2-Winner: #1 Pro-Trump description of impeachment:
— Sharyl Attkisson🕵️♂️ (@SharylAttkisson) January 19, 2020
(Thanks for playing!) https://t.co/kyOo0RARQI pic.twitter.com/B3aZbEsyMo
Enero 19, 2020
Sharyl Attkisson picks a winning pro-Trump description of impeachment (and I guess there will be a winning anti-Trump description).
Mga Post
57 komento:
"Mind if I do a J?"
Oh, boy, that sure is bait for someone (Who will fight you!).
1-Winner: #1 anti-Trump description of impeachment:
"If u think it's a good idea that your president can bribe and extort foreign governments for political gain, you're basically happily shredding the US Constitution..Dems should add another few articles..So many to choose from."
It wins because it is perfect.
Trump is guilty of Obstruction of Justice and Obstruction of Congress because.... Orange Man Bad and he beat Hillary because -even tho the Russians made the Clintons very rich - The Russians!
Trump usurped the throne from its rightful heir, and She will be very very pissed if we don't impeach.
Read the last paragraph for the real news about Iowa.>
Yup. Just wait till Biden is the nominee.
There still exists in the Democrats mindset that they can control the narrative. That people watch CNN and MSNBC (and Fox for that matter) and believe them.
I suspect November 2020 will disabuse them of that notion.
The knives are really out for Sanders which makes me think he will win.>
They have no choice. It's what the fantasy constitution requires in case of fantasy.
Does Sharyl Atkisson think that "winner" is remotely true, or accurate? Anything other than grossly misleading in search of a joke?
Shameful, from a purported reporter. Is she just an entertainer now?
Who to believe. Chuck or Attkisson. Beats me.
"Who to believe. Chuck or Attkisson. Beats me."
I believe The Dude. (Isn't that his name? I've never seen the movie.)
Hey Dems, while we are at it, why did Burisma pay Hunter the big $$?
Atkisson 6, Chuck 1
Ah Chuckles. Sod off if you can't take a joke----and the best jokes have a core element of truth.
The Dude Abides.
Biden blackmailed Ukraine with a billion in tax dollars to drop an investigation into his son.
"I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee," Biden admitted. "I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired."
Just give it up, Chuck.
Joe Biden needs to answer for his admitted threat.
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody who thinks Trump did something inappropriate can give Biden a pass.
Biden and his son are government whore crooks on a large international scale.
The Clintons are also government whore crooks on a large international scale.
We need to issue a Severe Titty Twister Warning for Sharyl Atkisson. Stat!!
The left must keep the crooks in power because the Brennan-Clapper Deep state will lose millions if they do not.
Just give it up, Chuck.
Upchuck, indeed!
"Biden blackmailed Ukraine with a billion in tax dollars to drop an investigation into his son.”
My new favorite part of this is that the Burisma. legal team, made up of powerful Democrats and purportedly “headed” by crackhead Hunter Biden met with the new prosecutor well before the old prosecutor was deposed, per the New York Times.
Does Sharyl Atkisson think that "winner" is remotely true, or accurate?
Every sane person agrees with her, yes.
Wanting to know the dishonest dealings of one of our politician's with a foreign government was a good thing for journalist to uncover. The journalist have dismissed that corruption by claiming it is a foreign government's interference in our election process.
Indeed aunty, that came from the documents shokin turned up
Now buretta the lead dog was obama doj division chief till he switched side.
This is his cv
https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/person/17222727
This is no 2
https://www.bluestarstrategies.com/about/our-team/sally-a-painter
Shes with the atlantic council quelle surprise
Law labor and urban politics
https://www.bluestarstrategies.com/about/our-team/karen-tramontano
Due diligence, fiduciary responsibility, and mitigating progress are impeachable offenses.
The way I heard it put a while back was: "The Democrats want to impeach the President for asking about corruption, so they can elect the guy who did the corruption."
