Pompeo verbally assaulted an NPR reporter.

[Coyote]

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.

Hunter Biden was never Vice President. Re-read what I responded to.

 

[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'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.

If it's been shed, no harm can come from testimony under oath.

 

[Coyote]

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?

My "feelings" are irrelevant. There are multiple laws and regulations and presidential directives regarding whistle blower protections - all of which are referenced in that article. If you want more info - copy the ones referenced that interest you and google them. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you. I've done my part.

 

[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'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's a private citizen.

And that means he can't testify? LOL!

Why do you have a problem with letting law enforcement agencies handle it?

People are allowed to testify before Congress, even if law enforcement is handling or not handling something.

 

[Coyote]

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?

My "feelings" are irrelevant. There are multiple laws and regulations and presidential directives regarding whistle blower protections - all of which are referenced in that article. If you want more info - copy the ones referenced that interest you and google them. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you. I've done my

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.

Let's have Trump testify then.

 

[Coyote]

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's a private citizen.

And that means he can't testify? LOL!

Why do you have a problem with letting law enforcement agencies handle it?

People are allowed to testify before Congress, even if law enforcement is handling or not handling something.

Cool. Let's have Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner testify. I'd like to know who she got all those patents and how he got a very expensive piece of real estate debt paid off.

 

[The Original Tree]

This thread isn’t even discussing the original topic.

Looks like nothing but flame bait and should be moved.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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?

My "feelings" are irrelevant. There are multiple laws and regulations and presidential directives regarding whistle blower protections - all of which are referenced in that article. If you want more info - copy the ones referenced that interest you and google them. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you. I've done my part.

My "feelings" are irrelevant.

And so was your link which didn't mention anonymous or any prohibition against testimony.

I'm not going to spoon feed it to you.

Especially not with links that don't support your claim.

 

[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'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.

Exciting.

Nothing in there says the press must cover up the identity of whistleblowers? The little Goebbels sure didn't cove up the identity of Linda Tripp, quite the opposite.

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

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.

Getting Eric Ciaramella on the stand would be interesting.

Agent Ciaramella, how long have you worked for the CIA? What are the laws regarding domestic spying? Is engaging in espionage against the president of the United States and act of treason? What is your relationship with KGB John Brennan? When did Adam Schitt cook up the whistleblower scam with you? Are you aware that lying on the whistleblower complaint is perjury? What is your relationship with Joe Biden? What is your relationship with Alexandra Chalupa?

What does any of this have to do with Trump’s attempted extortion of the Ukraine. You keep screaming about corrupt Democrats without a shred of evidence, no witnesses and no crimes.

But when a Republican is caught red handed and publicly admits to doing illegal corrupt acts, you fools pretend it never happened. Such hypocrisy.

You elected a criminal. And you knew he was a criminal when you elected him. Did you think there were no consequences? Did you think honest people wouldn’t notice or care?

 

[Uncensored2008]

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.

Hunter Biden was never Vice President. Re-read what I responded to.

Hunter was just a mule. The actual crook is Quid Pro Joe Biden, along with Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry.

 

[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.

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.

Getting Eric Ciaramella on the stand would be interesting.

Agent Ciaramella, how long have you worked for the CIA? What are the laws regarding domestic spying? Is engaging in espionage against the president of the United States and act of treason? What is your relationship with KGB John Brennan? When did Adam Schitt cook up the whistleblower scam with you? Are you aware that lying on the whistleblower complaint is perjury? What is your relationship with Joe Biden? What is your relationship with Alexandra Chalupa?

What does any of this have to do with Trump’s attempted extortion of the Ukraine. You keep screaming about corrupt Democrats without a shred of evidence, no witnesses and no crimes.

But when a Republican is caught red handed and publicly admits to doing illegal corrupt acts, you fools pretend it never happened. Such hypocrisy.

You elected a criminal. And you knew he was a criminal when you elected him. Did you think there were no consequences? Did you think honest people wouldn’t notice or care?

There was no attempted extortion of Ukraine, other than that of Joe Biden to derail the investigation of his son,.

