the moops
Footballguy
Bolton isn't new to you?So nothing new or provable since the House Hearings........ Thanks
Bolton isn't new to you?So nothing new or provable since the House Hearings........ Thanks
Bolton's book and the evidence gathered would disagree.So nothing new or provable since the House Hearings........ Thanks
The GOP has made a very strong case that Hunter Biden should be removed from office immediately.So nothing new or provable since the House Hearings........ Thanks
If/when he testifies, then yes. Until then, not so much.....Bolton isn't new to you?
He's trolling. Leave him be. He's ignored every Bolton comment because it doesn't fit his agenda. Just ignore.Bolton isn't new to you?
Grilling the whistleblower has always been the biggest smokescreen of this whole process. His motivations don't matter.If/when he testifies, then yes. Until then, not so much.....
And I think he should along with Hunter and the WB
And if the GOP doesn't allow him to testify?If/when he testifies, then yes. Until then, not so much.....
And I think he should along with Hunter and the WB
It's like there was a contest in the GOP to see who can get best noise/irrelevance ratio topic out there.Grilling the whistleblower has always been the biggest smokescreen of this whole process. His motivations don't matter.
No I'm not. I stated from the beginning that I haven't been paying attention. Since the Dems opening statements.He's trolling. Leave him be. He's ignored every Bolton comment because it doesn't fit his agenda. Just ignore.
What's telling is that if he truly thought that the behavior he vehemently lied about was actually within his powers, he would have just come out and told the truth from the beginning. He obviously knew it was unconstitutional and impeachable or he wouldn't have tried several lies before needing to admit the whistleblower was 100% correct.Well, Don pretty much has to abandon the argument that he didn't do it now; his credibility pales against almost anyone else's. So he's left with only the "it's all right for a president to do" argument. If he's not censured somehow for suborning the smear of an election rival, then the things he's going to do during the real campaign this year will make you throw up. Because if he gets away with it, he's going to do it even worse.
Won't that ultimately be up to John Roberts or the SC?And if the GOP doesn't allow him to testify?
What would constitute "proof" to you?No I'm not. I stated from the beginning that I haven't been paying attention. Since the Dems opening statements.
I'm just now/today hearing about the leaked Bolton book and was hoping for a link that would prove or disprove the demand for a public announcement.
No. The Senate sets the rules for the impeachment.Won't that ultimately be up to John Roberts or the SC?
Or everyone can just agree that Bolton needs to be heard. No need to involve the SCOTUS or Roberts unless there's a reason to fight to keep Bolton quiet.Won't that ultimately be up to John Roberts or the SC?
We're not doing your homework for you.No I'm not. I stated from the beginning that I haven't been paying attention.
Roberts is nothing but a figurehead. He may as well be wearing a powdered wig and using a feather pen. Just there to make the process look more like something our forefathers created. He's heard actual lies and doesn't even have the power to hit the gavel on the table. And even if he does vote on something, McConnell can overrule him.Won't that ultimately be up to John Roberts or the SC?
Thanks you. Feel free to ignore any more of questions,We're not doing your homework for you.
That's a good question. I don''t know. A smoking gun memo would be nice. Maybe direct testimony from Bolton would do it for me.What would constitute "proof" to you?
If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.That's a good question. I don''t know. A smoking gun memo would be nice. Maybe direct testimony from Bolton would do it for me.
If comes down to the word of Bolton vs Trump. I would probably lean towards Bolton on a coin flip. I'm just not sure a coin flip is good enough for removal.
I'm no big fan of Trump, and like I've said, for the 3rd time now, It's the public announcement that would push me to removal .
not until Mich and crew vote to allow witnessesWon't that ultimately be up to John Roberts or the SC?
Also, the publicly available info from Bolton is supported by countless hours of sworn testimony. How many hours of testimony do we have that refutes it?If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.That's a good question. I don''t know. A smoking gun memo would be nice. Maybe direct testimony from Bolton would do it for me.
If comes down to the word of Bolton vs Trump. I would probably lean towards Bolton on a coin flip. I'm just not sure a coin flip is good enough for removal.
I'm no big fan of Trump, and like I've said, for the 3rd time now, It's the public announcement that would push me to removal .
I would be fascinated to know the analysis that goes on to arrive at a conclusion that a Trump vs. Bolton credibility test would be a coin flip.If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.
I'm well aware of his history telling the truth. I also know if anyone has an ego large enough to challenge Trumps, It would be Bolton.If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.
There's also the part where one guy would be under oath and under threat of perjury and the other guy would just be spewing more drivel on Twitter.I would be fascinated to know the analysis that goes on to arrive at a conclusion that a Trump vs. Bolton credibility test would be a coin flip.
