The Bolton Bombshell (from his book)

[Faun]

It's about more than just that one phone call. It was a course of conduct for which he was impeached. I highly recommend you actually read the articles of impeachment or have them explained to you if you're that incapable of understanding them.

The articles don't list a crime or impeachable wrongdoing.

Just 2 vague whines.

Dumbfuck, abuse of power is an impeachable offense. The House drafted an article of impeachment on abuse of power against Nixon and Clinton as well.

Where does one find the definition of abuse of power? Your imagination and those of the libtards does not count.

It's whatever the House says it is. In this case, they say it was using the power of his office for personal gain.

 

[MAGAman]

LOLOLOL

Even if it's true that Impeached Trump fired Bolton, if they discussed this matter, Bolton is still a first hand witness. You're dumber than dirt.

And yet Shifft still refuses to subpoena him.

Tell us why, Einstien.

 

[Desperado]

I think someone from tramp admin spread around fake news, due to the media's want to call John Bolton and it will be a disaster, and he will say I didn't say that in the book, we should pick Pompeo, and Mulvaney to call.

I think its a set up, only tramp can do EP on his book.

Bolton lawyer slams 'corrupted' White House review process after book leak

A lawyer for former national security adviser John Bolton accused White House officials of leaking details of Bolton's forthcoming book following a report that the manuscript contained the allegation that President Trump directly tied security aid for Ukraine to the country investigating his political rivals.

Bolton upset that American people informed of Trump’s behavior as president.

That should tell you how screwed we are.

John Bolton is a Neo-Con
Neo-Cons Lie
It is what they do.

 

[The Original Tree]

Flame Bait Thread which is nothing but speculation

 

[colfax_m]

Of course he should be questioned. But if all you’re going to do is claim he’s lying, then you’re case is rather weak.

What? WTF?

I mean, if Bolton testifies that Trump connected aid and investigations, then Trump would need to respond. If the response is just “he’s lying” then that’s a very weak response.

Bolton would need something on hard-copy to prove he just wasn't saying that Trump knew, and then, what if all this is true? It still means nothing!

Goalposts are moving. First you wanted firsthand witnesses. Now you’re demanding documentary evidence. Nothing will ever satisfy the true Trump believers.

If it’s all true, then it contradicts something that the Trump defense has been working very hard to convince us of. Wouldn’t you wonder why Trump was trying to sell you on a lie that didn’t even matter?

it is not a coupeachable offense

Then why lie about it?

 

[Faun]

WTF?? Who says hearsay doesn't count? You??

And there was actual evidence. From Impeached Trump himself...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..."​

Ukraine and America have a mutual anti corruption treaty for cooperation.

There is no exception for corrupt Democrats.

Go back to your hate-site and look again.

You still won't find evidence of wrongdoing, because it doesn't exist.

Impeached Trump can't rely on that treaty since he didn't abide by its terms. Furthermore, not even Impeached Trump says he asked Ukraine's president to look into his political rival because of that treaty.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.

WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

NYT: Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Demands for Inquiries, Bolton Book Says

John Bolton Reportedly Recalls Trump Tying Ukraine Aid To Biden Investigation

How can Republicans not vote for witnesses after this? By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt. They are two of the Times best and most credible reporters.

Bigger than Mueller and Omarosa!!

We got him this time!!

 

[Faun]

That’s also factually incorrect. There were thousands of pages of testimony corroborating the Democratic case.

Nope.

Rumors and heresy don't count.

There was zero actual evidence and zero actual witnesses.

WTF?? Who says hearsay doesn't count? You??

And there was actual evidence. From Impeached Trump himself...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..."​

What is your source for that comment? Is that Schiff's fantasy conversation?

I just said where it came from. Are you hard of learning??

Are you terminally stupid? I guess you are!

You cited no reference. You just claimed Trump said it. When? Where? How? Why?

Either shut your cock holster or answer the question, you miserable piece of shit!

LOLOL

Yes, I did, ya flaming gay moron.

