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.
You want illegals selecting our president.I want people selecting our presidents NOT LAND like you do And more good news More whistle blowers showing up to bury this misfit you supportMaybe we should have impeached Hillary??? Oh wait..........
the US voters impeached her in 2016.
Actually the US voters did no such thing; what they did do was award more votes to her than to anybody else.
The most votes since Reagan I understand. Thousands of them, dancing on rooftops in a very wonderful place in Germany on Seven Eleven.
take LA county out of the count and Trump wins both the EC and the PV. Do you really want LA county selecting our presidents? you probably do, you are that dumb
in all fairness, quoting CNN anymore is worse that brietbart.READ: Inspector General letter on whistleblower complaint - CNNPolitics
The IG s response to the false allegations the form was recently changed
No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.The thing is, the rules were not changed (I added more to my post)false from who? you hold trump to some very high standards but don't seem to care rules were changed to allow his testimony. this isn't objective, it's hate for someone and allowing that hate to let some do what you won't let others do.It is hard to take what he says as factual when he states:IG Stonewalled Congress On Backdated Whistleblower Rule Changes
Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, told HPSCI lawmakers during a committee oversight hearing on Friday that the whistleblower forms and rules changes were made in September, even though the new forms and guidance, which were not uploaded to the ICIG’s website until September 24, state that they were changed in August. Despite having a full week to come up with explanations for his office’s decisions to secretly change its forms to eliminate the requirement for first-hand evidence and to backdate those changes to August, Atkinson refused to provide any explanation to lawmakers baffled by his behavior.
----------
people are saying "fake news" and this never happened. well, we have names that refuse to answer as to why it DID happen.
i simply fail to see how those claiming this is all good can claim an ounce of objectivity if they allow crap like this to go on and then act all agosh in surprise when anyone does anything at all they can call a crime.
now if it didn't happen, why all the hoopla around this?
That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Much of the whistle blower’s statement has not been shown to be false. In fact I don’t think any of it has been. The telephone conversation in and of itself is only one part of the evidence and it is incomplete. It is not verbatim (the White stopped that practice) it is a memo of the call. There are also text messages, and information still to be obtained.
With such a deliberately false claim, it is doubtful the rest is accurate.
we have the name of the person in question and he won't answer it. this is far and away more than you get from CNN/MSNBC/CBS/HuffPost that all say "a source familiar with the matter".
why can the left keep changing rules but the right can't?
no one is forcing you to use highly discredited sites like CNN either. i looked for MANY sites to find the information itself w/o a lot of "a source familiar with shit said" and baiting headlines.No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.The thing is, the rules were not changed (I added more to my post)false from who? you hold trump to some very high standards but don't seem to care rules were changed to allow his testimony. this isn't objective, it's hate for someone and allowing that hate to let some do what you won't let others do.It is hard to take what he says as factual when he states:IG Stonewalled Congress On Backdated Whistleblower Rule Changes
Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, told HPSCI lawmakers during a committee oversight hearing on Friday that the whistleblower forms and rules changes were made in September, even though the new forms and guidance, which were not uploaded to the ICIG’s website until September 24, state that they were changed in August. Despite having a full week to come up with explanations for his office’s decisions to secretly change its forms to eliminate the requirement for first-hand evidence and to backdate those changes to August, Atkinson refused to provide any explanation to lawmakers baffled by his behavior.
----------
people are saying "fake news" and this never happened. well, we have names that refuse to answer as to why it DID happen.
i simply fail to see how those claiming this is all good can claim an ounce of objectivity if they allow crap like this to go on and then act all agosh in surprise when anyone does anything at all they can call a crime.
now if it didn't happen, why all the hoopla around this?
That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Much of the whistle blower’s statement has not been shown to be false. In fact I don’t think any of it has been. The telephone conversation in and of itself is only one part of the evidence and it is incomplete. It is not verbatim (the White stopped that practice) it is a memo of the call. There are also text messages, and information still to be obtained.
With such a deliberately false claim, it is doubtful the rest is accurate.
we have the name of the person in question and he won't answer it. this is far and away more than you get from CNN/MSNBC/CBS/HuffPost that all say "a source familiar with the matter".
why can the left keep changing rules but the right can't?
