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.
No charges of obstruction were made, dumbass.Lying fucking moron, charges of conspiracy need not have been made for obstruction to have occurred.Sorry turd, but no charges were listed in the report. Therefore, no obstruction. Mueller didn't list any such charges because he knew he would be laughed out of town if he did. Furthermore, Mueller's theory on obstruction were absurd, but he knew that.It's still a show trial. The Mueller report said "no collusion," dumbfuck. There is no "there" there.It may be "legal," but that doesn't mean it isn't a show trial. It's just plain false to claim that "anything that is done to impede it is contrary to the Constitution of the United States." That's bullshit. It will get resolved when it goes to the Senate and they toss it into the waste bin. Of course, that's exactly what you don't want.
Defending yourself is not "obstruction," dumbfuck. That's a Stalinist argument if there ever was one.
You keep repeating that lie. If you repeat a lie long enough and hard enough does that make it the truth? Nope, it's still a lie. The Mueller report has come to hatch as well on this one. Not a good day for Rump, his band of merry criminals and you.
No Collusion but it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump. While there is nothing illegal about Collusion, obstruction is impeachable. And that is coming to roost right now. Get it through your head, we are not going to be distracted. Your "Hey, look over there" routine has long since reached it's sell by date.
These weasels are just repeating the same theories the Dims have been beating their chests about for the last couple of months. The Dims probably consulted them before they started this impeachment jihad.My God. All the liberal women in this procedure are so so so physically ugly I refuse to watch them.
Why are these women such pathetic ugly beasts.....So ugly inside too.
Lying fucking moron, I didn't say they were.No charges of obstruction were made, dumbass.Lying fucking moron, charges of conspiracy need not have been made for obstruction to have occurred.Sorry turd, but no charges were listed in the report. Therefore, no obstruction. Mueller didn't list any such charges because he knew he would be laughed out of town if he did. Furthermore, Mueller's theory on obstruction were absurd, but he knew that.It's still a show trial. The Mueller report said "no collusion," dumbfuck. There is no "there" there.You keep repeating that lie. If you repeat a lie long enough and hard enough does that make it the truth? Nope, it's still a lie. The Mueller report has come to hatch as well on this one. Not a good day for Rump, his band of merry criminals and you.
No Collusion but it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump. While there is nothing illegal about Collusion, obstruction is impeachable. And that is coming to roost right now. Get it through your head, we are not going to be distracted. Your "Hey, look over there" routine has long since reached it's sell by date.
Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOLSCHIFF OBTAINED PHONE RECORDS OF NUNES, JOURNALIST, OTHERS
This is shocking:
“Adam Schiff Has Crossed a Line: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon.” The most stunning aspect of the report was the inclusion of telephone records of House Intelligence Committee ranking member.Presumably such records were obtained through legal process, as opposed to computer hacking or bribery of telephone company employees. Offhand, however, I don’t know what the legal basis would be for obtaining these phone records, and Schiff’s refusal to comment does not inspire confidence. I also don’t understand how Schiff could have obtained these records–legally–without the knowledge of the ranking member of his committee, Devin Nunes.
John Solomon has been one of the best reporters on the subjects at issue here, and spying on his phone records reminds one of when Sharyl Attkisson’s home computer was intruded on at a time when her reporting was inconvenient for the Obama administration.
Schiff has crossed the line of decency with this move. Once again, he has abused his power. This is an abuse of the constitutional rights of all spied on. These are KGB tactics.
Now Republicans should obtain Schiff’s phone records, those of the so-called whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and the colleague with whom he had a “bro-like” relationship, Sean Misko, the one Schiff hired as an aide the day after the whistleblower’s complaint was submitted.
The repellent Adam Schiff has managed to reach a new level of depravity.
Schiff’s depravity is unprecedented, but, we saw previews of it during the Obama administration.
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
Now you're trying to distance yourself from your own dumbass theories. You said "it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump." If that's irrelevant, then why did you bring it up?Lying fucking moron, I didn't say they were.No charges of obstruction were made, dumbass.Lying fucking moron, charges of conspiracy need not have been made for obstruction to have occurred.Sorry turd, but no charges were listed in the report. Therefore, no obstruction. Mueller didn't list any such charges because he knew he would be laughed out of town if he did. Furthermore, Mueller's theory on obstruction were absurd, but he knew that.It's still a show trial. The Mueller report said "no collusion," dumbfuck. There is no "there" there.
No Collusion but it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump. While there is nothing illegal about Collusion, obstruction is impeachable. And that is coming to roost right now. Get it through your head, we are not going to be distracted. Your "Hey, look over there" routine has long since reached it's sell by date.
Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOLSCHIFF OBTAINED PHONE RECORDS OF NUNES, JOURNALIST, OTHERS
This is shocking:
“Adam Schiff Has Crossed a Line: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon.” The most stunning aspect of the report was the inclusion of telephone records of House Intelligence Committee ranking member.Presumably such records were obtained through legal process, as opposed to computer hacking or bribery of telephone company employees. Offhand, however, I don’t know what the legal basis would be for obtaining these phone records, and Schiff’s refusal to comment does not inspire confidence. I also don’t understand how Schiff could have obtained these records–legally–without the knowledge of the ranking member of his committee, Devin Nunes.
John Solomon has been one of the best reporters on the subjects at issue here, and spying on his phone records reminds one of when Sharyl Attkisson’s home computer was intruded on at a time when her reporting was inconvenient for the Obama administration.
Schiff has crossed the line of decency with this move. Once again, he has abused his power. This is an abuse of the constitutional rights of all spied on. These are KGB tactics.
Now Republicans should obtain Schiff’s phone records, those of the so-called whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and the colleague with whom he had a “bro-like” relationship, Sean Misko, the one Schiff hired as an aide the day after the whistleblower’s complaint was submitted.
The repellent Adam Schiff has managed to reach a new level of depravity.
Schiff’s depravity is unprecedented, but, we saw previews of it during the Obama administration.
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
Lol where’s Mueller at, carnival barker?Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOLSCHIFF OBTAINED PHONE RECORDS OF NUNES, JOURNALIST, OTHERS
This is shocking:
“Adam Schiff Has Crossed a Line: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon.” The most stunning aspect of the report was the inclusion of telephone records of House Intelligence Committee ranking member.Presumably such records were obtained through legal process, as opposed to computer hacking or bribery of telephone company employees. Offhand, however, I don’t know what the legal basis would be for obtaining these phone records, and Schiff’s refusal to comment does not inspire confidence. I also don’t understand how Schiff could have obtained these records–legally–without the knowledge of the ranking member of his committee, Devin Nunes.
John Solomon has been one of the best reporters on the subjects at issue here, and spying on his phone records reminds one of when Sharyl Attkisson’s home computer was intruded on at a time when her reporting was inconvenient for the Obama administration.
Schiff has crossed the line of decency with this move. Once again, he has abused his power. This is an abuse of the constitutional rights of all spied on. These are KGB tactics.
Now Republicans should obtain Schiff’s phone records, those of the so-called whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and the colleague with whom he had a “bro-like” relationship, Sean Misko, the one Schiff hired as an aide the day after the whistleblower’s complaint was submitted.
The repellent Adam Schiff has managed to reach a new level of depravity.
Schiff’s depravity is unprecedented, but, we saw previews of it during the Obama administration.
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
It's a violation of the 4th Amendment, moron.Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOLSCHIFF OBTAINED PHONE RECORDS OF NUNES, JOURNALIST, OTHERS
This is shocking:
“Adam Schiff Has Crossed a Line: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon.” The most stunning aspect of the report was the inclusion of telephone records of House Intelligence Committee ranking member.Presumably such records were obtained through legal process, as opposed to computer hacking or bribery of telephone company employees. Offhand, however, I don’t know what the legal basis would be for obtaining these phone records, and Schiff’s refusal to comment does not inspire confidence. I also don’t understand how Schiff could have obtained these records–legally–without the knowledge of the ranking member of his committee, Devin Nunes.
John Solomon has been one of the best reporters on the subjects at issue here, and spying on his phone records reminds one of when Sharyl Attkisson’s home computer was intruded on at a time when her reporting was inconvenient for the Obama administration.
Schiff has crossed the line of decency with this move. Once again, he has abused his power. This is an abuse of the constitutional rights of all spied on. These are KGB tactics.
Now Republicans should obtain Schiff’s phone records, those of the so-called whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and the colleague with whom he had a “bro-like” relationship, Sean Misko, the one Schiff hired as an aide the day after the whistleblower’s complaint was submitted.
The repellent Adam Schiff has managed to reach a new level of depravity.
Schiff’s depravity is unprecedented, but, we saw previews of it during the Obama administration.
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
Why are you asking me?Lol where’s Mueller at, carnival barker?Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOL
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOLSCHIFF OBTAINED PHONE RECORDS OF NUNES, JOURNALIST, OTHERS
This is shocking:
“Adam Schiff Has Crossed a Line: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon.” The most stunning aspect of the report was the inclusion of telephone records of House Intelligence Committee ranking member.Presumably such records were obtained through legal process, as opposed to computer hacking or bribery of telephone company employees. Offhand, however, I don’t know what the legal basis would be for obtaining these phone records, and Schiff’s refusal to comment does not inspire confidence. I also don’t understand how Schiff could have obtained these records–legally–without the knowledge of the ranking member of his committee, Devin Nunes.
