and the Intelligence Committee.

The whistleblower’s ties to Democrats, including Biden, Schiff, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of Intelligence James Clapper and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice, have created controversy, with Trump and Republicans using his past work with them in an attempt to discredit him. Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert told a local radio station in his home state of Texas that many in Washington D.C. knew the whistleblower’s identity, calling him a “staunch Democrat,” and former “point person on Ukraine,” who never called out corruption in the Eastern European country.

Ciaramella worked on Eastern European issues along with another Obama administration holdover, Fiona Hill. Ciaramella was also accused of being a major leaker while working with McMaster. He was accused of leaking information to the media about Michael Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak. McMaster also worked with Abigail Grace and Sean Misko, both also Obama holdovers. Grace and Misko are now aides to Rep. Schiff. McMaster’s staffers were frequently accused of being behind leaks of embarrassing details about Trump’s calls to foreign leaders. None of those accusations were ever proven. In the summer of 2017, Ciaramella returned to the CIA, where he is still an active employee.

Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and the former chief of staff for the National Security Council, told Real Clear Investigations, “Everyone knows who he is. CNN knows. The Washington Post knows. The New York Times knows. Congress knows. The White House knows. Even the president knows who he is. They’re hiding him. They’re hiding him because of his political bias.”

Democrats have sought to keep the name concealed and have criticized efforts by Republicans to name the whistleblower. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "Outing the whistleblower is an unpatriotic action. They shouldn’t even go near that."

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Eric_Ciaramella

Praise the Lord.
:lol:
By Atlantis
#15050212
blackjack21 wrote:Well at least you have a clue now why socialism is a hard sell to most people with real life experience. Fortunately for socialists, an idiot is born every day.


That doesn't explain why socialism is disappearing while the world population is increasing. I would rather say innumerable fools are born every second.

It's also hard to understand why you think that Kim Jong Un and Idi Amin are socialists. I think you use the term socialism as a straw man for everything you don't like, irrespective of what socialism means.

Why Americans are so obsessed with socialism is a mystery. I can only assume that it has to do with a greedy and violent people that is founded on genocide of the natives and that now believes it has a natural right to do the same to the whole world. It's about imperialism and unfettered greed at the expense of the rest of humanity and at the expense of creation itself. Yankee imperialism is the curse of the world.

You haven't got any argument regarding the Ukraine affair. That's why you engage in character assassinations of the witnesses and in technical tricks to divert from the crime. The first hand testimony in the words of Donald Trump is clear from the transcript of his phone call. There is no doubt about it. All other witnesses have consistently corroborated this. Trump is asking a foreign leader to publicly smear his political rival on CNN in exchange for US support. There is no doubt it.

Instead of addressing the facts, the always Trumpers have launched a massive campaign of witness intimidation and character assassination. You are making silly comparisons about a legal quid pro quo which has nothing to do with the crime committed by Trump. Instead of addressing the facts, you are playing with words.

Instead of contesting the crime, the Republicans commit another crime by trying to violate the right to anonymity of the whistle blower. The report of the whistle blower has been confirmed by the inquiry and there is no purpose in exposing his identity other than to destroy the person to discourage future whistle blowers. The Republicans willfully endanger the security of the nation by trying to expose intelligence details that are expressly excluded from the investigation. The Republicans keep on harping about Russian hoaxes and the like that have nothing to do with the investigation. Russian interference is not contested. What we don't know for certain is to what degree Trump was directly involved. Instead of trying to bring light into the inquiry so the nation can move on, the Republicans are stone walling to prevent key witnesses and relevant documents to get to the inquiry.

Trump has divided the nation, and as every day goes on, the nation grows further apart by the violence of his partisan temper. He is out to destroy the bloody US of A, which is fine by me, but he is also out to destroy democracy, the rule of law, human rights and this planet, which is not fine by me.
By Hindsite
#15050215
Atlantis wrote:Trump has divided the nation, and as every day goes on, the nation grows further apart by the violence of his partisan temper. He is out to destroy the bloody US of A, which is fine by me, but he is also out to destroy democracy, the rule of law, human rights and this planet, which is not fine by me.

