Of course it is. The Second Coming has waved his hand and done so.That part is not pre-ordained.
Better summary:Good summary so far -
Ann Couter@AnnCoulter Okay, fine, I backslid and listened to a few minutes, but now I have the whole picture: It's a policy disagreement, featuring self-important bureaucrats telling us that their views are better than THE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.
https://twitter.com/anncoulter/status/1194647800908304385?s=21
I hope Morrison and Sondland confirm that or it is just hearsayBill Taylor:
"During this same phone call I had with Mr. Morrison, he went on to describe a conversation Ambassador Sondland had… Ambassador Sondland told Mr. Yermak that the security money would not come until President Zelensky committed to pursue the Burisma investigation."
Schiff and the whole crew know the whistleblower. Incredible he would try to lie about this. He is a serial liar though.Got any proof of this?
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/10/schiff-wrong-on-whistleblower-contact/Rep. Adam Schiff, chair of the House intelligence committee, wrongly implied that his committee had no contact with the whistleblower before receiving the complaint. Schiff claimed, “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,” when the whistleblower had in fact reached out to a committee aide before filing a complaint.
I could see many of these sound bites used in campaign ads against trump's senators needing reelection in 2020..The most difficult part of this is the use of all these names. This testimony is devastating if you are willing to listen to it, but the problem will be the people who aren't willing to listen. That used to be the function of the media, but right wing media outlets are asking who the whistleblower is. I don't think you can expect the bubble to get popped.
The Democrats badly need sound bites from this.
Jesus isn't a Republican.Of course it is. The Second Coming has waved his hand and done so.
That says the WB reached out to an aide, not to Schiff himself. I'm going to have to require something more tangible.Schiff and the whole crew know the whistleblower. Incredible he would try to lie about this. He is a serial liar though.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/10/schiff-wrong-on-whistleblower-contact/
So her hatred of Trump lasted about a week?Good summary so far -
Ann Couter@AnnCoulter Okay, fine, I backslid and listened to a few minutes, but now I have the whole picture: It's a policy disagreement, featuring self-important bureaucrats telling us that their views are better than THE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.
https://twitter.com/anncoulter/status/1194647800908304385?s=21
NOW we got a SCANDAL!Schiff and the whole crew know the whistleblower.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/10/schiff-wrong-on-whistleblower-contact/
38% of the country needs to crack open that Bible gathering dust on their shelf, then.38% of the country disagrees.
Widbil83 said:
Schiff and the whole crew know the whistleblower.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/10/schiff-wrong-on-whistleblower-contact/
The witnesses were just reading prepared statements, which is fairly boring.It seems like the posts here over the last 2 pages are dominated by discussion of the whistleblower’s identity, and whether Schiff knows, while almost ignoring the gentleman who is speaking and his absolutely devastating testimony.
The whistleblower could be Hillary Clinton and it wouldn't matter. His/her charges have been strongly validated by multiple people.It seems like the posts here over the last 2 pages are dominated by discussion of the whistleblower’s identity, and whether Schiff knows, while almost ignoring the gentleman who is speaking and his absolutely devastating testimony.
Wow. Did you find Taylor boring? I certainly didn’t.They were just reading prepared statements, which is fairly boring.
Thus proving my point about how devastating it would be if the Republicans can prove Schiff was lying. It would become the story. And yes it would be very unfortunate if it overrode facts but that's the sad way the world works.It seems like the posts here over the last 2 pages are dominated by discussion of the whistleblower’s identity, and whether Schiff knows, while almost ignoring the gentleman who is speaking and his absolutely devastating testimony.
Maybe Sondland's memory will get jogged again.Another perfect phone call.
William Taylor details NEW info from a July 26 event: One of Taylor's staffers heard Gordon Sondland on the phone with Trump, "asking Ambassador Sondland about 'the investigations.' Ambassador Sondland told President Trump that the Ukrainians were ready to move forward."
See here: https://twitter.com/HayesBrown/status/1194654015365304320?s=20
there ya goI hope Schiff stops asking questions himself very soon and hands it over to the legal counsel.
A bit curious if Holmes is the staffer that Taylor testified about hearing the phone call between Trump and Sondland.Kyle Cheney@kyledcheney
Mid-hearing impeachment inquiry officials announce two new closed depositions.
Friday: David Holmes
Saturday: Mark Sandy, an OMB official who refused to appear last week.
No I think it proves the point that people are trying to distract. I don’t think they will succeed. My guess is that around the country, people watching are not thinking at all about the whistleblower, nor will they from this morning on. It’s become a dead issue as of this public testimony.Thus proving my point about how devastating it would be if the Republicans can prove Schiff was lying. It would become the story. And yes it would be very unfortunate if it overrode facts but that's the sad way the world works.
I think he must be. Very well played by the Dems here.A bit curious if Holmes is the staffer that Taylor testified about hearing the phone call between Trump and Sondland.
Would definitely need to bring in the staffer.Maybe Sondland's memory will get jogged again.
And this is also the direct link to Trump.
This is probably because most of the people in here are already well-versed on the topic and these upstanding, lifetime government officials have confirmed everything we already knew. Not much to discuss. In the parlance of red hats, one could even say "these guys are owning the traitors."It seems like the posts here over the last 2 pages are dominated by discussion of the whistleblower’s identity, and whether Schiff knows, while almost ignoring the gentleman who is speaking and his absolutely devastating testimony.
But is it stronger than mithril?If I were the Republicans, I wouldn't attempt to challenge the characters of Kent or Taylor. Their honor and integrity is stronger than valyrian steel.
Eh, it's more like why the Julio Jones thread isn't as popular as the threads of fringe fantasy players. There's nothing to debate. These two gentleman have just confirmed things we all knew. Not sure there's much to talk about.Thus proving my point about how devastating it would be if the Republicans can prove Schiff was lying. It would become the story. And yes it would be very unfortunate if it overrode facts but that's the sad way the world works.It seems like the posts here over the last 2 pages are dominated by discussion of the whistleblower’s identity, and whether Schiff knows, while almost ignoring the gentleman who is speaking and his absolutely devastating testimony.
I doubt it.If the QPQ was based solely on the WH meeting and nothing to do with withholding aid, would this be going on?
While still a bad act, I don't think there's any way at all it would lead to impeachment hearings.If the QPQ was based solely on the WH meeting and nothing to do with withholding aid, would this be going on?