Joe Biden and the Stalinist democrats were running an embezzlement scheme through Burisma. You are such a mindless drone that you don't mind that they were embezzling millions of US foreign aid, as long as your party was served, you don't give a fuck... Party is the ONLY thing you care about.

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

Hunter Biden was never Vice President. Re-read what I responded to.

Hunter was just a mule. The actual crook is Quid Pro Joe Biden, along with Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry.

Once again, Republicans make up shit about Democrats, and then expect taxpayers to pay for investigations of Republican rumours.

In excess of $100 million spent investigating the Clintons and not one criminal charge. No evidence of any corruption except a lie about a blow job.

Now Trump wants the taxpayers to pay to smear the Bidens in the same way. Only this time is Russian propaganda being investigated while real crimes by Republicans are treated at no big deal.

 

[BluesLegend]

Look, you stupid right wing idiot, there was no connection between joe biden and Burisma.

LOL just a photo of Joe Biden golfing with two Burisma board members, nothing to see here am I right

 

[IM2]

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?

We don't even know if this Eric Ciaramella is the whistleblower. These chumps automatically believe anything coming from RWM then repeat the crap like it's gospel.

 

[IM2]

Look, you stupid right wing idiot, there was no connection between joe biden and Burisma.

LOL just a photo of Joe Biden golfing with two Burisma board members, nothing to see here am I right

There is nothing to see since trump had no problem with this in 2017-2018 when he authorized funds to Ukraine.

 

[Mac-7]

Lying to liars dont count

Lying to the American people, counts. And the media is constitutionally mandated to keep the public informed about the President’s activities.

I get that Trumpkins HATE that the media keeps calling out Trump’s self-serving, and highly illegal behaviours, but his illegal self-serving behaviours is why he was unfit for office in the first place.

Pompao did not lie to the lib reporter

he just told her to pound sand

He clearly lied.

"Verbally Assaulted"?

Is that something like "hurting a snowflakes feelings"?

Or maybe "not taking someone's bullshit"?

View attachment 302364

No Son. That's what I do to you guys every day.

A verbal assault is different.

She sandbagged him, lied to get him on her show. She lied that she was going to discuss Iran then jumped him over Marie Yovanovitch

No she did not. She cleared the topics with his staff - Iran and Ukraine, well ahead of the interview. That is typical best practices when interviewing high ranking officials. Can't you guys just stop lying for a change? Just once?

Who sez she cleared ukraine with his staff?

Multiple people - there is a email trail.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...93cf0e-4071-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html

I have not seen the alleged emails

we only have WaPo‘s word for that

which is not worth much

but if they exist then maybe pompeo‘s staff needs to do a better job for him

 

[Mac-7]

Lying to the American people, counts. And the media is constitutionally mandated to keep the public informed about the President’s activities.

I get that Trumpkins HATE that the media keeps calling out Trump’s self-serving, and highly illegal behaviours, but his illegal self-serving behaviours is why he was unfit for office in the first place.

Pompao did not lie to the lib reporter

he just told her to pound sand

He clearly lied.

No Son. That's what I do to you guys every day.

A verbal assault is different.

She sandbagged him, lied to get him on her show. She lied that she was going to discuss Iran then jumped him over Marie Yovanovitch

No she did not. She cleared the topics with his staff - Iran and Ukraine, well ahead of the interview. That is typical best practices when interviewing high ranking officials. Can't you guys just stop lying for a change? Just once?

Who sez she cleared ukraine with his staff?

Multiple people including the CEO of NPR - there is a email trail.

Team Trump will just call it fake news

I beat them to it

the lib media has zero credibility

 

[Mac-7]

He clearly lied.
No she did not. She cleared the topics with his staff - Iran and Ukraine, well ahead of the interview. That is typical best practices when interviewing high ranking officials. Can't you guys just stop lying for a change? Just once?

Who sez she cleared ukraine with his staff?

Multiple people including the CEO of NPR - there is a email trail.

Team Trump will just call it fake news

Fake like your patriotism.

Patriotism isn't about blind worship of a lying sack of shit.

Or blind hate against trump that exists throughout lib la la land

 

[rightwinger]

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.

Why would Schiff testify?
He wasn’t there......Pompeo and Bolton were

More diversion from Republicans