"From Impeached Trump himself..." ~ Faun​

 

[wamose]

What? WTF?

I mean, if Bolton testifies that Trump connected aid and investigations, then Trump would need to respond. If the response is just “he’s lying” then that’s a very weak response.

Bolton would need something on hard-copy to prove he just wasn't saying that Trump knew, and then, what if all this is true? It still means nothing!

Goalposts are moving. First you wanted firsthand witnesses. Now you’re demanding documentary evidence. Nothing will ever satisfy the true Trump believers.

If it’s all true, then it contradicts something that the Trump defense has been working very hard to convince us of. Wouldn’t you wonder why Trump was trying to sell you on a lie that didn’t even matter?

Bolton is not a firsthand witness either as he was FIRED by Trump. If Trump actually did anything that Bolton didn't like, why didn't Bolton appear before the House impeachment inquiry?

LOLOLOL

Even if it's true that Impeached Trump fired Bolton, if they discussed this matter, Bolton is still a first hand witness. You're dumber than dirt.

Dude, what part of "he can't testify" don't you understand? What's next, bugging the White House bathrooms? You people are out of control.

 

[colfax_m]

That’s also factually incorrect. There were thousands of pages of testimony corroborating the Democratic case.

Nope.

Rumors and heresy don't count.

There was zero actual evidence and zero actual witnesses.

WTF?? Who says hearsay doesn't count? You??

And there was actual evidence. From Impeached Trump himself...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..."​

What is your source for that comment? Is that Schiff's fantasy conversation?

I just said where it came from. Are you hard of learning??

Are you terminally stupid? I guess you are!

You cited no reference. You just claimed Trump said it. When? Where? How? Why?

Either shut your cock holster or answer the question, you miserable piece of shit!

It’s from Trump’s perfect phone call with Zelensky. You don’t know that? Have you read it?

It’s a little early to be this nasty.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.

WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

NYT: Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Demands for Inquiries, Bolton Book Says

John Bolton Reportedly Recalls Trump Tying Ukraine Aid To Biden Investigation

How can Republicans not vote for witnesses after this? By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt. They are two of the Times best and most credible reporters.

Disgruntled, fired, warmongering employee says...

Look at the timing too, so coinkydinkel

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

What? WTF?

I mean, if Bolton testifies that Trump connected aid and investigations, then Trump would need to respond. If the response is just “he’s lying” then that’s a very weak response.

Bolton would need something on hard-copy to prove he just wasn't saying that Trump knew, and then, what if all this is true? It still means nothing!

Goalposts are moving. First you wanted firsthand witnesses. Now you’re demanding documentary evidence. Nothing will ever satisfy the true Trump believers.

If it’s all true, then it contradicts something that the Trump defense has been working very hard to convince us of. Wouldn’t you wonder why Trump was trying to sell you on a lie that didn’t even matter?

it is not a coupeachable offense

Then why lie about it?

because the Klanocrats are trying to use anything that they can to steal the 2016 election

 

[Astrostar]

Impeachment: Bolton bombshell undercuts Trump impeachment defense - CNNPolitics

With conviction and removal from office, thanks to John Bolton, now almost a certainty, should Trump go ahead and pardon his cronies behind bars? Once he is convicted, it will be too late. Should he move now, or take a chance and wait?

 

[colfax_m]

Of course he should be questioned. But if all you’re going to do is claim he’s lying, then you’re case is rather weak.

What? WTF?

I mean, if Bolton testifies that Trump connected aid and investigations, then Trump would need to respond. If the response is just “he’s lying” then that’s a very weak response.

Bolton would need something on hard-copy to prove he just wasn't saying that Trump knew, and then, what if all this is true? It still means nothing!

Goalposts are moving. First you wanted firsthand witnesses. Now you’re demanding documentary evidence. Nothing will ever satisfy the true Trump believers.

If it’s all true, then it contradicts something that the Trump defense has been working very hard to convince us of. Wouldn’t you wonder why Trump was trying to sell you on a lie that didn’t even matter?

