Popular Post Sujo Posted December 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 23, 2019 50 minutes ago, mogandave said: So the second hand testimony is relevant, but the first hand testimony is no. Any one should be able to provide testimony for Pompeo, and someone else can substantiate it, perfect. First hand evidence is completely relevant. So call all that have it. Hint, its not wb, bidens, schiff. It is pompeo,mulvany, bolton, perry, giuliani. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 22 minutes ago, heybruce said: Where did you get that understanding about the whistleblower? Why are you focused on Biden? Why not focus on the people who were there and have first hand info? You know, the ones Trump and the Republicans don't want to testify. Where did you get that understanding about me being focused on Biden? Someone else (candied?) made Biden the focus, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 24 minutes ago, Sujo said: What part do you not understand. What biden did is irrelevant to what trump did. Hunter Biden could have assasinated the prosecutor, still not relevant to what trump is accused of. He had proper ways to investigate and chose the wrong one. The whistleblower followed all protocol. Oh? What is the protocol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 3 hours ago, mogandave said: Oh? What is the protocol? Try doing your own research instead of posting falsehoods. Thats what trump supporters do. State so many falsehoods hoping people wont bother to look. No wonder they like trump. They just accept his lies because they are too lazy to look. The wb followed protocols. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fact-check-were-whistleblower-rules-changed-ukraine-complaint-n1060481 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 20 minutes ago, Sujo said: Try doing your own research instead of posting falsehoods. Thats what trump supporters do. State so many falsehoods hoping people wont bother to look. No wonder they like trump. They just accept his lies because they are too lazy to look. That’s what I thought, thanks. 20 minutes ago, Sujo said: The wb followed protocols. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fact-check-were-whistleblower-rules-changed-ukraine-complaint-n1060481 Did you actually read the article? I pursued it and did not see where it said the whistleblower had followed protocol, so I think you just made that up. in any event, I wasn’t talking about the rules change issue the article addressed, I was talking about a different issue in the current protocol that the whistleblower failed to follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 3 hours ago, mogandave said: Where did you get that understanding about me being focused on Biden? Someone else (candied?) made Biden the focus, not me. Check your posts #174 and #177. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redline Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 17 hours ago, mogandave said: Almost 30k, but it was 500 law professors and 700 ”scholars”, yes? How many “scholars” do you think there are? Over half a million professors and how many grad students? That’s just academia so 1,200/500,000 - 0.2%, yes? If you just went with law professors: 500/30,000- 1.7% Seems like many more than wrote letters against impeachment? I actually didn’t read about anyone doing that-wonder why? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 6 hours ago, mogandave said: As I understand it, as the whistleblower did not follow protocol, they’re technically not whistleblower in the legal sense and it can be argued they enjoy no such protection. Biden could have maintained contact and could be influencing testimony, yes? One question might be if he has had any contact with any witnesses, the whistleblower, or anyone in the Ukraine in the last 24 months. Again, I’m not accusing Biden of anything, and I don’t believe he’s done anything criminal, but I’m not assuming he’s pure as the driven snow either. It seems you know better than the IG who accepted him as whistleblower. You forgot one argument: Biden could have listened through the wall, lol. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 hour ago, heybruce said: Check your posts #174 and #177. Those are me responding to someone else that asked me about Biden. But I’m sure if you go back far enough you can find something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 2 hours ago, mogandave said: That’s what I thought, thanks. Did you actually read the article? I pursued it and did not see where it said the whistleblower had followed protocol, so I think you just made that up. in any event, I wasn’t talking about the rules change issue the article addressed, I was talking about a different issue in the current protocol that the whistleblower failed to follow. Oh for the love of buddha. Its obvious you didnt read it or you would have seen this... Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire told Congress last week that the Ukraine whistleblower had followed the law. "I want to stress that I believe that the whistleblower and the inspector general have acted in good faith throughout," Maguire said at a House Intelligence hearing Thursday. "I have every reason to believe that they have done everything by the book and followed the law." 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 32 minutes ago, Sujo said: Oh for the love of buddha. Its obvious you didnt read it or you would have seen this... Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire told Congress last week that the Ukraine whistleblower had followed the law. "I want to stress that I believe that the whistleblower and the inspector general have acted in good faith throughout," Maguire said at a House Intelligence hearing Thursday. "I have every reason to believe that they have done everything by the book and followed the law." No, as I said, I perused it. Thanks for pointing that out, I’ll have to rethink and or reinvestigate my position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 22 minutes ago, mogandave said: No, as I said, I perused it. Thanks for pointing that out, I’ll have to rethink and or reinvestigate my position. Nevermind. Its no big deal. That part is over. Now its just who can do damage control best. Dems want witnesses, repubs dont. Either way trump will not be convicted. I will put money on that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, Sujo said: Either way trump will not be convicted. I will put money on that. Let me know if you find someone that will take it... That said, if they are hiding something significant beyond asking an announcement about an investigation, he could well be convicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Redline said: Seems like many more than wrote letters against impeachment? I actually didn’t read about anyone doing that-wonder why? Given you you think ~0.24% is not a small percentage, and that you were unable to find out how many law professors there are in the US without help it doesn’t surprise me that you are unable to figure that out. I’ll give you a hint: It’s not because all law professors love Trump. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slip Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 hour ago, mogandave said: Let me know if you find someone that will take it... That said, if they are hiding something significant beyond asking an announcement about an investigation, he could well be convicted. We should all rest easy. This administration is hiding that and far, far worse. (imo of course) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 59 minutes ago, Slip said: We should all rest easy. This administration is hiding that and far, far worse. (imo of course) Of course 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelsall Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 18 hours ago, candide said: Interesting quote "I'm not really making a political judgment about him, because that's not our expertise at Christianity Today. I am making a moral judgment that he's morally unfit, or even more precisely, it's his public morality that makes him unfit. Anybody in leadership has — none of us are perfect. We're not looking for saints. ... But a president has certain responsibilities as a public figure to display a certain level of public character and public morality." https://www.axios.com/christianity-today-evangelical-trump-removal-d6e3309f-a163-4bae-a437-708a0f07acad.html Nearly 200 evangelical leaders condemned Christianity Today's editorial calling for the removal of President Trump, which “offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens-of-millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations," they wrote to the magazine's president. https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/nearly-200-evangelical-leaders-condemned-christianity-today-editorial-on-trump 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post candide Posted December 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, Kelsall said: Nearly 200 evangelical leaders condemned Christianity Today's editorial calling for the removal of President Trump, which “offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens-of-millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations," they wrote to the magazine's president. https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/nearly-200-evangelical-leaders-condemned-christianity-today-editorial-on-trump I don't disagree that nothing will likely prevent most of them from voting for Trump. They have even been able to elect a dead pimp in Nevada last year. I just found it interesting that a few of them are starting to open their eyes. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cryingdick Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, candide said: I don't disagree that nothing will likely prevent most of them from voting for Trump. They have even been able to elect a dead pimp in Nevada last year. I just found it interesting that a few of them are starting to open their eyes. There is no reasonable alternative to Trump. Cry about Trump all you want but a major factor in the reason he will do two terms is the dem party. Making Trump look worse isn't making them look better. Come back in 5 years with a candidate who is actually half sane and has a plan that makes sense. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogandave Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Kelsall said: Nearly 200 evangelical leaders condemned Christianity Today's editorial calling for the removal of President Trump, which “offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens-of-millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations," they wrote to the magazine's president. https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/nearly-200-evangelical-leaders-condemned-christianity-today-editorial-on-trump Mark Galli will retire in January. Nice he got all these appearances to pad the nest... I’m betting he get’s a gig as a theological contributor for CNN or some-such. That way they can get a respected Christian’s prospective on how bad Trump is every time something involving evangelicals comes up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 China and israel. Hows the trade war going. Ahahaha. https://www.scmp.com/news/world/middle-east/article/3043235/china-and-israel-are-poised-sign-free-trade-deal-will-donald 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Cryingdick said: There is no reasonable alternative to Trump. Cry about Trump all you want but a major factor in the reason he will do two terms is the dem party. Making Trump look worse isn't making them look better. Come back in 5 years with a candidate who is actually half sane and has a plan that makes sense. "Come back in 5 years with a candidate who is actually half sane and has a plan that makes sense." You set a much higher standard for Democrats than for the Republicans. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jany123 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 2 hours ago, candide said: I don't disagree that nothing will likely prevent most of them from voting for Trump. They have even been able to elect a dead pimp in Nevada last year. I just found it interesting that a few of them are starting to open their eyes. 100:1 these wayward Christians are nothing but dirty rotten never trumpers.... Lmao.... From kelsalls link above... Jenna Ellis, a senior legal adviser for the Trump 2020 campaign, slammed the magazine in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner as being run by "pious 'Never Trumpers' who feel morally justified...in a self-serving desire to be proven right..." i was wrong! They are “pious” self serving never trumpers ????????????????... is that worse? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redline Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 8 hours ago, mogandave said: Given you you think ~0.24% is not a small percentage, and that you were unable to find out how many law professors there are in the US without help it doesn’t surprise me that you are unable to figure that out. I’ll give you a hint: It’s not because all law professors love Trump. I wanted you to do it because I’m busy-sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now