Trump did not divide the nation. It has been divided before Trump by Democrats and Republicans. It just seems more noticeable now, because Trump's campaign slogan is Make America Great Again. That really pisses the Democrats off, especially the communists and socialists.
By late
#15050223
Hindsite wrote:
Dr. Fiona Hill was making reference to the Republicans on that committee, not to what Trump and his cronies were saying.





Way to miss the obvious, the Republicans in the hearing were trying to do what Trump wanted.

"The fact that the two biggest controversies of the Trump presidency have revolved around Russia and Ukraine — two former Soviet republics in a state of perpetual conflict — might have seemed like a strange coincidence.

(Recently released Mueller documents) show that Trump’s Ukraine conspiracy theory appears to have been propagated by two top aides who were central figures in the special counsel’s investigation: Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn. The conspiracy theory also was apparently fertilized by Manafort associate Konstantin Kilimnik..The three of them appear to have played a role in convincing Trump...

Mueller’s investigators concluded that Kilimnik, Manafort’s associate in Ukraine, had ongoing ties to Russian intelligence during this whole period."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -campaign/

IOW, Putin is still leading Trump around by the nose.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15050237
Atlantis wrote:It's also hard to understand why you think that Kim Jong Un and Idi Amin are socialists.

Uh huh. Well how about Erich Honecker? It's hard to see why socialists think that every prominent politician who purports to be a socialist isn't really a socialist? How about Fidel or Raul Castro?

Atlantis wrote:I think you use the term socialism as a straw man for everything you don't like, irrespective of what socialism means.

I don't care for basketball, but I don't think it is socialist. As it is, the main government types out there today are liberal democracy and socialism, with monarchy, despotism and Islamic governments fairly distant seconds. Liberal democracy has been on a tear since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Atlantis wrote:Why Americans are so obsessed with socialism is a mystery.

Generally we're not, but we don't want it on our shores.

Atlantis wrote:I can only assume...

He he. You sound like Sondland testifying to the House Intelligence committee.

Atlantis wrote:...a greedy and violent people that is founded on genocide

By that, I assume you mean Europeans, right?

Atlantis wrote:Yankee imperialism is the curse of the world.

Stop trading with us then.

Atlantis wrote:You haven't got any argument regarding the Ukraine affair.

I'm not making the accusations against Trump. I don't need an argument. The burden of proof isn't on me.

Atlantis wrote:That's why you engage in character assassinations of the witnesses and in technical tricks to divert from the crime. The first hand testimony in the words of Donald Trump is clear from the transcript of his phone call. There is no doubt about it. All other witnesses have consistently corroborated this.

I'm simply pointing out that except for Vindman and Williams, who were actually on the call, all of the other "witnesses" did not witness anything. Except for Sondland, none of them had ever even spoken with the POTUS. As the testimony revealed, many of them got their ideas about the call from Sondland who testified that these were his presumptions and that nobody on the entire planet had told him that this was the case. Sondland essentially kept amending (changing) his testimony.

As for "the crime," no crime has been charged and nothing meets the basic requirements of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Atlantis wrote:Trump is asking a foreign leader to publicly smear his political rival on CNN in exchange for US support.

Cite the relevant section of the transcript where it says this. I didn't see it in there at all. Ask Zelenksy. He will tell you that nobody told him to do that. What you will find is that some assumptions were made and spread as office gossip. The POTUS never told anyone to do such a thing.

Atlantis wrote:Instead of addressing the facts, the always Trumpers have launched a massive campaign of witness intimidation and character assassination.

Facts are established in a trial by admissible evidence. Witnesses in US law are subject to cross examination.

Atlantis wrote:You are making silly comparisons about a legal quid pro quo which has nothing to do with the crime committed by Trump.

Trump has yet to be charged with a crime.

