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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Going to court would take years. By then it would be too late and the American people would be deprived of this information that they need to vote for the next president.Yes they did. Yet they got a blanket response.
When did they take that subpoena to court to have it enforced?
It is just a figment of your pathetically screwed imagination.
The asked them to appear, the only subpoena that was issued was taken to court and the commies withdrew it.
.
That's not true. Article 2 of the impeachment says this:
(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.
(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees — in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.
(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees — in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael “Mick” Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.
Wow, I notice Bolten isn't on that list, but you also need to check the facts and stop relying on commie lies. But let's assume that is correct, why didn't the commies go to court to enforce their subpoenas? They are the ones that tried to shortcut the system. Now they're asking the senate to do the job the chose not to do.
.
You say the House didn’t take to court. True.
The House isn’t asking the Senate to take it to court. They’re asking the Senate to call witnesses in a trial.
What do you think about a trial where witnesses can’t be called? Seems like it might not be a fair trial.
The accusation is that Biden got Shokin fired to helpNo it doesn't.....only to a partisan hack would itShoulda read the testimony. The idea to fire Shokin didn’t come from Biden. It pulls out the lynchpin from the accusation.What??????know what?You didn't know that?
Testimony before the House exonerated Biden. You didn't know that?
Nope, Trump will be acquitted regardless, the commies just want to sling more mud. It's a waste of time.
.
Since when is getting to the truth a waste of time?
The commies said they had a slam dunk case, what happened to that? The truth is the bidens are dirty as hell, you folks don't seem to interested in learning the facts about that.
.
There was more than enough testimony in front of the House to indict Trump. Republicans have a higher standard of proof than normal people so we really are going to have to slap them in the face with it.
There was more than enough testimony before the House to tell us that Biden wasn't doing anything wrong. You don't seem interested in acknowledging that.
Yeah right, baby biden got the job two days after Devon Archer met with poppa joe at the WH. Shoken was fired shortly after Devon Archer met with Kerry at the State Dept. Burisma bought access to the maobama regime, it's just that simple. Also it's been proven that 4 other close relatives of poppa joe made millions while poppa joe was VP. The bidens are drity as hell.
.
Does anyone at the State Dept back up your version of events?
Going to court would take years. By then it would be too late and the American people would be deprived of this information that they need to vote for the next president.When did they take that subpoena to court to have it enforced?
It is just a figment of your pathetically screwed imagination.
The asked them to appear, the only subpoena that was issued was taken to court and the commies withdrew it.
.
That's not true. Article 2 of the impeachment says this:
(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.
(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees — in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.
(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees — in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael “Mick” Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.
Wow, I notice Bolten isn't on that list, but you also need to check the facts and stop relying on commie lies. But let's assume that is correct, why didn't the commies go to court to enforce their subpoenas? They are the ones that tried to shortcut the system. Now they're asking the senate to do the job the chose not to do.
.
You say the House didn’t take to court. True.
The House isn’t asking the Senate to take it to court. They’re asking the Senate to call witnesses in a trial.
What do you think about a trial where witnesses can’t be called? Seems like it might not be a fair trial.
There were 18 witnesses called in the house, the republicans weren't allowed to call any with the exception of a constitutional lawyer. If they needed more witnesses to make their case, the commies should have gone through the established process to get them. The house even violated their own rules to refuse minority hearing days in BOTH committees.
.
Please tell. Who?Since when is getting to the truth a waste of time?
The commies said they had a slam dunk case, what happened to that? The truth is the bidens are dirty as hell, you folks don't seem to interested in learning the facts about that.
.
There was more than enough testimony in front of the House to indict Trump. Republicans have a higher standard of proof than normal people so we really are going to have to slap them in the face with it.
There was more than enough testimony before the House to tell us that Biden wasn't doing anything wrong. You don't seem interested in acknowledging that.
Yeah right, baby biden got the job two days after Devon Archer met with poppa joe at the WH. Shoken was fired shortly after Devon Archer met with Kerry at the State Dept. Burisma bought access to the maobama regime, it's just that simple. Also it's been proven that 4 other close relatives of poppa joe made millions while poppa joe was VP. The bidens are drity as hell.
.
Does anyone at the State Dept back up your version of events?
Yep.
.
Dude, you live in a delusional world where the facts that don't align with your mantra is thrown out, andThe accusation is that Biden got Shokin fired to helpNo it doesn't.....only to a partisan hack would itShoulda read the testimony. The idea to fire Shokin didn’t come from Biden. It pulls out the lynchpin from the accusation.What??????know what?
Testimony before the House exonerated Biden. You didn't know that?
Hunter.
If Biden wasn’t the one who came up with the idea to fire Shokin, it destroys the accusation.
It seems to be a crime syndicate, run by a mob boss.... imo.The White House is now trying to suppress Bolton's book. I wonder why...LOL
Trump is afraid. Afraid of the truth being revealed. The truth that his entire administration is a one big shitshow.
and then have the audacity to say they needed witnesses in the GOP senate. and that some of these senators give credence to them. I fking can't believe it I say, I can't believe it.Going to court would take years. By then it would be too late and the American people would be deprived of this information that they need to vote for the next president.When did they take that subpoena to court to have it enforced?
It is just a figment of your pathetically screwed imagination.
The asked them to appear, the only subpoena that was issued was taken to court and the commies withdrew it.
.
That's not true. Article 2 of the impeachment says this:
(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.
(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees — in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.
(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees — in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael “Mick” Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.
Wow, I notice Bolten isn't on that list, but you also need to check the facts and stop relying on commie lies. But let's assume that is correct, why didn't the commies go to court to enforce their subpoenas? They are the ones that tried to shortcut the system. Now they're asking the senate to do the job the chose not to do.
