The Bolton Bombshell (from his book)

[Rye Catcher]

You’re afraid. I get it. Don’t want Bolton to testify because it might upset the little fantasy you’ve created.

Let him testify, then we get Biden Jr.

What do you expect Hunter Biden will be asked, and what do you expect he will say in response?

He will show that there was reason for concern over corruption. Hell, the Heinz kid distanced himself and his employer
from what Biden Jr. was doing and emailed the State Dept of his concerns, wry.

Where do you get your information?

For the Readers, see:

What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma

Hunter Biden says taking a job at a Ukrainian energy company was "poor judgment"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...adff70-dfd9-11e9-8fd3-d943b4ed57e0_story.html

It was brought into evidence by Bondi yesterday, actually, showed the documents, wry.

Please post a summary of what Bondi showed. Yesterday I had outside appointments and didn't see much of the defense.

 

[colfax_m]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

Ha ha ha,

You had at most 4 minutes to read a 15+ minute to read post (with around 7 kinks you ignored), your unsupported rationalizations on what the Ukraine presidents states is stupid and insulting to them. You have no argument to offer, just ignore what they say, you have NOTHING but partisan bullcrap apologies/rationalizations to offer.

ph3iron same amount of time makes a dead on arrival post with ZERO counterpoints, it is clear NEITHER of you have a rational argument to offer, just unsupported bullshit.

You two lawfree thinkers ignore Professor Dershowitz argument completely:

Let me repeat: nothing in the Bolton revelations – even if true – would rise to the level of an abuse of power or impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution – you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit."

I read your post. Its mostly a copy/paste of other articles. Your entire argument relies on the statements of two people who are dependent on the president’s good graces. They have a lot of interest to not be fully honest. That’s why it’s weak evidence.

Now, can you provide a rebuttal? Or are you just going to call me names.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

Ha ha ha,

You had at most 4 minutes to read a 15+ minute to read post (with around 7 kinks you ignored), your unsupported rationalizations on what the Ukraine presidents states is stupid and insulting to them. You have no argument to offer, just ignore what they say, you have NOTHING but partisan bullcrap apologies/rationalizations to offer.

ph3iron same amount of time makes a dead on arrival post with ZERO counterpoints, it is clear NEITHER of you have a rational argument to offer, just unsupported bullshit.

You two lawfree thinkers ignore Professor Dershowitz argument completely:

Let me repeat: nothing in the Bolton revelations – even if true – would rise to the level of an abuse of power or impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution – you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit."

I read your post. Its mostly a copy/paste of other articles. Your entire argument relies on the statements of two people who are dependent on the president’s good graces. They have a lot of interest to not be fully honest. That’s why it’s weak evidence.

Now, can you provide a rebuttal? Or are you just going to call me names.

Your tiny rebuttal evidence/free post is dead on arrival, you are now stupid #3:

From my post you barely read:

This how stupid you two are, Both Ukraine Presidents made their statements AFTER they got all of the Military aid sent to them, if you bothered to read the links I gave you..........., but noooo you are tooooo lazy to think on your own, who feeds you the leftist crap, your stuffed Teddy Bear?

======

Your silly "good graces" argument is down in a heap of flames.......,, do you think on your own, or suck Schiffs thumb for more programmed replies?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What are you blabbering about?

Quid pro quo’s are normal. That’s what you’re accusing Biden of doing.

LOL.....how does getting your son hired on for 80k a month with no experience fit in?

So it’s a crime for Hunter it work for Burisma?

I’ll break it down.
Joe Biden using loan guarantees to get a prosecutor fired isn’t illegal.

Hunter Biden working for Burisma isn’t illegal.

If those two things are connected, it’s illegal. Is there any evidence that they’re connected?

You dont find it a bit suspicious that a guy with zero experience in the gas and oil business lands an 80k a month job at an oil and gas business?
Uhhhh....yeah there's a fucken connection!!!
Mainly biden admitting on national TV that the Ukraine better fire the prosecutor investigating the company Jr works for or you can kiss a billion dollars of aid good bye.

Nobody is as dumb as you're acting right now.

Like I said. You need some evidence that Joe’s actions are connected to Hunter’s actions.

There is none.

Kids of rich or famous people get jobs above their pay grade all the time. Sorry to have to be the one to tell you this. It’s not illegal. Joe Biden fired a corrupt prosecutor. Also not illegal.

The only way this is illegal is if there is evidence that the two are connected. You can be suspicious all day long. You can assume whatever you want. But that doesn’t mean there is evidence of a crime.

Lets pretend I'm as stupid as you.......
Dont you think it should be investigated?

