We do not want a transcript of the call, we want the Whistleblower's

Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia , he got hired due to Russia's help. Now he twice colluded with a foreign country. Lord knows what else he has done.

We do not trust the tramp admin, we know better.

upload_2019-9-23_15-27-16.png
 
report. They can make up a transcript of the call, so lets see the report that was sent to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG) who determined it was creditable and urgent for the security of the US.

Also the name of the whistleblower should be given under classified info to the House Intelligence Committee.
So you're saying you don't trust our intelligence community? Aren't you douchebags always attacking Trump for that?
 
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collusion).
 
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collustion).

No enough evidence means "innocent." That's the standard argument when you douchebags make accusations that you can't support.

It's a variation on Mueller's position that people are guilty until proven innocent.
 
report. They can make up a transcript of the call, so lets see the report that was sent to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG) who determined it was creditable and urgent for the security of the US.

Also the name of the whistleblower should be given under classified info to the House Intelligence Committee.

I totally agree!
you agree that 2nd hand knowlege of a call is evidence to something? did you just write that?
giphy.gif
 
we want HRC's 10,000 deleted emails, not redacted.

we want Obama's college transcripts
Why do you want Former President Obama's college transcripts?
Why do you want Trump's tax returns?

Why does he not want to give them, he said he would. What is he hiding,

the fact he flew into the WH on fumes.
He has received a lot of money from Russia.
He has not paid taxes since 2005.
The world will see what a crook he really is, and how he screwed the US taxpayers out of money.

and indebted to foreign countries.
Who received a lot of money from Russia and Foreign Countries? Biden and The Clintons. The Clintons alone between Russia and Saudi Arabia received almost a Quarter of a BILLION.

WTF?

How are they not in jail?

BIdens got around $40 Million

Obama got around $64 Million.
 
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collustion).

No enough evidence means "innocent." That's the standard argument when you douchebags make accusations that you can't support.

It's a variation on Mueller's position that people are guilty until proven innocent.
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collusion).
For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

nope, it wasn't against the law, hitlery's emails were already stolen prior to the comment, and trump merely asked they give them back. how is it that against the law exactly?
giphy.gif


Hey, BTW, maybe if her server was protected on government grounds, no one would be able to get to it. It was seth rich anyway, cause one can't dump that data off a remote position, files are too large. bandwidth would come into play and nothing would be moved. but, hey, what the fk do you know.
 
I have it on reliable sources...... (A cat coughed up a fur ball on my front porch) that the majority of Leftist Posters here are Communist Marxists Jihadists Coddlers who waste their lives away searching for an endless supply of hairy man butt to munch on.
 
I agree! We need the transcript when Biden threatened the Ukrianians

Lie!

Trump has claimed Biden called for the removal of a notoriously corrupt prosecutor in Ukraine in 2014 to impede an investigation into Ukrainian gas company, where Hunter Biden was a member of its board of directors at the time. But Ukrainian authorities have cleared Biden of any wrongdoing.

There’s no evidence Biden, as vice president, withheld aid to Ukraine to advance his own interest, as Trump has claimed. BUT, several House committees are now investigating whether Trump delayed more than $250 million in aid to Ukraine as he allegedly pressed Zelensky to advance his own interests.

“The one who’s got the problem is Biden,” Trump said Monday. “What Biden did is a disgrace. What his son did is a disgrace.”

No Trump. You are the one with the problem. You did what you falsely accused Biden of doing. And when the Ukraine told you Biden didn't do anything wrong, you withheld money to get them to lie for you. And now you got busted god bless the whistle blower.
 
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.
Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.
For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"
Mueller agreed.
It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.
Mueller agreed.
But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collusion).
Obviously not.
 
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collustion).

No enough evidence means "innocent." That's the standard argument when you douchebags make accusations that you can't support.

It's a variation on Mueller's position that people are guilty until proven innocent.
Tramp and his cronies, colluded with Russia...
Your statement is a lie.

Trumpybear and his cronies' conniving (collusion) with our enemy was not against the law they say.

For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

It wasn't illegal for him to pump up Wikileaks, urge and encourage his supporter to view the e-mails and DNC material stolen by Russia.

But the only way you are correct is that they didn't find enough evident to charge him with a criminal conspiracy (collusion).
For example it was not against the law when trumpybear asked "Russia, if you're listen......"

nope, it wasn't against the law, hitlery's emails were already stolen prior to the comment, and trump merely asked they give them back. how is it that against the law exactly?
giphy.gif


Hey, BTW, maybe if her server was protected on government grounds, no one would be able to get to it. It was seth rich anyway, cause one can't dump that data off a remote position, files are too large. bandwidth would come into play and nothing would be moved. but, hey, what the fk do you know.

Asking another country to use wikileaks to help him? If you have to ask, this is proof that we have entered a new low in American politics. Trump and his followers are proving Hillary was right. They are deplorable.

Hey, if you think this stuff is going to help Trump get re elected, great. And if it does, the American people deserve whatever Trump gives them in his second term.
 
report. They can make up a transcript of the call, so lets see the report that was sent to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG) who determined it was creditable and urgent for the security of the US.

Also the name of the whistleblower should be given under classified info to the House Intelligence Committee.

The call transcript SHOULD NEVER BE PROVIDED by the WH!

If it is, world leaders who talk to Trump will be real guarded in the future.
But unhinged Dems ignore this reality and do not care that a transcript release will result in interference with our national security.
 
More rumor and innuendo fakery that will Surely fulfill the fantasy feelings.
 
report. They can make up a transcript of the call, so lets see the report that was sent to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG) who determined it was creditable and urgent for the security of the US.

Also the name of the whistleblower should be given under classified info to the House Intelligence Committee.
are they still a whistleblower if they got the info 2nd hand and never heard it for themselves??

Yup. That's what I've been reading. The "whistleblower" didn't actually know anything. He just repeated something he was told.

More of a gossip than a whistleblower. LOL

Reading that where? Who is reporting that as fact?
 

Forum List

Back
Top