Pompeo verbally assaulted an NPR reporter.

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think you trumpers need a reality check. You guys are all in here running your mouths off about a certain and guaranteed trump landslide re election in November.

Let's take a look at your candidate.

He's been impeached. Now this means he starts off bad no matter what you in the 30 percent cult believe. trump is about to get pounded this fall by a relentless media campaign that is going to use his obstruction in this and the Mueller cases against him. And that will just be one part of trumps woes. That hunter biden shit isn't going to fool the majority of Americans. Calling Warren pocahontas for 3 months will not get him re elected. Joe Biden will rip him to shreds on both domestic and foreign policy. He will gut trump when it comes to his claims about the economy. trump is cutting food stamps and trying to cut social security, these things are going to be unleashed on trump and spelling covfefe on twitter is all he'll be left to do. trump is going to get carved up this fall.

Joe Biden will rip him to shreds on both domestic and foreign policy.

That dribbling idiot can't even keep his fake stories straight.

Are you the real Corn Pop? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trump Suggests NPR Shouldn’t Exist After Heated Mike Pompeo Interview

Trump is insane!

Cut off their government funding.

Typically Trumpist bully tactics.

Yup, now cut their funding.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

Schiff already said the whistleblower should be called as a witness, multiple times, on camera during fake news interviews.

Doesn't matter what Schiff says. It violates the whistle blower protection law for intelligence agencies.

It violates the whistle blower protection law for intelligence agencies.

Cool story!!
Post the law.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's a trick. Pompeo doesn't have a spine.

More spine than any pussy lib.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

I agree, Schiff should testify this week.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Dems and their corrupt lawless party will be utterly destroyed.

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I've posted it before. Several times. Here it is yet again.

R45345.pdf

Thanks for 15 pages. Now post the law.

 

[IM2]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

LMAO the Biden's corruption is at the center of impeachment and the Biden's should not be called as witnesses? You are also forgetting Schiff said the whistleblower should be called as a witness.

There was no Biden corruption. Fox news is feeding your dumb ass a bunch of bullshit. Schiff said what he did before 11-12 witnesses said the same thing as the whistleblower.

Lib please government officials PLURAL in Obama's own administration voiced concerns over this.

Look, you stupid right wing idiot, there was no connection between joe biden and Burisma. This dishonest bs you guys pull where you take part of something then conflate it is old. There is no Biden corruption. There is trump caught breaking a law then making up a lie.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Dems and their corrupt lawless party will be utterly destroyed.

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Cool! Doesn't say they can remain anonymous. Or that facing your accuser no longer applies.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?​

If Biden testifies, it might shed light on the claims of corruption.
You don't think his corruption should remain hidden, simply because his father is a candidate, do you?​

​

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. ​

Sounds good. We can do that right after he testifies in the impeachment trial.​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

Schiff already said the whistleblower should be called as a witness, multiple times, on camera during fake news interviews.

Doesn't matter what Schiff says. It violates the whistle blower protection law for intelligence agencies.

Legal scholars say you are wrong.

The law as written says I am right. There is a different standard for whistle blowers in intelligence agencies - a different set of protections. Maybe your legal scholars don't realize that.

There is a different standard for whistle blowers in intelligence agencies - a different set of protections.

If he needs to testify behind closed doors in the Senate....they can keep his secret. Right?

 

[IM2]

It's a trick. Pompeo doesn't have a spine.

More spine than any pussy lib.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

I agree, Schiff should testify this week.

There is no reason for Schiff to testify. Pompeo on the other hand...

 

[Coyote]

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

Schiff already said the whistleblower should be called as a witness, multiple times, on camera during fake news interviews.

Doesn't matter what Schiff says. It violates the whistle blower protection law for intelligence agencies.

Legal scholars say you are wrong.

The law as written says I am right. There is a different standard for whistle blowers in intelligence agencies - a different set of protections. Maybe your legal scholars don't realize that.

There is a different standard for whistle blowers in intelligence agencies - a different set of protections.

If he needs to testify behind closed doors in the Senate....they can keep his secret. Right?

I have a bridge for sale in NY....interested?

 

[Coyote]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I've posted it before. Several times. Here it is yet again.

R45345.pdf

Thanks for 15 pages. Now post the law.

It's all in there.

I'm not responsible for your ignorance. If you need more - look it up yourself.

