Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No, it's not, ya lying fucking mpron. Not following the treaty means he wasn't using the treaty.Yeah, I know douchebag. You tried your usual shtick of implying that it was illegal not to follow the procedure without actually saying that:LOLOLROFL! Now you're trying to claim (without actually claiming it) than not going by the procedure in the treaty is a crime. The fact is they must be followed only if you want the cooperation of the signers to the treaty. It doesn't make not following the procedure a crime, you fucking douchebag.As far as the treaty, YOU posted provisions in it must be followed. And the provision for making requests must come from our Attorney General, not the president. And they must be made to their Minister of Justice, not their president. And requests must be made on ongoing investigations, not opening up new ones.We've already told you, the DOJ is a next of deep state vipers. Trump gave the job to someone he could trust, not someone who was going to try to get him impeached or leak classified secrets to the press. That's not illegal.It doesn't matter. Under no circumstance can Trump break solicit a foreign national to investigate a political rival. Even if Trump suspected Biden committed a crime, he should have had his own Justice Department investigate Biden, not a foreign national. It involved a political rival. It's illegal and a threat to national security to delegate that job to a foreign nation.
You're also wrong in claiming that a foreign government to investigate American crooks in their country. The treaty we signed with Ukraine proves that theory is bogus from the starting gate.
You're inventing legal theories out of thin air.
Again, the term "solicit" implies a crime was committed. You're begging the question whenever you use it.
The existence of the treaty shows that it's not illegal to ask a foreign government for help in prosecuting American criminals.
In your douchebag fashion, you come down on both wrong sides of that issue.
You poor, deranged, lying fucking moron... YOU say I said it's a crime to not adhere to the treaty -- I never said that. I said he's not covered by the treaty because he didn't use it, but instead, went directly to the president of Ukraine.
As far as the treaty, YOU posted provisions in it must be followed. And the provision for making requests must come from our Attorney General, not the president.
"Not covered by the treaty" is just another way of implying that not following the procedure is illegal.
If it's not illegal, then what's the point of saying what you posted?
Who do you think you're fooling?
it did? how?The prosecutorial divisions of the DOJ dismissed the complaint because NO CRIME was proven and because there were NO WITNESSES.Yes he did, LIAR!No he didn't, moron.The IG found the report CREDIBLE, and I will take over lying scum like you and Tramp!Whistleblowers (Really Criminals who filed False Reports).
It only shows that Barr has corrupted the DOJ to protect Trump.
Constitutionally speaking the Jury is not obligated to investigate that's the part of the houses job.It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutorThat’s not true.They can only call those that was heard from in the investigationWho says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnesses
THE TRUTH IS YOU'RE IGNORING THE US CONSTITUTION.
Thank you for your service Comrade, and continue to keep up the good work with disseminating lies, propaganda, and sowing division among The American People.Do you actually expect us to believe that you give a damn about American security?The full scope of Trump's threat to US national security will probably never see the light of day; if it does, it will be decades after the useless eater dies in prison.Did Thailand, Australia, or Mexico provide any information on Hunter Biden that Ukraine and China missed, Moron
Trump–Ukraine scandal - Wikipedia
"Immediately after the Trump–Zelensky call ended, White House national security aides discussed their deep concerns, with at least one National Security Council (NSC) official alerting White House national security lawyers.[27][28]
"A text message between a State department envoy to Ukraine and a Ukrainian official showed the envoy understood from the White House that a Zelensky visit with Trump was contingent upon Ukraine's investigating a conspiracy theory about alleged Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.[29]
"Records of the Trump–Zelensky call were moved from the system where presidential call transcripts are typically stored to a system reserved for the government's most sensitive secrets.[24][30][11][12]
"The Trump administration had also similarly restricted access to records of Trump's conversations with the leaders of China,[31] Russia, Saudi Arabia,[32] and Australia.[2]
"It was subsequently revealed that this placement was made for political rather than for national security reasons, which are the only valid reasons to use such a server.[33]"Trump doesn't.Do you actually expect us to believe that you give a damn about American security?
Today will go down in history as a Glorious day for Mother Russia and we thank you for helping us achieve our objective!
Because it's supposed to be a trial. Witnesses are generally called in trials.Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnessesWe've been through this beforethe constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -
does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY
Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.
I just didn't follow your poor writing.When you introduce new witnesses it is investigatingThey’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.
Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
Last time, Dims got to call all the witnesses they wanted during the House inquiry. You don't help your case by citing the Clinton impeachment.
Constitutionally speaking the Jury is not obligated to investigate that's the part of the houses job.It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutorThat’s not true.They can only call those that was heard from in the investigationWho says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??
