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.
Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Funny how you Dimwingers have been relegated to what ifs and fantasies.Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Ahhhhh..............more HURRY UP AND WAIT.Nothing yet but even Nixon was able to step downWhat has he been found guilty of?Innocence and Trump??? Those words are not compatibleTrump doesn't have the dignity Nixon had We'll have to hog tie the crook and drag him out
Due process, assumption of innocence are the bedrock of U.S. law. What country do you live in?
You are like the 8th person who has dodged answering the question... I didn’t realize it was that scaryFunny how you Dimwingers have been relegated to what ifs and fantasies.Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Impeachment not going so well, huh?
You’re l
You are like the 8th person who has dodged answering the question... I didn’t realize it was that scaryFunny how you Dimwingers have been relegated to what ifs and fantasies.Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Impeachment not going so well, huh?
Pelosi knows the democrat elections aren't going good.
Thank you!!! You’re the first to even try to answer. I think you make a very fair point and that the Dems are making a very stupid and careless move going with impeachment. Do you think the QPQ if true is criminal or an impeachable offense?IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?
You will hate the answer. PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE...if an offer of quid pro quo were true the appropriate response would be for congress to censure the president. Taking into account Trump is not a politician or a lawyer, that no quid pro quo actually took place, and that we don't wish to intimidate an American citizens from running for president censure is the most appropritae and reasonable response.
Yet Democrats have chosen to jump past censure to the extreme of impeachment, undoing a fair election and the will of the American people, why?
wow, I gotta say I’m surprised to see you prevail as the rational one out of the near dozen clowns that avoided this question. That wasn’t meant to be back handed either. Well said and kudos for giving two respectable responses.Thank you!!! You’re the first to even try to answer. I think you make a very fair point and that the Dems are making a very stupid and careless move going with impeachment. Do you think the QPQ if true is criminal or an impeachable offense?IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?
You will hate the answer. PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE...if an offer of quid pro quo were true the appropriate response would be for congress to censure the president. Taking into account Trump is not a politician or a lawyer, that no quid pro quo actually took place, and that we don't wish to intimidate an American citizens from running for president censure is the most appropritae and reasonable response.
Yet Democrats have chosen to jump past censure to the extreme of impeachment, undoing a fair election and the will of the American people, why?
In this case assuming an intentional offer of QPQ but no actual QPQ I could support a public rebuke and maybe censure. Congress telling Trump hey we understand you are not a lawyer or professional politician, we get it you made a mistake but don't do that again.
For a particularly aggreges example of actual QPQ, money changing hands, repeated infractions after censure, possibly impeachment it would depend on the circumstances.
wow, I gotta say I’m surprised to see you prevail as the rational one out of the near dozen clowns that avoided this question. That wasn’t meant to be back handed either. Well said and kudos for giving two respectable responses.Thank you!!! You’re the first to even try to answer. I think you make a very fair point and that the Dems are making a very stupid and careless move going with impeachment. Do you think the QPQ if true is criminal or an impeachable offense?IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?
You will hate the answer. PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE...if an offer of quid pro quo were true the appropriate response would be for congress to censure the president. Taking into account Trump is not a politician or a lawyer, that no quid pro quo actually took place, and that we don't wish to intimidate an American citizens from running for president censure is the most appropritae and reasonable response.
Yet Democrats have chosen to jump past censure to the extreme of impeachment, undoing a fair election and the will of the American people, why?
In this case assuming an intentional offer of QPQ but no actual QPQ I could support a public rebuke and maybe censure. Congress telling Trump hey we understand you are not a lawyer or professional politician, we get it you made a mistake but don't do that again.
For a particularly aggreges example of actual QPQ, money changing hands, repeated infractions after censure, possibly impeachment it would depend on the circumstances.
This is the same Nancy Pelosi that said President Trump should be arrested and imprisoned after Mueller's report and testimony established that the two+ year investigation found no evidence that Trump's campaign colluded (or conspired) with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Of course they do. The ONLY thing Dems are good at is being HYPOCRITES.This is the same Nancy Pelosi that said President Trump should be arrested and imprisoned after Mueller's report and testimony established that the two+ year investigation found no evidence that Trump's campaign colluded (or conspired) with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Dem's publicly attack president Trump again and again, then pretend to be the victim when Trump hits back and claim he's mean and treats them badly.
I guess if you don't understand basic economics the giveaways they are promising may look like they are doing fine. Anyone who can balance a checkbook understands that they have no idea what they are doing.Pelosi knows the democrat elections aren't going good.
They seem to be doing just fine based on recent results.
NO.Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Stupid democrats are really getting desperate. With no hint of any crime being committed Pelosi wants Trump to resign because they can't get him out of office any other way. Impeachment won't work, and the 2020 election with the democrat clown car looks like a disaster. Hey Nancy, RBG isn't looking too good either.
Pelosi says Trump's actions are worse than Richard Nixon's and suggests he should resign
“I mean, what the president did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did, that at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this could not continue,” Pelosi said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
View attachment 290367
What is scary is watching America turn in to Nazi Germany or The Soviet Union via The DemNazi Party.
You’re l
You are like the 8th person who has dodged answering the question... I didn’t realize it was that scaryFunny how you Dimwingers have been relegated to what ifs and fantasies.Wow, the ultimate deflection there... jump to the finger-pointing and then to the defense of Trump. My question had nothing to do with any of that... I was simply asking If the accusations were all true would they constitute a crimeI’m curious... I know you don’t believe the accusations are true BUT IF the quid pro quo that the Dems are accusing Trump of was true, would that constitute a crime or impeachable offense in your mind?
Its funny that you can even ask that fucking question after 2016 and how the democrats broke the law going after Trump. Let me refresh your memory:
1. Hillary pays RUSSIANS to FABRICATE LIES about Trump and put them in several versions of the Steele Dossiers.
2. The Obama admin used foreign assets to entrap Popadope such that the DOJ/FBI could illegally spy on Trump via a bullshit FISA warrant using Hillary's Steele Dossier
3. The FBI entrapped General Flynn and used very high pressure tactics to get him to lie about Trump
4. Hillary had an illegal server in her bathroom, that the FBI and DOJ gave her a pass on
5. The deep state conspirators have "insurance policies" against the Trump admin, leakers and whistle-blowers that pop up on occasion
6. The deep state conspirators enabled the Mueller Investigation into Russian Collusion, making Trump basically prove his innocence, which he did
7. Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz are going to issue indictments for real crimes.
So to answer your question.
1. Trump said "no quid pro quo" to Sondland, meaning no US "demand" for an investigation
2. Law Professors Dershowitz and Turley both said that the Ukraine call was not a crime nor impeachable
Why the Framers would reject the Democrats' impeachment criteria
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
I think that Trump is so used to dancing on the edge of the Law that he thought that he could "finesse" Ukraine to investigate Burisma (and the Bidens) with a short delay in the military aid. Zelensky didn't bite and authorize the investigation, he's new and basically a comedian. Trump got burned by that stunt. I hope he learned his lesson. He should have gone all in on investigating Burisma without mentioning the Bidens. He could have quoted the law that requires him to investigate corruption. All 3 witnesses have said that Burisma is corrupt. Trump could have said that future relations depend on what happens to Burisma's investigation.
Impeachment not going so well, huh?
Trump is a pathological liar, a religious bigot, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, his administration is corrupt.
other than that, he's great!
