Dems hated Bolton Now they love him

[AzogtheDefiler]

Firsthand? You have the transcript? How much more firsthand could it be?

A recreated memo is first hand? You defile yourself every day.

So you're saying that those who transcribe the call were lying? What's your proof of that, other than your hatred for Trump?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

Why would 3 different people on the call, report the call as being a quid pro quo for personal gain to their superiors and legal council?

Why would the Trump admin immediately pull back the transcript and lock it up in some ABOVE Top Secret Server?

Why did the notes of the call have three sets of ellipses, ..., in it and what was said that was left out?

Why did the rewriting note takers not correct their notes to include Vindmans notes of the call?

Why did the notes memorandum that we got, have Velensky tell Trump that the company Trump told him to look in to, Burisma....blah blah blah, not show Trump's conversation of mentioning Burisma, to velensky? It only shows Velensky saying Trump mentioned Burisma? But not where Trump said it.





We never got the full transcript of the call. An automated transcript exists, but it is being hidden and cover upped.

Why did Zelensky say no QPQ? Is he lying too?

Yes. He is saying what he needs to say.

If you think the President of the country is an overt liar then we should not be giving them deadly weaponry

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

He couldn't win approval when he was nominated for UN Ambassador during the Bush Administration because the Democrats complained that he was a liar....yet we're supposed to take his word on a conversation with the president that could be twisted by the press into seeming to be a lie by the president.

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

He couldn't win approval when he was nominated for UN Ambassador during the Bush Administration because the Democrats complained that he was a liar....yet we're supposed to take his word on a conversation with the president that could be twisted by the press into seeming to be a lie by the president.

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

 

[Care4all]

Trumpers, do you HONESTLY believe Trump didn't have Giuliani involved in the Ukraine and "the investigations" for personal reasons?

Do you HONESTLY believe Velensky having to make a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT on CNN about investigations in to crowdstrike and Burisma/Biden's was not for his own personal gain?

 

[Camp]

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a serious mental illness. It causes people to be confused about a lot of things. The Moon Bat confusion with Bolton is a great example.

Most people become uncomfortable when they learn and realize another person has lied to them. When the lying becomes prolific and serial, routine and expected, compulsive to the point of clinical diagnosis of pseudologia fantastica and or mythomania all credibility for the liar is lost. . Trump is the one with serious mental illness, not the folks uncomfortable with him being a clinically diagnosed liar.

 

[Care4all]

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

Who cares if Schiff knows who the anonymous whistle blower is, as long as he keeps him anonymous, he's good, with the law and regs on it?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

Whether you accept Bolton's testimony or not is every individual's choice. There seems to be an overwhelming opinion he should at least give testimony under oath. What is the logical sensible reason for preventing a willing witness from testifying?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

You don’t know who it is for certain?

 

[LoneLaugher]

A recreated memo is first hand? You defile yourself every day.

So you're saying that those who transcribe the call were lying? What's your proof of that, other than your hatred for Trump?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

Why would 3 different people on the call, report the call as being a quid pro quo for personal gain to their superiors and legal council?

Why would the Trump admin immediately pull back the transcript and lock it up in some ABOVE Top Secret Server?

Why did the notes of the call have three sets of ellipses, ..., in it and what was said that was left out?

Why did the rewriting note takers not correct their notes to include Vindmans notes of the call?

Why did the notes memorandum that we got, have Velensky tell Trump that the company Trump told him to look in to, Burisma....blah blah blah, not show Trump's conversation of mentioning Burisma, to velensky? It only shows Velensky saying Trump mentioned Burisma? But not where Trump said it.





We never got the full transcript of the call. An automated transcript exists, but it is being hidden and cover upped.

Why did Zelensky say no QPQ? Is he lying too?

Yes. He is saying what he needs to say.

If you think the President of the country is an overt liar then we should not be giving them deadly weaponry

Your logic is impenetrable.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

Who cares if Schiff knows who the anonymous whistle blower is, as long as he keeps him anonymous, he's good, with the law and regs on it?

Well, Schiff claimed at one point that he personally didn’t know the identity of the whistleblower. Trombies think he lied about that. They find this to be unforgivable and have called for his arrest for lying.

 

[Desperado]

It is hilarious that the Dems, who used to hate wars are now in love with one of the all time war mongers. The irony is astounding. Bolton used to be the type of person that the demonrats would despise. How the world has changed.

 

[gipper]

It is hilarious that the Dems, who used to hate wars are now in love with one of the all time war mongers. The irony is astounding. Bolton used to be the type of person that the demonrats would despise. How the world has changed.