I'm not going to CNN.no one is forcing you to use highly discredited sites like CNN either. i looked for MANY sites to find the information itself w/o a lot of "a source familiar with shit said" and baiting headlines.No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.The thing is, the rules were not changed (I added more to my post)false from who? you hold trump to some very high standards but don't seem to care rules were changed to allow his testimony. this isn't objective, it's hate for someone and allowing that hate to let some do what you won't let others do.It is hard to take what he says as factual when he states:
That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Much of the whistle blower’s statement has not been shown to be false. In fact I don’t think any of it has been. The telephone conversation in and of itself is only one part of the evidence and it is incomplete. It is not verbatim (the White stopped that practice) it is a memo of the call. There are also text messages, and information still to be obtained.
With such a deliberately false claim, it is doubtful the rest is accurate.
we have the name of the person in question and he won't answer it. this is far and away more than you get from CNN/MSNBC/CBS/HuffPost that all say "a source familiar with the matter".
why can the left keep changing rules but the right can't?
i'd be glad to discuss the issues themselves *around* said sites to see if there is merit to what they say, but to date that has been a pretty futile attempt with her, you, and many others. you don't want to discuss issues, you want to mock/slam the other side and ROFL around a lot.
have fun.
yet you sure came out to either defend them or attack me.I'm not going to CNN.no one is forcing you to use highly discredited sites like CNN either. i looked for MANY sites to find the information itself w/o a lot of "a source familiar with shit said" and baiting headlines.No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.The thing is, the rules were not changed (I added more to my post)false from who? you hold trump to some very high standards but don't seem to care rules were changed to allow his testimony. this isn't objective, it's hate for someone and allowing that hate to let some do what you won't let others do.
we have the name of the person in question and he won't answer it. this is far and away more than you get from CNN/MSNBC/CBS/HuffPost that all say "a source familiar with the matter".
why can the left keep changing rules but the right can't?
i'd be glad to discuss the issues themselves *around* said sites to see if there is merit to what they say, but to date that has been a pretty futile attempt with her, you, and many others. you don't want to discuss issues, you want to mock/slam the other side and ROFL around a lot.
have fun.
in all fairness, if you actually clicked on the link, they posted the IG's actual statement, in full....in all fairness, quoting CNN anymore is worse that brietbart.READ: Inspector General letter on whistleblower complaint - CNNPolitics
The IG s response to the false allegations the form was recently changed
it was CNN - could tell form hovering and not going to bother with them anymore than fox news, infowars or any other emotionally based site of bullshit.in all fairness, if you actually clicked on the link, they posted the IG's actual statement, in full.... :tu:in all fairness, quoting CNN anymore is worse that brietbart.READ: Inspector General letter on whistleblower complaint - CNNPolitics
The IG s response to the false allegations the form was recently changed
Dumbfuck, I didn't defend CNN. They're biased. I recognize that. I prefer AP, Reuters, etc...yet you sure came out to either defend them or attack me.I'm not going to CNN.no one is forcing you to use highly discredited sites like CNN either. i looked for MANY sites to find the information itself w/o a lot of "a source familiar with shit said" and baiting headlines.No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.The thing is, the rules were not changed (I added more to my post)
i'd be glad to discuss the issues themselves *around* said sites to see if there is merit to what they say, but to date that has been a pretty futile attempt with her, you, and many others. you don't want to discuss issues, you want to mock/slam the other side and ROFL around a lot.
have fun.
both of which are bullshit.
so kindly fuck off and have a nice day.
4 or 5 stories being wrong out of 1000 written, is a GOOD track record of telling the Truth imoit was CNN - could tell form hovering and not going to bother with them anymore than fox news, infowars or any other emotionally based site of bullshit.in all fairness, if you actually clicked on the link, they posted the IG's actual statement, in full.... :tu:in all fairness, quoting CNN anymore is worse that brietbart.READ: Inspector General letter on whistleblower complaint - CNNPolitics
The IG s response to the false allegations the form was recently changed
Dumbfuck, I didn't defend CNN. They're biased. I recognize that. I prefer AP, Reuters, etc...yet you sure came out to either defend them or attack me.I'm not going to CNN.no one is forcing you to use highly discredited sites like CNN either. i looked for MANY sites to find the information itself w/o a lot of "a source familiar with shit said" and baiting headlines.No one is forcing you to go to bullshit sites, like the federalist, for your news.i saw gator provide a PDF. if they didn't change, they didn't change and i wish that crap would stop all around.
i'd be glad to discuss the issues themselves *around* said sites to see if there is merit to what they say, but to date that has been a pretty futile attempt with her, you, and many others. you don't want to discuss issues, you want to mock/slam the other side and ROFL around a lot.
have fun.
both of which are bullshit.
so kindly fuck off and have a nice day.