It's simple. It's obvious. It's true. It also corruption of the highest possible order. To disenfranchise 60+ million American voters, and starting that effort even before he was elected. The worst episode in American political history. It will be remember most for how many were part of it, how deep it went, and how many were willing to accept it.
The fate they wanted for us:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/01/what-do-iran-chile-and-france-have-in-common.php
Wasnt expecting this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1218962547161911303
I am prepared, for purposes of the argument, to accept that Trump's dealing with the Ukraine was motivated by the opportunity to gain political advantage over Biden, his most likely opponent in the next election. Having said that, how does anyone distinguish that from almost every other official act of a president or any politician for that matter?
Is there anything a president does that isn't shaped by a political calculation with reference to opponents? Only in the rarest case I would wager.
This impeachment circus is strictly a way for the Dems to express their hatred of the OrangeManBad, and I'm reasonably certain that they will pay a terrible price for it. If not, the next Dem president who has a Republican majority in the House will get no shelter from the paybacks.
The lefties are 95% to blame for the toxic political environment in which we live. I leave 5% for other players, but I can't think of who they might be at the moment.
- Krumhorn
Nobody expects 1218962547161911303.
I gotta ask.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo_GMMLULXw
The thing is, it wasn't true - it wasn't U.s. tax dollars, there was no ongoing investigation of Biden's son - Biden didn't say he got the prosecutor fired in order to stop an prosecution and what's more Joe Biden probably made the whole story up!
The Democrats want to exclude the question of whether there was any validity to Trump's question.
The thing is, it wasn't true - it wasn't U.S. tax dollars, but a loan guarantee there was no ongoing investigation of Biden's son - Biden didn't say on video on January 23, 2018 at a Q&A session at the Council on Foreign Relations that he got the prosecutor fired in order to stop a prosecution
And what's more, Joe Biden probably made the whole story up! with the aborted annoncement and everything.
The Democrats want to exclude the question of whether there was any validity to Trump's question.
They fired the prosecutor and his sucessor made no progress sammy
In the midst of a mighty silence, the impeachers are sowing the wind.
Will be? The other winner was not that hard to find and was announced first
The fake quote described in the photo is false, but where would you be without distorting the facts and spreading lies?
I see that Larry Tribe is now arguing in the Post that the president's lawyers should not be allowed to make a defense.
Trial should be interesting.
Attkisson is one of the BEST investigative reporters out there, (that OBAMA spied on) and Chuck calls HER an entertainer??? Chuck, you ARE nuts.
It’s funny because the DNC-Media (and fake LLR) take is that Biden was AUTHORIZED by the President Obama to withhold the money, but Trump should be impeached because he didn’t have permission to withhold the money. Simple!
So, if Biden is not the Democrats Appointed One, doesn't that nullify the 'political opponent' argument?
So the entire Democrat field of candidates could be getting bribes from Burisma and the head of the Executive Branch (the law enforcement branch) has to just ignore it. Yea, the logic is sound.
Where is the investigation into Biden's obvious crimes?
What lie - pee pee tap?
Tell us about Biden's son and Biden's on-tape admission of quid-pro-quo for tax dollars.
People act like anyone could have filled the executive position held by Hunter at Burisma. My god, it's not like you could easily find someone with such demonstrated ability to abuse alcohol, snort coke and bang strippers while simultaneously having zero experience in the energy industry. Christ, it's not like candidates with these credentials grow on trees.
That Joe was VP is such an obvious coincidence. I don't see how any reasonable person could make that connection.
Chuck said...
Does Sharyl Atkisson think that "winner" is remotely true, or accurate?
No, Chuck, she knows it's entirely true, accurate, correct, and honest.
For that matter, so do you. So does anyone who's been paying attention
Sammy Finkelman said...
The thing is, it wasn't true - it wasn't U.s. tax dollars, there was no ongoing investigation of Biden's son - Biden didn't say he got the prosecutor fired in order to stop an prosecution and what's more Joe Biden probably made the whole story up!
Then Joe Biden can testify to that fact during the Trump impeachment trail in the US Senate
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.