John Solomon has been one of the best reporters on the subjects at issue here, and spying on his phone records reminds one of when Sharyl Attkisson’s home computer was intruded on at a time when her reporting was inconvenient for the Obama administration.
Schiff has crossed the line of decency with this move. Once again, he has abused his power. This is an abuse of the constitutional rights of all spied on. These are KGB tactics.
Now Republicans should obtain Schiff’s phone records, those of the so-called whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and the colleague with whom he had a “bro-like” relationship, Sean Misko, the one Schiff hired as an aide the day after the whistleblower’s complaint was submitted.
The repellent Adam Schiff has managed to reach a new level of depravity.
Schiff’s depravity is unprecedented, but, we saw previews of it during the Obama administration.
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
Not if the records were legally obtained, ya lying fucking moron.It's a violation of the 4th Amendment, moron.Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...LOLOL
Obtaining phone records is an abuse of power but getting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is not??
Dayum, you rightards sure are brain-dead.
If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
When he can produce a legal warrant, then he's off the hook. Otherwise, he's guilty of violating the 4th Amendment.Not if the records were legally obtained, ya lying fucking moron.It's a violation of the 4th Amendment, moron.Actually, I asked a brain-dead con how obtaining records is an abuse of power. I didn't assert that it was. Some reading comprehension would do you wonders.Great, let's see your evidence they broke the law...If they break the law trying to attack the president, they are accountable to that. We let a lot of people get away with a lot of stuff because we don't follow the law when prosecuting them.
I was just working with what you gave me. You assumed in your post that Schiff obtaining phone records was an "abuse of power", so I did as well in my response. Did you not intend to do that?
The bottom line remains, moreover, that trying to "get" Trump is not such a noble goal as to excuse extra legal manuvering, and it is certainly justified to scrutinize Schiff's actions in this regard. In fact, removing a president is a momentous enough event as to require extreme precision and the highest of evidentiary standards. Second hand knowledge, suppositions and opinions do not rise to that level. If, for example, the president is accused of demanding something in exchange for aid, but the "victim" says it didn't happen, that's a big deficit to overcome, and "I hate Trump and automatically assume he's guilty of every accusation" isn't enough.
I would like to start, perhaps incongruously, with a statement of three irrelevantfacts. First, I am not a supporter of President Trump. I voted against him in 2016 and Ihave previously voted for Presidents Clinton and Obama. Second, I have been highlycritical of President Trump, his policies, and his rhetoric, in dozens of columns. Third, Ihave repeatedly criticized his raising of the investigation of the Hunter Biden matter withthe Ukrainian president. These points are not meant to curry favor or approval. Ratherthey are meant to drive home a simple point: one can oppose President Trump’s policiesor actions but still conclude that the current legal case for impeachment is not justwoefully inadequate, but in some respects, dangerous, as the basis for the impeachmentof an American president. To put it simply, I hold no brief for President Trump. My personal and political views of President Trump, however, are irrelevant to myimpeachment testimony, as they should be to your impeachment vote. Today, my onlyconcern is the integrity and coherence of the constitutional standard and process ofimpeachment. President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in thewake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concernedabout lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance ofanger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment wouldstand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnestevidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.
7
Thatdoes not bode well for future presidents who are working in a country often sharply and,at times, bitterly divided
She sure made a lot of good points. Ugly is the best you can do to refute them?I just can't understand why they raid kennels for this S
Look at that Kaplan lady. She could scare a hot dog off a bun.............whewwww...Ida shot my parents for doing such a horrible job
LOLNow you're trying to distance yourself from your own dumbass theories. You said "it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump." If that's irrelevant, then why did you bring it up?Lying fucking moron, I didn't say they were.No charges of obstruction were made, dumbass.Lying fucking moron, charges of conspiracy need not have been made for obstruction to have occurred.Sorry turd, but no charges were listed in the report. Therefore, no obstruction. Mueller didn't list any such charges because he knew he would be laughed out of town if he did. Furthermore, Mueller's theory on obstruction were absurd, but he knew that.No Collusion but it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump. While there is nothing illegal about Collusion, obstruction is impeachable. And that is coming to roost right now. Get it through your head, we are not going to be distracted. Your "Hey, look over there" routine has long since reached it's sell by date.
I quoted it directly from your post, moron.LOLNow you're trying to distance yourself from your own dumbass theories. You said "it did say there was a ton of Obstruction by Rump." If that's irrelevant, then why did you bring it up?Lying fucking moron, I didn't say they were.No charges of obstruction were made, dumbass.Lying fucking moron, charges of conspiracy need not have been made for obstruction to have occurred.Sorry turd, but no charges were listed in the report. Therefore, no obstruction. Mueller didn't list any such charges because he knew he would be laughed out of town if he did. Furthermore, Mueller's theory on obstruction were absurd, but he knew that.
I never said that, lying fucking moron.