And there is nothing wrong with attacking you for relying on bullshit sites like the Federalist. That's not even news. And look what happened when you did.... you were fed false information and then you came on here and spread false information.
wrong is one thing.4 or 5 stories being wrong out of 1000 written, is a GOOD track record of telling the Truth imoit was CNN - could tell form hovering and not going to bother with them anymore than fox news, infowars or any other emotionally based site of bullshit.in all fairness, if you actually clicked on the link, they posted the IG's actual statement, in full.... :tu:in all fairness, quoting CNN anymore is worse that brietbart.READ: Inspector General letter on whistleblower complaint - CNNPolitics
The IG s response to the false allegations the form was recently changed
How many times do you have to be told that your document doesn't define the term "thing of value?"Says the chief of the federal election commission.Says you, but you're a confirmed fucking moron.Not according to election law.Eliminating potential competition from the election they're both running in is a thing of value.Investigating the possibility of criminal conduct is not a thing of personal value. If it was Obama, Hillary and half of the people in their inner circle would be in jail.
Stop with the ignorant shit
No, says you offering us your venerably clueless pseudo-legal gibberish where you make up inane babble about the law and then insist that our government is bound to whatever you make up.
Um, no. It isn't.
In comparison to your comic misunderstandings of the law, we have what the head of the FEC *actually* said:
"It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election. "
So much for your pseudo-legal gibberish. It doesn't amount to much, does it?
Not in the legal sense, moron. Was having bimbos claim Tump molested them a thing of value to the Hillary campaign? According to you it is, and therefore Hillary shuold be in prison.LOLOLOLOLYour quote doesn't define "thing of value" so it's a non sequitur.Says the chief of the federal election commission.Says you, but you're a confirmed fucking moron.Not according to election law.
No, says you offering us your venerably clueless pseudo-legal gibberish where you make up inane babble about the law and then insist that our government is bound to whatever you make up.
Um, no. It isn't.
In comparison to your comic misunderstandings of the law, we have what the head of the FEC *actually* said:
"It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election. "
So much for your pseudo-legal gibberish. It doesn't amount to much, does it?
You aren't good at this logic thing, are you?
Look at a fucking moron trying to argue that eliminating competition from the election isn't a thing of value.
Anything valued at over $2000 is a misdemeanor, and anything valued at $25000 and above, is considered a felony...How many times do you have to be told that your document doesn't define the term "thing of value?"Says the chief of the federal election commission.Says you, but you're a confirmed fucking moron.Not according to election law.Eliminating potential competition from the election they're both running in is a thing of value.
No, says you offering us your venerably clueless pseudo-legal gibberish where you make up inane babble about the law and then insist that our government is bound to whatever you make up.
Um, no. It isn't.
In comparison to your comic misunderstandings of the law, we have what the head of the FEC *actually* said:
"It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election. "
So much for your pseudo-legal gibberish. It doesn't amount to much, does it?
It's actually is quite a big less, and Trump was elected. He earned his position. He didn't get it because his dad was the president.Actually I think the POTUS salary is a bit more than that sooooooooo..........
Actually it's quite a bit more --- $400k to be precise.
You are correct that Rump didn't get it because his dad was POTUS -- that would be Shrub. Rather, Rump got rich because his dad was. Like everything else, handed to him for nothing. All he had to do was play the part of sponge.
You need to look up what the word "earn" means.
Trump was elected because the american people chose him and rejected crooked hillary. the clintons are also very rich, but unlike Trump, they got theirs at our expense.
I hope you are not claiming that the clintons "earned" their millions, you aren't that dumb are you?