On the one hand you have a guy who started a fake University to scam people out of money. On the other you have a guy who is always described as honest to a fault. Coin flip? wow.
I'm not following? He has a large ego and therefore he is more likely to lie?I'm well aware of his history telling the truth. I also know if anyone has an ego large enough to challenge Trumps, It would be Bolton.
He's always been very hawkish for my liking, and just something that rubs me wrong. It's just the way I feel about him. Maybe it's the stash.I'm not following? He has a large ego and therefore he is more likely to lie?
And that Bolton has volunteered to testify under oath while Trump avoids it like kryptonite.If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.
Can Bolton just hold a press conference or do an interview with the mainstream media?And that Bolton has volunteered to testify under oath while Trump avoids it like kryptonite.
I can't really stand the guy either. But I have absolutely no reason to question his honesty. Especially when people who know him far better than me do not and speak about his character in that regard glowingly.He's always been very hawkish for my liking, and just something that rubs me wrong. It's just the way I feel about him. Maybe it's the stash.
Absolutely. He's a private citizen. I doubt he'd do that unless his publishers are prepared to push the book out immediately following.Can Bolton just hold a press conference or do an interview with the mainstream media?
13.6 lies a day. I'm cogitating on that figure. Seems high. Then again on a lie per waking hour rate maybe not so much. I wonder too about material matters in his service of public office and those in his private life. Does this include "foot wedges" in golf, a sort of lie in its own right?If it has to come down to Bolton vs. Trump for you, please remember that Trump has lied over 15,000 times since taking office, and his word is definitely not to be trusted.
Avoiding something like kryptonite implies one is Superman. Perhaps a better analogy for him is that he avoids it like its Kale.And that Bolton has volunteered to testify under oath while Trump avoids it like kryptonite.
Would be nice if both were under oath.There's also the part where one guy would be under oath and under threat of perjury and the other guy would just be spewing more drivel on Twitter.
Did you listen to the Gordon Sondland testimony? In my opinion, Sondland combined with Bolton should be enough for everyone to believe it.That's a good question. I don''t know. A smoking gun memo would be nice. Maybe direct testimony from Bolton would do it for me.
If comes down to the word of Bolton vs Trump. I would probably lean towards Bolton on a coin flip. I'm just not sure a coin flip is good enough for removal.
I'm no big fan of Trump, and like I've said, for the 3rd time now, It's the public announcement that would push me to removal .
not under oathCan Bolton just hold a press conference or do an interview with the mainstream media?
Sure, but the House did not subpoena him. So in the words of that Olson fellow. Why would the Senate do the House's homework? But Any way, I'd like to hear from him, Hunter, the WB and anyone else that may shed light on the truth.Or everyone can just agree that Bolton needs to be heard. No need to involve the SCOTUS or Roberts unless there's a reason to fight to keep Bolton quiet.
Weirdly enough, some types make me stronger.Avoiding something like kryptonite implies one is Superman. Perhaps a better analogy for him is that he avoids it like its Kale.
Bolton has said that if he was subpoenaed, he would testify.Sure, but the House did not subpoena him. So in the words of that Olson fellow. Why would the Senate do the House's homework? But Any way, I'd like to hear from him, Hunter, the WB and anyone else that may shed light on the truth.
As for the procedure. It's my understanding that after the opening statements, The senate votes on witnesses. If they subpoena Bolton the WH can claim executive privilege to keep him from testifying. It's at that point as the third equal branch the SCOTUS would step in and decide. Am I wrong about that?
What's preventing both sides from agreeing to hear what Bolton has to say? Didn't Trump say he never discussed this with Bolton? If that's true, how can Trump claim executive privilege over a conversation he said never happened?Sure, but the House did not subpoena him. So in the words of that Olson fellow. Why would the Senate do the House's homework? But Any way, I'd like to hear from him, Hunter, the WB and anyone else that may shed light on the truth.
As for the procedure. It's my understanding that after the opening statements, The senate votes on witnesses. If they subpoena Bolton the WH can claim executive privilege to keep him from testifying. It's at that point as the third equal branch the SCOTUS would step in and decide. Am I wrong about that?
How about Mulvaney when he twice admitted that they were holding up funding unless there was an investigation and then told us they do it all the time and to get over it?Did you listen to the Gordon Sondland testimory? In my opinion, Sondland combined with Bolton should be enough for everyone to believe it.
It's quite remarkable that the defense isnt calling witnesses. It's like they arent interested in due process.Hey look there’s no new info from witnesses in a trial with no witnesses...whodathunkit?
I went and looked it up. I would never have guessed how many forms there were. I mean Pink Kryptonite, who knew.Weirdly enough, some types make me stronger.