 

[IM2]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Cool! Doesn't say they can remain anonymous. Or that facing your accuser no longer applies.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

If Biden testifies, it might shed light on the claims of corruption.
You don't think his corruption should remain hidden, simply because his father is a candidate, do you?
AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation.

Sounds good. We can do that right after he testifies in the impeachment trial.​

The light has long been shed about this. You have fallen for the trump con.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

Schiff already said the whistleblower should be called as a witness, multiple times, on camera during fake news interviews.

Doesn't matter what Schiff says. It violates the whistle blower protection law for intelligence agencies.

Zatt rite comrade?

Say, who is Linda Tripp?

Fucking fraud.....

 

[Coyote]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Cool! Doesn't say they can remain anonymous. Or that facing your accuser no longer applies.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

If Biden testifies, it might shed light on the claims of corruption.
You don't think his corruption should remain hidden, simply because his father is a candidate, do you?
AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation.

Sounds good. We can do that right after he testifies in the impeachment trial.​

I'm curious. He's a private citizen. Why do you have a problem with letting law enforcement agencies handle it?

 

[rightwinger]

It's a trick. Pompeo doesn't have a spine.

More spine than any pussy lib.

Some spine

Bangladesh my ass

 

[rightwinger]

The republicans are the lawless party and I see 2018 coming again and more. If republicans don't allows witnesses in this senate trial, they are gone.

And trump will not be reelected.

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

But we know that Eric Ciaramella lied. The transcripts released by the President proved that the CIA operation was a fraud and that Agent Ciaramella was lying in conjunction with Adam Schitt to defame and slander the POTUS in an attempt to remove him from office (an act of treason)

Lied?
About what?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Cool! Doesn't say they can remain anonymous. Or that facing your accuser no longer applies.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

If Biden testifies, it might shed light on the claims of corruption.
You don't think his corruption should remain hidden, simply because his father is a candidate, do you?
AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation.

Sounds good. We can do that right after he testifies in the impeachment trial.​

I'm curious. He's a private citizen. Why do you have a problem with letting law enforcement agencies handle it?

He was Vice President when he committed the crimes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's a trick. Pompeo doesn't have a spine.

More spine than any pussy lib.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

If the motherfucker had a spine, he'd testify.

I agree, Schiff should testify this week.

There is no reason for Schiff to testify. Pompeo on the other hand...

There is no reason for Schiff to testify.

There is no reason for Schiff not to testify.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I'm responding to the parts in blue.

First - whistle blower reports need to be determined to be credible. They are investigated. That weeds out false charges. In this case they were found to be credible per the agency head.

Second part. The Bidens may have been part of the reason for the call but they did not participate in the call. What could they add to the charges either for or against?

AGAIN - if you have evidence of corruption that merits it's own investigation. The fact that there has been none despite 3 years of largely Republican control kind of indicates there might not be much to the accusations. YOU guys control things. The Senate can request investigations and the Dems can not do anything about it. The President has agencies at his disposal who can investigate. Why haven't they? Three years.

But we know that Eric Ciaramella lied. The transcripts released by the President proved that the CIA operation was a fraud and that Agent Ciaramella was lying in conjunction with Adam Schitt to defame and slander the POTUS in an attempt to remove him from office (an act of treason)

Lied?
About what?

I'll give you points for chutzpah.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Take the blinders off and you will see so much more, IM2.
The last thing that the dems want to see in the trial is a Hunter Biden or the whistleblower as witnesses.
Nadler even said if it came to that he would vote for no witnesses. What the hell are the democrats hiding?
Of course, you really don't want to know that either.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies not to mention put lives at risk. Just isn't a good step to take when all he reported has been indecently verified and those people can take and have taken the witness stand. Except for a handful that were refused.

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues and possibly harassment. IF there evidence of wrong doing by the Bidens, by all means conduct an investigation - it needs it's own investigation. No one would argue against it if the evidence warrants it.

The whistle blower should not be a witness - it's a violation of whistle blower laws

Prove it. Post the law.

and it will put an absolute chill on whistle blowers

What will absolute anonymity do for false charges against political figures?

Biden shouldn't be called as a witness because that is a deflection away from the issues

The issue was Trump's phone call. The Bidens weren't the issue of the call?

I've posted it before. Several times. Here it is yet again.

R45345.pdf

Thanks for 15 pages. Now post the law.

It's all in there.

I'm not responsible for your ignorance. If you need more - look it up yourself.

What page do you feel it is on?