I haven't posted about the "clintons '[sic]" at all. Changing the subject because the current one is too hot to handle is your thing, not mine. And one hopes you are not claiming that Rump "earned" his millions, by the courageous act of standing still while Daddy handed it to him saying "here son, I won't be around to use this money I scammed from the FHA so you take it and continue my sleazy work".
As to your first claim, the american [sic] people didn't "choose" him at all. "Rejected" ""hillary [sic]" got more votes than he did. Moreover, in those constantly-cited crucial states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin --- as well as several others including my own, even including Utah ---- NOBODY won a majority of the state's vote.
How's that for being "chosen by the american [sic] people? A candy with an R after his name can't even win Utah.
MORE moreover, as per usual because of our perverted election-charade system, only 55% of eligible voters even bothered to make the trip, because what's the point, and 46% of those chose Rump. You can do the math but I already did --- 46% of 55% means 25% of the "american [sic}" people made that choice. Feel free to essplain to the class how one-quarter of a population equates to "the american [sic] people".
both candidates knew the rules and how the EC works before the election. One of them used those rules to his benefit and the other didn't. We don't change our constitution because a candidate runs a stupid campaign.
And, without the EC Trump would have campaigned in California, NY, south Florida, and other left wing areas, neither of us can say what the result would have been under those circumstances
and I am quite knowledgeable on the capitalization rules of grammar, I just sometimes forget to hit the shift key------------------please forgive me, teacher.
Trump was elected because the american [sic] people chose him and rejected crooked hillary [sic].
the [sic] clintons [sic] are also very rich, but unlike Trump, they got theirs at our expense.
Everything we said about Hillary is true. She is a crook, and Biden is a crook. It's clear that the BIden family has gotten very rich off his trips to Ukraine and China. Anyone who says there is no evidence of corruption is a lying douchebag.Bidens ARE NOT CROOKS,,,,,,, investigating Biden IS helping trump election.......Your repub friends are trying to pull the same lying shit they did with HillaryWrong, as always. Asking a foreign government to investigate a crook is not "asking for election help."Sometimes you want to knock your head against a wall talking to republicans Trump asks for help from Russia Ukraine and China knowing it's impeachable and he says Whadda you gonna do about it and repubs bow down asking for another
Investigating criminals is not "opposition research," dumbass. Apparently you believe Comey was illegally contributing to the Trump campaign when he investigated Hillary's emails.Anything valued at over $2000 is a misdemeanor, and anything valued at $25000 and above, is considered a felony...How many times do you have to be told that your document doesn't define the term "thing of value?"Says the chief of the federal election commission.Says you, but you're a confirmed fucking moron.Not according to election law.
No, says you offering us your venerably clueless pseudo-legal gibberish where you make up inane babble about the law and then insist that our government is bound to whatever you make up.
Um, no. It isn't.
In comparison to your comic misunderstandings of the law, we have what the head of the FEC *actually* said:
"It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election. "
So much for your pseudo-legal gibberish. It doesn't amount to much, does it?
it would be easy to determine value of opposition research, which is what Rudy is stating this information is...
Ya'll accused the DNC of spending millions for GPS's opposition research....
so Opposition research definitely has a value of OVER $25 k....
Even The Washington Free Beacon, who had hired GPS for oopsition research against Trump spent much more than $25k for it...
Plus if you consider the Ukraine Prosecutors salaries to investigate the Bidens for the Trump Campaign, it's more than the $25k for a felony.
and anyone supporting this scumbag in our WH is a traitorous POS AND I promise I won't vote for Hill or Bidens sonEverything we said about Hillary is true. She is a crook, and Biden is a crook. It's clear that the BIden family has gotten very rich off his trips to Ukraine and China. Anyone who says there is no evidence of corruption is a lying douchebag.Bidens ARE NOT CROOKS,,,,,,, investigating Biden IS helping trump election.......Your repub friends are trying to pull the same lying shit they did with HillaryWrong, as always. Asking a foreign government to investigate a crook is not "asking for election help."Sometimes you want to knock your head against a wall talking to republicans Trump asks for help from Russia Ukraine and China knowing it's impeachable and he says Whadda you gonna do about it and repubs bow down asking for another