Bolton is not a firsthand witness either as he was FIRED by Trump. If Trump actually did anything that Bolton didn't like, why didn't Bolton appear before the House impeachment inquiry?

There’s a discrepancy as to whether he was fired or resigned. But let’s say he was fired. How does that mean he wasn’t a firsthand witness?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It's about more than just that one phone call. It was a course of conduct for which he was impeached. I highly recommend you actually read the articles of impeachment or have them explained to you if you're that incapable of understanding them.

The articles don't list a crime or impeachable wrongdoing.

Just 2 vague whines.

Dumbfuck, abuse of power is an impeachable offense. The House drafted an article of impeachment on abuse of power against Nixon and Clinton as well.

Where does one find the definition of abuse of power? Your imagination and those of the libtards does not count.

It's whatever the House says it is. In this case, they say it was using the power of his office for personal gain.

What personal gain would that be? You don't have an answer so don't try that "dirt on a political opponent" bullshit! It doesn't fly with anyone above a room temp IQ.

 

[Faun]

LOLOLOL

Even if it's true that Impeached Trump fired Bolton, if they discussed this matter, Bolton is still a first hand witness. You're dumber than dirt.

And yet Shifft still refuses to subpoena him.

Tell us why, Einstien.

He may still.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Trump will not be convicted and removed. Bolton is selling a book.

 

[Faun]

I mean, if Bolton testifies that Trump connected aid and investigations, then Trump would need to respond. If the response is just “he’s lying” then that’s a very weak response.

Bolton would need something on hard-copy to prove he just wasn't saying that Trump knew, and then, what if all this is true? It still means nothing!

Goalposts are moving. First you wanted firsthand witnesses. Now you’re demanding documentary evidence. Nothing will ever satisfy the true Trump believers.

If it’s all true, then it contradicts something that the Trump defense has been working very hard to convince us of. Wouldn’t you wonder why Trump was trying to sell you on a lie that didn’t even matter?

Bolton is not a firsthand witness either as he was FIRED by Trump. If Trump actually did anything that Bolton didn't like, why didn't Bolton appear before the House impeachment inquiry?

LOLOLOL

Even if it's true that Impeached Trump fired Bolton, if they discussed this matter, Bolton is still a first hand witness. You're dumber than dirt.

Dude, what part of "he can't testify" don't you understand? What's next, bugging the White House bathrooms? You people are out of control.

Of course he can testify. WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nope.

Rumors and heresy don't count.

There was zero actual evidence and zero actual witnesses.

WTF?? Who says hearsay doesn't count? You??

And there was actual evidence. From Impeached Trump himself...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..."​

What is your source for that comment? Is that Schiff's fantasy conversation?

I just said where it came from. Are you hard of learning??

Are you terminally stupid? I guess you are!

You cited no reference. You just claimed Trump said it. When? Where? How? Why?

Either shut your cock holster or answer the question, you miserable piece of shit!

LOLOL

Yes, I did, ya flaming gay moron.

"From Impeached Trump himself..." ~ Faun​

Listen here semen breath, I can say that Trump said the moon is made of clitty litter from your Momma's underwear, but that doesn't make it true. Now, pony up the citation or go play with yourself. If you do that long enough, you might get a surprise!

 

[Faun]

It's about more than just that one phone call. It was a course of conduct for which he was impeached. I highly recommend you actually read the articles of impeachment or have them explained to you if you're that incapable of understanding them.

The articles don't list a crime or impeachable wrongdoing.

Just 2 vague whines.

Dumbfuck, abuse of power is an impeachable offense. The House drafted an article of impeachment on abuse of power against Nixon and Clinton as well.

Where does one find the definition of abuse of power? Your imagination and those of the libtards does not count.

It's whatever the House says it is. In this case, they say it was using the power of his office for personal gain.

What personal gain would that be? You don't have an answer so don't try that "dirt on a political opponent" bullshit! It doesn't fly with anyone above a room temp IQ.

LOLOL

So you want me to answer but you don't want to hear the answer.