Atlantis wrote:Instead of contesting the crime, the Republicans commit another crime by trying to violate the right to anonymity of the whistle blower.

The whistleblower has no right of anonymity.

Atlantis wrote:The report of the whistle blower has been confirmed by the inquiry and there is no purpose in exposing his identity other than to destroy the person to discourage future whistle blowers.

Hearsay confirming hearsay is still hearsay. It's not admissible as evidence by people who were not on the call over the superior evidence of the transcript. It's not probative.

Atlantis wrote:Yankee imperialism is the curse of the world. ...
The Republicans willfully endanger the security of the nation by trying to expose intelligence details that are expressly excluded from the investigation.

So you are worried that the Republicans are going to endanger the security of the curse of the world? Is that what you would have me believe?

Atlantis wrote: The Republicans keep on harping about Russian hoaxes and the like that have nothing to do with the investigation.

The DoJ is conducting its own investigation, which you will be hearing a lot about soon.

Atlantis wrote:Instead of trying to bring light into the inquiry so the nation can move on, the Republicans are stone walling to prevent key witnesses and relevant documents to get to the inquiry.

Anyone who watched the hearings could see plainly that the only stonewalling came from Schiff. Trump's poll numbers have gone up as a result of these hearings.

Atlantis wrote:He is out to destroy the bloody US of A, which is fine by me

Uh huh... So why are you so worried about it?

Atlantis wrote:but he is also out to destroy democracy, the rule of law, human rights and this planet, which is not fine by me.

And you defend socialism, huh?

late wrote:Way to miss the obvious, the Republicans in the hearing were trying to do what Trump wanted.

So?

late wrote:(Recently released Mueller documents) show that Trump’s Ukraine conspiracy theory appears to have been propagated by two top aides who were central figures in the special counsel’s investigation: Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn.

It has also been reported in various political rags and newspapers--Politico, et. al.

late wrote:Mueller’s investigators concluded that Kilimnik, Manafort’s associate in Ukraine, had ongoing ties to Russian intelligence during this whole period.

Uh huh. So?

late wrote:IOW, Putin is still leading Trump around by the nose.

So Putin wanted Trump to approve the delivery of Javelin missiles to Ukraine? That seems apocryphal to me.
User avatar
By jimjam
#15050261
Image

Look at the simple minded bullshit ^ that Republicans stage for their simple minded "base". How about a cardboard cutout of Joe Biden with a cow plop on his head.

I guess etiquette calls for hats off in the hearing room or the Republican Stooges could all wear the mandatory red Trump beanies.
User avatar
By jimjam
#15050267
Formally, the House of Representatives is holding an inquiry into the question of whether Donald J. Trump should be impeached. In reality, we’ve known the answer to that question for a long time. In a different era, when both parties believed in the Constitution, Trump’s abuse of his position for personal gain would have led to his removal from office long ago.

No, what we’re actually witnessing is a test of the depths to which the Republican Party will sink. How much corruption, how much collusion with foreign powers and betrayal of the national interest will that party’s elected representatives stand for?

The modern G.O.P. as a whole is overwhelmingly fanatical, corrupt, or both. Anyone imagining that the mountainous evidence of Trump’s malfeasance will lead to a moral awakening, or that Republicans will return to democratic political norms once Trump is gone, is living in a fantasy world. Even catastrophic electoral defeat next year probably wouldn’t do much to change Republican behavior.

The big question is whether America as we know it can long endure when one of its two major parties has effectively rejected the principles on which our nation was built.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15050277
jimjam wrote:Look at the simple minded bullshit ^ that Republicans stage for their simple minded "base".

He he. It's pretty funny. The media had to do close ups of the Republican questioners to hide the signs. Quite humorous.

jimjam wrote:In reality, we’ve known the answer to that question for a long time.

The answer is no. Trump won because the Democrats ran Hillary Clinton. Now they have a slate of candidates that aren't quite as corrupt--except Biden--but almost all of them are indisputably crazy in their policy positions. Trump won on building a wall and the Democrats are running on giving free healthcare to illegal aliens. Talk about not getting the message. :roll:

jimjam wrote:How much corruption, how much collusion with foreign powers and betrayal of the national interest will that party’s elected representatives stand for?