THE TRUTH IS YOU'RE IGNORING THE US CONSTITUTION.
LOLOLOLThey can only call those that was heard from in the investigationWho says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnessesWe've been through this beforethe constitution makes it clear there is no jury in an impeachment -
does anyone think the board Russians give a shit what OUR constitution states and means -- fuck no they dont.
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY
Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.
If there was true why didn't the democrats find it? Why are democrats dependent on the Republicans to find what they couldn't? 3 years now and nothing impeachableThey don’t have to call witnesses.Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnessesIts a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.
They will if they’re interested in the truth
They did. Trump prevented many of them from testifying.The Dems should have thought about witnesses and evidence before their Congress Critters abused their power.
Just sayin'.
Stick to the topic chief.Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crimeWhen you introduce new witnesses it is investigatingThey’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.
Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
Lying fucking moron, a law was broken. It's illegal to solicit a foreign national to investigate a political rival.I'm saying it's illegal to solicit a foreign national because the law says it's illegal to solicit a foreign national.As I have pointed out 100 times, the term "solicit" implies something illegal. So you're saying it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help because it's illegal to ask a foreign government for help.It doesn't matter. Under no circumstance can Trump break the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival. Even if Trump suspected Biden committed a crime, he should have had his own Justice Department investigate Biden, not a foreign national. It involved a political rival. It's illegal and a threat to national security to delegate that job to a foreign nation.You only see biden as a political candidate rather than a former VP who abused his officeHow is a president soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival not violating that law?
There's no law that says the government can't investigate political candidates if they have broken the law. They don't get a "get out of jail free" card because they filed to run for office.
If your claims are true, then why didn't the House Dims file a charge on that issue? Apparently, even they know you're full of shit.
Again, the term "solicit" implies a law was broken.
It's illegal to hire foreign nationals to work on political campaigns. Trump didn't do that, dumbass.
Yes witnesses are called those that were part of the investigationBecause it's supposed to be a trial. Witnesses are generally called in trials.Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnessesWe've been through this before
The Senate is the Jury and Judge in all impeachment EXCEPT for impeachment of the President. The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment
THE SENATE IS STILL THE JURY
Its a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.
Guess he's not gonna practice law again, huh?Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crimeWhen you introduce new witnesses it is investigatingThey’re not asking the Senate to “investigate”. They’re asking the Senate to call relevant witnesses.
Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
You're the one that brought Bill Clinton up sportStick to the topic chief.Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crimeWhen you introduce new witnesses it is investigating
Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
Republicans had no problem requesting witnesses during impeachment trial that weren't called during the hearing last time around.
Republicans are hypocrites and afraid of the truth.
What kind of idiot are you? The Senate holds a trial. The purpose of a trial is to determine if the impeachment was warranted or not. It's not to blindly decide it wasn't and not actually conduct a trial.Constitutionally speaking the Jury is not obligated to investigate that's the part of the houses job.It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutorThat’s not true.They can only call those that was heard from in the investigationWho says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??
THE TRUTH IS YOU'RE IGNORING THE US CONSTITUTION.
well is what Clinton did wasn't a crime why did he lose his law licenses?Guess he's not gonna practice law again, huh?Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crimeWhen you introduce new witnesses it is investigating
Republicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
What kind of idiot are you to disagree with the facts?What kind of idiot are you? The Senate holds a trial. The purpose of a trial is to determine if the impeachment was warranted or not. It's not to blindly decide it wasn't and not actually conduct a trial.Constitutionally speaking the Jury is not obligated to investigate that's the part of the houses job.It's true, the jury has no duty to call new witnesses and do further investigations for the prosecutorThat’s not true.They can only call those that was heard from in the investigation
THE TRUTH IS YOU'RE IGNORING THE US CONSTITUTION.
Nowhere is it written that only witnesses who testified in the impeachment can testify in the Senate. You're literally making that up out of whole cloth.Yes witnesses are called those that were part of the investigationBecause it's supposed to be a trial. Witnesses are generally called in trials.Who says the Senate has to call any witnesses?Who says the House has to call every witness they wan for the Trial??The witnesses from the Democrat investigation and no new witnessesIts a limited analogy. They’re more than the jury since apparently the Senate has to agree what witnesses will be called. This is a decision typically left to the prosecutor and defense, not the jury.
In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides.
Who said lying under oath isn't a crime?? Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?well is what Clinton did wasn't a crime why did he lose his law licenses?Guess he's not gonna practice law again, huh?Bill Clinton actually lost his law licenses for his crimeRepublicans didn’t have a problem with it last time around.
When was "last time," asshole?
Bill Clinton. Good lord, are you that stupid to not know this?