.
You say the House didn’t take to court. True.
The House isn’t asking the Senate to take it to court. They’re asking the Senate to call witnesses in a trial.
What do you think about a trial where witnesses can’t be called? Seems like it might not be a fair trial.
There were 18 witnesses called in the house, the republicans weren't allowed to call any with the exception of a constitutional lawyer. If they needed more witnesses to make their case, the commies should have gone through the established process to get them. The house even violated their own rules to refuse minority hearing days in BOTH committees.
.
that's why hunter should testifyIt seems to be a crime syndicate, run by a mob boss.... imo.The White House is now trying to suppress Bolton's book. I wonder why...LOL
Trump is afraid. Afraid of the truth being revealed. The truth that his entire administration is a one big shitshow.
what four were the republicans? I keep hearing this, post the names.Going to court would take years. By then it would be too late and the American people would be deprived of this information that they need to vote for the next president.The asked them to appear, the only subpoena that was issued was taken to court and the commies withdrew it.
.
That's not true. Article 2 of the impeachment says this:
(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.
(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees — in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.
(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees — in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael “Mick” Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.
Wow, I notice Bolten isn't on that list, but you also need to check the facts and stop relying on commie lies. But let's assume that is correct, why didn't the commies go to court to enforce their subpoenas? They are the ones that tried to shortcut the system. Now they're asking the senate to do the job the chose not to do.
.
You say the House didn’t take to court. True.
The House isn’t asking the Senate to take it to court. They’re asking the Senate to call witnesses in a trial.
What do you think about a trial where witnesses can’t be called? Seems like it might not be a fair trial.
There were 18 witnesses called in the house, the republicans weren't allowed to call any with the exception of a constitutional lawyer. If they needed more witnesses to make their case, the commies should have gone through the established process to get them. The house even violated their own rules to refuse minority hearing days in BOTH committees.
.
Not entirely true. Republicans called, I think, 4 witnesses. They didn’t call any other witnesses relevant to the investigation which is why they didn’t get a day of hearings. They would have had their day, but by rules they had to call witnesses they were relevant. They didn’t. Rules weren’t broken.
Why shouldn’t the Senate call Bolton?
Dude, you live in a delusional world where the facts that don't align with your mantra is thrown out, andThe accusation is that Biden got Shokin fired to helpNo it doesn't.....only to a partisan hack would itShoulda read the testimony. The idea to fire Shokin didn’t come from Biden. It pulls out the lynchpin from the accusation.What??????Testimony before the House exonerated Biden. You didn't know that?
Hunter.
If Biden wasn’t the one who came up with the idea to fire Shokin, it destroys the accusation.
only what supports your delusion is valid. Carry on
well the house impeached with hands on their dicks and other orifices.
Why didn’t YOUR House Clowns call them during the investigation?Mulveyny would be just as good of a first hand witness, and so would giuliani, and so would Pompeo, and so would Duffy and Parnas too perhaps.... Bolton is just 1 first hand witness of the slew that are out there....
You are so informed on this subject you don’t even know the name of the President of the Ukraine.dudette! Do you think President Velensky had any kind of choice, but to lie? Seriously?funny, we have a documented call. scribbed by others. and you're calling out a president of another country saying he lies. dude, I give a shit what you think that's for fking sure.I don't.How do you assess the credibility of statements?again, you know what they're thinking huh? old magic eight ball for you huh?
That would make you very easy to manipulate.
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.
People lie, buddy. They do it for all sorts of reasons. Sorry to upset you.
It's called Self and Nation, Preservation!
The Wrath of Don, ain't pretty little girl!
If they wouldn’t testify without court orders in the House, why would they do so in the Senate?Well the witnesses were discovered but wouldn't testify without court orders that would have taken months. But it's clear that the gop senate isn't gonna do anything even if Trump shoots someone on 5th ave.Claim endless witnesses are out there, although none discovered when ball was in your court, and thus endless impeachment seeking the never ending mystery “witnesses”
Four Gop senators may want some show of witnesses to try and claim they had open minds to an already foregone vote.
And it doesn't matter to the polling. The only actual effect may be if this stretches out into the SOTU speech and Trump loses it on TV and goes into a rage for all to see
The Senate has no more pull in the courts than the House does.THEY DIDN'T HAVE YEARS TO BATTLE IT OUT IN THE COURTS, with Trump's endless appeals, using our tax dollars....Claim endless witnesses are out there, although none discovered when ball was in your court, and thus endless impeachment seeking the never ending mystery “witnesses”
the trial Senators and the defense lawyers, can ask for suits to be expedited and leap straight (with minor bumps) to the supreme court.... 3 weeks or so at most, and not years, to get witnesses!
Challenging the validity of invalid subpoenas isn’t obstruction.Every time Democrats say they need witnesses in Senate .. I say they failed miserably in the House of TDS Democrat morons..
They failed because Trump obstructed. The Senate doesn’t even want to try. Why wouldn’t they want to even try?
What?Incorrect. Guess what would happen if you ignored a subpoena?all legal, they chose not to wait, it's on them, no one else.Well the witnesses were discovered but wouldn't testify without court orders that would have taken months. But it's clear that the gop senate isn't gonna do anything even if Trump shoots someone on 5th ave.Claim endless witnesses are out there, although none discovered when ball was in your court, and thus endless impeachment seeking the never ending mystery “witnesses”
Four Gop senators may want some show of witnesses to try and claim they had open minds to an already foregone vote.
And it doesn't matter to the polling. The only actual effect may be if this stretches out into the SOTU speech and Trump loses it on TV and goes into a rage for all to see