 

[Faun]

here's the left

LOL

 

[Faun]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

Ha ha ha,

You had at most 4 minutes to read a 15+ minute to read post (with around 7 kinks you ignored), your unsupported rationalizations on what the Ukraine presidents states is stupid and insulting to them. You have no argument to offer, just ignore what they say, you have NOTHING but partisan bullcrap apologies/rationalizations to offer.

ph3iron same amount of time makes a dead on arrival post with ZERO counterpoints, it is clear NEITHER of you have a rational argument to offer, just unsupported bullshit.

You two lawfree thinkers ignore Professor Dershowitz argument completely:

Let me repeat: nothing in the Bolton revelations – even if true – would rise to the level of an abuse of power or impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution – you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit."

I read your post. Its mostly a copy/paste of other articles. Your entire argument relies on the statements of two people who are dependent on the president’s good graces. They have a lot of interest to not be fully honest. That’s why it’s weak evidence.

Now, can you provide a rebuttal? Or are you just going to call me names.

Your tiny rebuttal evidence/free post is dead on arrival, you are now stupid #3:

From my post you barely read:

This how stupid you two are, Both Ukraine Presidents made their statements AFTER they got all of the Military aid sent to them, if you bothered to read the links I gave you..........., but noooo you are tooooo lazy to think on your own, who feeds you the leftist crap, your stuffed Teddy Bear?

======

Your silly "good graces" argument is down in a heap of flames.......,, do you think on your own, or suck Schiffs thumb for more programmed replies?

What do you mean, "after?" They get money almost every year. Are you suggesting they don't care if they never get another dime from us?

 

[colfax_m]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

Ha ha ha,

You had at most 4 minutes to read a 15+ minute to read post (with around 7 kinks you ignored), your unsupported rationalizations on what the Ukraine presidents states is stupid and insulting to them. You have no argument to offer, just ignore what they say, you have NOTHING but partisan bullcrap apologies/rationalizations to offer.

ph3iron same amount of time makes a dead on arrival post with ZERO counterpoints, it is clear NEITHER of you have a rational argument to offer, just unsupported bullshit.

You two lawfree thinkers ignore Professor Dershowitz argument completely:

Let me repeat: nothing in the Bolton revelations – even if true – would rise to the level of an abuse of power or impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution – you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit."

I read your post. Its mostly a copy/paste of other articles. Your entire argument relies on the statements of two people who are dependent on the president’s good graces. They have a lot of interest to not be fully honest. That’s why it’s weak evidence.

Now, can you provide a rebuttal? Or are you just going to call me names.

Your tiny rebuttal evidence/free post is dead on arrival, you are now stupid #3:

From my post you barely read:

This how stupid you two are, Both Ukraine Presidents made their statements AFTER they got all of the Military aid sent to them, if you bothered to read the links I gave you..........., but noooo you are tooooo lazy to think on your own, who feeds you the leftist crap, your stuffed Teddy Bear?

======

Your silly "good graces" argument is down in a heap of flames.......,, do you think on your own, or suck Schiffs thumb for more programmed replies?

Yes, the statements came after aid was released, but don’t get short sighted.

What about next time funding for Ukraine comes up? This isn’t one time aid. These are annual appropriations. Pissing off Trump might impact future aid packages. It’s in their best interests to stay in his good graces, especially given how personal Trump can be when it comes with how he conducts foreign policy.

It’s a good rebuttal, but I think my argument is still very strong.

 

[colfax_m]

Quid pro quo’s are normal. That’s what you’re accusing Biden of doing.

LOL.....how does getting your son hired on for 80k a month with no experience fit in?

So it’s a crime for Hunter it work for Burisma?

I’ll break it down.
Joe Biden using loan guarantees to get a prosecutor fired isn’t illegal.

Hunter Biden working for Burisma isn’t illegal.

If those two things are connected, it’s illegal. Is there any evidence that they’re connected?

You dont find it a bit suspicious that a guy with zero experience in the gas and oil business lands an 80k a month job at an oil and gas business?
Uhhhh....yeah there's a fucken connection!!!
Mainly biden admitting on national TV that the Ukraine better fire the prosecutor investigating the company Jr works for or you can kiss a billion dollars of aid good bye.

Nobody is as dumb as you're acting right now.

Like I said. You need some evidence that Joe’s actions are connected to Hunter’s actions.

There is none.

Kids of rich or famous people get jobs above their pay grade all the time. Sorry to have to be the one to tell you this. It’s not illegal. Joe Biden fired a corrupt prosecutor. Also not illegal.

The only way this is illegal is if there is evidence that the two are connected. You can be suspicious all day long. You can assume whatever you want. But that doesn’t mean there is evidence of a crime.

Lets pretend I'm as stupid as you.......
Dont you think it should be investigated?

I think the DoJ should decide. I think someone without a conflict of interest should make that call.

That ain’t Trump. He shouldn’t be deciding if his political opponents need to be investigated.

 

[WEATHER53]

Let him testify, then we get Biden Jr.

