Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 97,386
- 73,660
- 3,645
Well sure, as it isn't ever up to the president. Duh. What a goofy question.The bottom line remains, claiming "Bill Clinton allowed witnesses" doesn't work.
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well sure, as it isn't ever up to the president. Duh. What a goofy question.The bottom line remains, claiming "Bill Clinton allowed witnesses" doesn't work.
No, weirdo. Seriously, you are embarrassing yourself.So you are accusing Vindman of lying to a House inquiry?
No, weirdo. Seriously, you are embarrassing yourself.So you are accusing Vindman of lying to a House inquiry?
Shameless lie. He did not answer "yes" to that question.He was asked if the transcript released to the public was accurate and complete? Both witnesses (Vindman and Williams) answered yes to that question.
Shameless lie. He did not answer "yes" to that question.He was asked if the transcript released to the public was accurate and complete? Both witnesses (Vindman and Williams) answered yes to that question.
No go ahead, move on to your next lie. This doesn't faze you one bit, does it? A normal, rational adult would be embarrassed.
Shameless lie. He did not answer "yes" to that question.He was asked if the transcript released to the public was accurate and complete? Both witnesses (Vindman and Williams) answered yes to that question.
No go ahead, move on to your next lie. This doesn't faze you one bit, does it? A normal, rational adult would be embarrassed.
You leftists are amazing. You see and hear things, but somehow, that leftist mind of yours changes what was said to your liking. Are you from our country? Do you understand what words like "Substantively" means? Or is it you just don't want to watch the video because it proves you're wrong?
Well sure, as it isn't ever up to the president. Duh. What a goofy question.The bottom line remains, claiming "Bill Clinton allowed witnesses" doesn't work.
As agreed by both parties, since the video tapes of the depositions sufficed. So, no comparison. Give it up.And the net result was, no one appeared in person before the Senate,
The bottom line remains, claiming "Bill Clinton allowed witnesses" doesn't work.
I do. It's an adjective used to qualify the answer, else he would have just said "yes" to the question. Which, contrary to your lie, he did not do. And, in absolutely no contradiction whatsoever to calling something "substantively" correct, he also said it ommitted some details.Do you understand what words like "Substantively" means?
I will get right on that!Well then, since we agree, tell that to Siete, because that's who I was replying to.
Cocaine Mitch had a twinkle in his eye when he said that. Let's see where this stands come voting time, or likely on Friday.McConnell says he doesn't have the votes.
Three Democrat presidential candidates may be neutered.![]()
Mitch will win in the end, as he often does. and when he doesnt win, he doesn't stick his thumb in his mouth and get in the fetal position, but he gets ready for the next fight. that's the way he is. TOUGH!
Hickenlooper is already slamming Garnder though. i bet Hick takes Gardner's seat!Mitch will win in the end, as he often does. and when he doesnt win, he doesn't stick his thumb in his mouth and get in the fetal position, but he gets ready for the next fight. that's the way he is. TOUGH!
Well, he has secured Cory Gardner's vote. Ernst and McSally aren't going to vote for witnesses...The latest poll out of Utah
shows....
68% believe the President should be impeached.
64% Do not favor more witnesses.
60% are less likely to vote for Romney if he does not vote like they expect him to. (Looks like Mitt has a lot to think about).
Plus that TV interview made in August on Radio Free Europe with John Bolton discussing how well the President's
2 phone calls with Zelensky went, while doing an interview with a Ukrainian reporter, has all but sealed the deal.
I do. It's an adjective used to qualify the answer, else he would have just said "yes" to the question. Which, contrary to your lie, he did not do. And, in absolutely no contradiction whatsoever to calling something "substantively" correct, he also said it ommitted some details.Do you understand what words like "Substantively" means?
I feel like I am teaching english to a child.
Mitt is in zero danger in Utah. Put up the crack pipe.Mitch will win in the end, as he often does. and when he doesnt win, he doesn't stick his thumb in his mouth and get in the fetal position, but he gets ready for the next fight. that's the way he is. TOUGH!
Well, he has secured Cory Gardner's vote. Ernst and McSally aren't going to vote for witnesses...The latest poll out of Utah
shows....
68% believe the President should be impeached.
64% Do not favor more witnesses.
60% are less likely to vote for Romney if he does not vote like they expect him to. (Looks like Mitt has a lot to think about).
Plus that TV interview made in August on Radio Free Europe with John Bolton discussing how well the President's
2 phone calls with Zelensky went, while doing an interview with a Ukrainian reporter, has all but sealed the deal.
Ya left out dem controlled congress impeached him without a single repub.There was never any expectation that the Trump party controlled Senate would convict him. It would take integrity for them to do that, and they just don't have any.
Your trump controlled senate is laughable.
and, in the House, 1 changed party over impeachment, 1 voted present, and one democrat voted against at least 1 of the articles.
Are the Democrats voting in lockstep, or is there a chance 1, or more, will vote against conviction?
Mitch may have the votes he needs, and not yet aware of it.
As of this morning, there are 3 Rep Senators that will vote for Bolton to be questioned on the Senate Floor. One more to go. Sounds like Rump may have pissed off a few Republicans. It was also announced that Rump has had the manuscript for weeks of Boltons book and never tipped off the Senate and House Republicans. Can anyone spell "Blindsided"?
Just how many of these easter eggs before the Repubs start saying "Enough is Enough".
One more to go.
Provided, as I stated, the democrats march in lockstep to convict.
The next vote isn't about conviction. There will never be a 67 vote to remove him from office. But there just needs to be one more vote to bring Bolton to the Senate Floor. Please stay focused. You are looking a bit tipsy. It's a bit early to be hitting the bar.
Mitt is entrenched in UtahMitt is in zero danger in Utah. Put up the crack pipe.Mitch will win in the end, as he often does. and when he doesnt win, he doesn't stick his thumb in his mouth and get in the fetal position, but he gets ready for the next fight. that's the way he is. TOUGH!
Well, he has secured Cory Gardner's vote. Ernst and McSally aren't going to vote for witnesses...The latest poll out of Utah
shows....
68% believe the President should be impeached.
64% Do not favor more witnesses.
60% are less likely to vote for Romney if he does not vote like they expect him to. (Looks like Mitt has a lot to think about).
Plus that TV interview made in August on Radio Free Europe with John Bolton discussing how well the President's
2 phone calls with Zelensky went, while doing an interview with a Ukrainian reporter, has all but sealed the deal.
And the one Republican not in any danger whatsoever is the one willing to let the facts come out. Not a coincidence, of course.
I am not prepared to bet the rent money either wayMcConnell has the votes to end the trial Friday without new witnesses.
Maybe it will end today if they run out of stupid redundant questions?