We'll find out when the IG report comes out and Durham gets his indictments going.

jimjam wrote:Even catastrophic electoral defeat next year probably wouldn’t do much to change Republican behavior.

I think Trump is going to win again. Technically, he's not all that strong of a candidate, but establishment politicians are so unpopular that they make it easy for Trump.

jimjam wrote:The big question is whether America as we know it can long endure when one of its two major parties has effectively rejected the principles on which our nation was built.

What principles are those? You know they don't teach civics anymore, but everyone knows how to masturbate. :eh:
User avatar
By jimjam
#15050301
Mr. Trump accused David Holmes, a political counselor to the American ambassador in Ukraine, of fabricating a phone call between Mr. Trump and the American ambassador to the European Union. “I guarantee you that never took place,” Mr. Trump said (got that? A "guarantee" from Donald :lol: ). He added that he barely knew Mr. Sondland, a wealthy hotelier from Oregon who contributed $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee. I guess when you are worshiping at the alter of money with Donald, $1,000,000 is easy to miss. In his own testimony, Mr. Sondland corroborated Mr. Holmes’s account.
By Hindsite
#15050352
late wrote:Way to miss the obvious, the Republicans in the hearing were trying to do what Trump wanted.

You are the one that missed the obvious, which was that Dr. Fiona Hill repeated that lie she apparently heard from the lying "shifty" Adam Schiff about the Republicans on the committee. The Republicans in the hearing were simply cross examining the witnesses, which was their duty. The Democrats would not allow President Trump to have defense attorneys at the hearing, a very unfair process. But in the end the Democrats were unable to prove one impeachable offense, so they just made up some things.
By late
#15050354
Hindsite wrote:
You are the one that missed the obvious, which was that Dr. Fiona Hill repeated that lie she apparently heard from the lying "shifty" Adam Schiff about the Republicans on the committee. The Republicans in the hearing were simply cross examining the witnesses, which was their duty. The Democrats would not allow President Trump to have defense attorneys at the hearing, a very unfair process. But in the end the Democrats were unable to prove one impeachable offense, so they just made up some things.



Thanks, you should go into comedy.

The Republicans tried to run their BS, she shut them down, and they gave up.

She doesn't need to lie, she knows this stuff cold.

You and your compatriots, lies are all you have...
By Hindsite
#15050362
jimjam wrote:Mr. Trump accused David Holmes, a political counselor to the American ambassador in Ukraine, of fabricating a phone call between Mr. Trump and the American ambassador to the European Union. “I guarantee you that never took place,” Mr. Trump said (got that? A "guarantee" from Donald :lol: ). He added that he barely knew Mr. Sondland, a wealthy hotelier from Oregon who contributed $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee. I guess when you are worshiping at the alter of money with Donald, $1,000,000 is easy to miss. In his own testimony, Mr. Sondland corroborated Mr. Holmes’s account.

During Sondland’s testimony, Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., read Trump’s comments aloud and asked Sondland if he knew the president well. Sondland said they were not "close friends" but have a "professional, cordial working relationship."

As Trump noted on the White House lawn, Sondland preferred other presidential candidates in 2016 and distanced himself from Trump, citing Trump’s criticism of a Gold Star family.

After Trump won, then Sondland donated — through four limited liability companies — $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. This allowed Sondland to attend the inauguration ceremony and vie for his long desired ambassadorship.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... ell-heres/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/political- ... 1574195793

Actually, Sondland did not completely corroborated Mr. Holmes’s account. He couldn't remember completely.
  • 1
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64

And here is the proof of what I am saying. This […]

How to become an EU citizen

I'm sorry, but none of that makes any sense whats[…]

Divine decadence empowers fascists

But what about the sexual culture in the SA leade[…]

@Truth To Power You still do not understand. Y[…]