What do you expect Hunter Biden will be asked, and what do you expect he will say in response?

He will show that there was reason for concern over corruption. Hell, the Heinz kid distanced himself and his employer
from what Biden Jr. was doing and emailed the State Dept of his concerns, wry.

Where do you get your information?

For the Readers, see:

What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma

Hunter Biden says taking a job at a Ukrainian energy company was "poor judgment"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...adff70-dfd9-11e9-8fd3-d943b4ed57e0_story.html

It was brought into evidence by Bondi yesterday, actually, showed the documents, wry.

Please post a summary of what Bondi showed. Yesterday I had outside appointments and didn't see much of the defense.

If it’s not a priority for you then don’t ask other people to do your work for you but thank you for waving your liberal Do It For Me Flag.

 

[jc456]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

again, you know what they're thinking huh? old magic eight ball for you huh?

 

[The Original Tree]

Adam Schiff:

Everyone defending Trump is a Russian Asset! LMAO!

 

[jc456]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

Ha ha ha,

You had at most 4 minutes to read a 15+ minute to read post (with around 7 kinks you ignored), your unsupported rationalizations on what the Ukraine presidents states is stupid and insulting to them. You have no argument to offer, just ignore what they say, you have NOTHING but partisan bullcrap apologies/rationalizations to offer.

ph3iron same amount of time makes a dead on arrival post with ZERO counterpoints, it is clear NEITHER of you have a rational argument to offer, just unsupported bullshit.

You two lawfree thinkers ignore Professor Dershowitz argument completely:

Let me repeat: nothing in the Bolton revelations – even if true – would rise to the level of an abuse of power or impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution – you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit."

I read your post. Its mostly a copy/paste of other articles. Your entire argument relies on the statements of two people who are dependent on the president’s good graces. They have a lot of interest to not be fully honest. That’s why it’s weak evidence.

Now, can you provide a rebuttal? Or are you just going to call me names.

what is it you don't understand about the two articles that were brought over? they were voted on with the witnesses that were called. if you needed more witnesses, why would one vote? that really seems odd! you're kinda odd. ah, that's why you don't get it. Again, witnesses were called, they testified, a vote was taken on two articles drawn up. taken to senate. what is it you don't understand? Compelling might I add from all your nutjob peers.

 

[colfax_m]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

again, you know what they're thinking huh? old magic eight ball for you huh?

How do you assess the credibility of statements?

 

[jc456]

Adam Schiff:

Everyone defending Trump is a Russian Asset! LMAO!

schitt's fking looney toons fk.

 

[protectionist]

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.

How does this matter at all ? If Trump had been refusing to give $$$$ to Ukraine, when they were involved in corruption, that is how things are supposed to be done.

Just Trump doing his job.

 

[jc456]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

again, you know what they're thinking huh? old magic eight ball for you huh?

How do you assess the credibility of statements?

I don't. I look at evidence. hard evidence, like statements from party's directly involved, like the PM. He said nope! you said yep. he was on the call, you weren't and yet..... you know something he doesn't. wow. see that's called stupid. but hey, you work hard at it.

 

[jc456]

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.

How does this matter at all ? If Trump had been refusing to give $$$$ to Ukraine, when they were involved in corruption, that is how things are supposed to be done.

Just Trump doing his job.

but if I may, since there was never any mention of aid in the call, it never happened. so we're arguing over something that isn't there! funny shit a shitty leftist.

 

[BlindBoo]

Mainly biden admitting on national TV that the Ukraine better fire the prosecutor investigating the company Jr works for

We have what Joe bragged about recorded. Why do you lie about what he said. He never mentioned his son.

Biden wasn't even on the board when the corruption they were investigation occurred. No crime in offering Hunter a job and no crime in Hunter accepting a job. The only crime is the Strong Arm Shakedown of the Ukraine Trumpublicans conspired together on to attack the entire Democrat half of the Country. We're going to find out who else was conspiring with the Orange Turd too. Bolton, probably not conspiring........that's just funny...Bolton..!!

 

[jc456]

Your stupid replies have been smashed by TWO Ukraine Presidents, going to call them a liar?

Liar? No. Under duress? Yes. Their statements are out of court which technically makes them hearsay. This is weak evidence given the nature of their positions and their continued dependence on Trump’s good graces.

again, you know what they're thinking huh? old magic eight ball for you huh?

How do you assess the credibility of statements?

I don't. I look at evidence. hard evidence, like statements from party's directly involved, like the PM. He said nope! you said yep. he was on the call, you weren't and yet..... you know something he doesn't. wow. see that's called stupid. but hey, you work hard at it.

done seven times by obammy!

 

[protectionist]

Bolton is just another example of desperate Democrats trying to create inroads to the 2020 election . As usual, trying to make something out of nothing
Ho hum. Yawn*****