They still despise him but if he shits on Donnie, he will be their hero.

They never learn. Donnie has broken their brains.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

Who cares if Schiff knows who the anonymous whistle blower is, as long as he keeps him anonymous, he's good, with the law and regs on it?

My point is politicians lie. On both sides.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

It will be another he said she said. When both sides are notorious liars, who will you believe?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

You don’t know who it is for certain?

I would Bet everything I gave it’s him. So I am certain.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The one who testifies under oath?

The one who testifies under oath?

That doesn’t mean anything in Washington. Oath shmoath. I do not necessarily mean this case but Washington in general. Do you really believe Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is? Come on...

Who is the whistleblower?

People say it’s this man.
Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was Biden guest at State Department banquet

Who cares if Schiff knows who the anonymous whistle blower is, as long as he keeps him anonymous, he's good, with the law and regs on it?

Well, Schiff claimed at one point that he personally didn’t know the identity of the whistleblower. Trombies think he lied about that. They find this to be unforgivable and have called for his arrest for lying.

You missed my point.

 

[Care4all]

Firsthand? You have the transcript? How much more firsthand could it be?

A recreated memo is first hand? You defile yourself every day.

So you're saying that those who transcribe the call were lying? What's your proof of that, other than your hatred for Trump?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

Why would 3 different people on the call, report the call as being a quid pro quo for personal gain to their superiors and legal council?

Why would the Trump admin immediately pull back the transcript and lock it up in some ABOVE Top Secret Server?

Why did the notes of the call have three sets of ellipses, ..., in it and what was said that was left out?

Why did the rewriting note takers not correct their notes to include Vindmans notes of the call?

Why did the notes memorandum that we got, have Velensky tell Trump that the company Trump told him to look in to, Burisma....blah blah blah, not show Trump's conversation of mentioning Burisma, to velensky? It only shows Velensky saying Trump mentioned Burisma? But not where Trump said it.





We never got the full transcript of the call. An automated transcript exists, but it is being hidden and cover upped.

Why did Zelensky say no QPQ? Is he lying too?

Self preservation.

We've already had witnesses testify under oath that the Ukrainians KNEW the aid and meeting in DC relied on Zelensky making the public announcement in to the Burisma/ bidens investigation etc....

Everyone that testified, Sondland, Volker, Hill, Vindman, and aids etc. that were called by Ukrainian diplomats asking about the money from our state dept.....

Velensky was very aware of it, and would never in a million years, do a press conference and announce such.....

Surely, you can comprehend that plain and simple logic, that the Wrath of Don, would harm his country, if he did?

 

[22lcidw]

Trumpers, do you HONESTLY believe Trump didn't have Giuliani involved in the Ukraine and "the investigations" for personal reasons?

Do you HONESTLY believe Velensky having to make a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT on CNN about investigations in to crowdstrike and Burisma/Biden's was not for his own personal gain?

You can not get over the 2016 election. Your own arrogance cost you it. A candidate calling half the population voting nasty names before the election! Calling for impeachment if Trump won before the election. And looking and looking and looking until you found a smidgen of a smidgen of a molecule to impeach him on. Do you watch yourselves day after day and night after night on TV? You have learned nothing. You are the Goliath and you let David beat you.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

John Bolton: ‘If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it’

John Bolton: ‘If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it’

Of course what he meant was he would deliberately lie to protect HIS version of what is best for America. By his own admission, he would lie to bring Trump down simply because he disagreed with Trump's foreign policy. Bolton cannot be trusted.

WoW

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Funny how they work.
Whoever will give them another temporary stay of Aquittal......
Any nothingburger......

That's the nature of simplistic partisan politics.

Whatever works. No shame. Just get the other tribe.
.

Bolton is not a partisan Democrat.

Your ass ever get sore from straddling that fence?

 

[Camp]

Trumpers, do you HONESTLY believe Trump didn't have Giuliani involved in the Ukraine and "the investigations" for personal reasons?

Do you HONESTLY believe Velensky having to make a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT on CNN about investigations in to crowdstrike and Burisma/Biden's was not for his own personal gain?

You can not get over the 2016 election.

Most Dems got over the 2016 election when they won the 2018 and won the House which led to Trump's impeachment.

 

[Nostra]

Funny how they work.

Whoever will give them another temporary stay of Aquittal......

Any nothingburger......

BINGO!

A few week ago he was the Devil, now he walks on water.

 

[rightwinger]

Bolton is still a first class asshole

Even if he does testify, I think he will still provide cover