• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Adam Schiff's EPIC SMACKDOWN of repubs & Trump who have attacked him.

oscarlevant said:
schiff is the coolest head in the room., he rarely gets mad. But, here, his take down is so pure, forceful, plain, emotional and heart felt only those with skins of crabs can't feel it --- he succeeded in exposing the elephant in the room in the most powerful way imaginable, this is a take down of take downs that future politicians, historians and academicians will be quoting from for years to come.

Schiff slices and dices the republican mud cuddlers with a mighty smackdown and puts senate repubs back into their lowly crawling spaces.

Click to expand...



blah blah blah.



schiff.jpg
 
GDViking said:
Haven't had your coffee yet???

Your posts are always lame and not worth the time to open, however that was incredibly week even for you...
Click to expand...



Great rebuttal!! Pretty much expresses the LIMIT of YOUR ABILITIES... :lamo


It's only the SAME QUESTION the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ( who are NOT CNN/MSNBC VIEWERS ) ARE ASKING....


LET'S SEE THE LYING SCHIFF"s EVIDENCE....
 
Excon said:
Epic smackdown? iLOL
You are dreaming.
He again established why he should be removed. He not only falsely characterized the information but lied as well.
But as those on the left do the same I am sure you did not see it.

eg: @03:16 "You might think it is okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponents emails if they were listening."​

That is an absolutely false statement on his part.
It refers to the supposedly 30,000 destroyed emails on Hillary Clinton's private server.
The President asked Russia to release them if they had them. That is not a request to hack.
Nor could it be a request to hack the server those 30,000 destroyed emails had been on as the server was no longer on-line.
Click to expand...

Why Russia? Why didn't he ask Canada, Albania or Iceland if they were listening????
 
Middleground said:
Why Russia? Why didn't he ask Canada, Albania or Iceland if they were listening????
Click to expand...

Because the LIE-O-CRATS had already claimed Russia hacked them ; the JOKE would not have made sense with any other nation.


You DO REALIZE that that was an OBVIOUS JOKE, not a "SERIOUS REQUEST FOR RUSSIAN ASSISTANCE...right? ?

Maybe you should watch the ACTUAL VIDEO of it....
 
Grokmaster said:
Because the LIE-O-CRATS had already claimed Russia hacked them ; the JOKE would not have made sense with any other nation.


You DO REALIZE that that was an OBVIOUS JOKE, not a "SERIOUS REQUEST FOR RUSSIAN ASSISTANCE...right? ?

Maybe you should watch the ACTUAL VIDEO of it....
Click to expand...

I thought the hacking happened afterwards. Are you saying it happened before Trump said those words?
 
Grokmaster said:
Because the LIE-O-CRATS had already claimed Russia hacked them ; the JOKE would not have made sense with any other nation.


You DO REALIZE that that was an OBVIOUS JOKE, not a "SERIOUS REQUEST FOR RUSSIAN ASSISTANCE...right? ?

Maybe you should watch the ACTUAL VIDEO of it....
Click to expand...

And yet Russia followed through and did just as he asked in less than 48 hrs.

Yeah, funny, funny joke, Russia fixed an American election, ****ing hilarious!!!
 
Chillfolks said:
I enjoyed watching the Republicans try ans containe their laughter as Schiff went on his mostly unsubstantiated rant
Click to expand...

Given that they weren't showing the Republicans through most of his substantiated rant, how did you manage that?
 
Where were all these Republicans calling for Trump's resignation when he falsely accused Obama of the crime of wire tapping his phones? Where were all these Republicans calling for the resignation of Trump, Miller and Sanders when they falsely accused Hillary Clinton's campaign of the crime of bussing illegal voters from the state of Massachusetts over the border into New Hampshire on election day to throw the state for her?

I guess hypocrisy really does run deep in the right these days.
 
I hope all of the Schiff-admirer on this board will contribute generously ...


@AdamSchiff
Follow Follow @AdamSchiff
More
BREAKING: Not only did President Trump just call Adam a “liar,” and a “disgrace to our country,” he went on to say Adam “should be forced out of office.” Donate now to show Adam the people stand with him in spite of Trump’s attacks.

YyJ-b1Wx


9:55 AM - 28 Mar 2019


For the "non-admirers" read the response tweets. :lamo
 
Lesh said:
Negated by Mueller?

You've read the Mueller Report?
Click to expand...

Well let's look at it this way.

- Schiff keeps saying he saw solid non-circumstantial evidence of Trump collusion.
- No one ever seems to want to ask him what that evidence is.
- Granted, that's only because of who's interviewing him.
But anyway ...
- That would mean Mueller must've missed it.
- The chances of that are slim, right?
- That would make Mueller, his team, and the FBI terribly incompetent.
- Or that would make Schiff truly full of ****.
- But let's say Schiff actually has something Mueller doesn't.
- That would mean Schiff should have turned it over to Mueller but he didn't.
- That would make Schiff guilty of obstruction of justice, wouldn't it?

Doesn't look good for Schiff any way you look at it.
 
bubbabgone said:
Well let's look at it this way.

- Schiff keeps saying he saw solid non-circumstantial evidence of Trump collusion.
- No one ever seems to want to ask him what that evidence is.
- Granted, that's only because of who's interviewing him.
But anyway ...
- That would mean Mueller must've missed it.
- The chances of that are slim, right?
- That would make Mueller, his team, and the FBI terribly incompetent.
- Or that would make Schiff truly full of ****.
- But let's say Schiff actually has something Mueller doesn't.
- That would mean Schiff should have turned it over to Mueller but he didn't.
- That would make Schiff guilty of obstruction of justice, wouldn't it?

Doesn't look good for Schiff any way you look at it.
Click to expand...

Actually, it could mean that different people come to different conclusions about the same information.
 
haymarket said:
Actually, it could mean that different people come to different conclusions about the same information.
Click to expand...

So you're going with "That would make Mueller, his team, and the FBI terribly incompetent." because they're not sharp enough to assess the evidence as well as Schiff.
 
"Do you seriously think Barr would base the principle conclusion on something that was not in Mueller's report? "

Yes.

In a word.

Yes. That was what he was HIRED to do
 
bubbabgone said:
Well let's look at it this way.

- Schiff keeps saying he saw solid non-circumstantial evidence of Trump collusion.
- No one ever seems to want to ask him what that evidence is.
Click to expand...
He told you in that video. :shrug:
 
Lesh said:
"Do you seriously think Barr would base the principle conclusion on something that was not in Mueller's report? "

Yes.

In a word.

Yes. That was what he was HIRED to do
Click to expand...

Agreed.....YES in spades and it appears that Barr's flimflam is not holding up as well it should not.

That said I expect Barr to desperately try to find the logical legal predicate (executive privilege or counter-intelligence justification) to redact elements of Mueller's report that reflect badly on the President with regard to Obstruction or Conspiracy or even Collusion. I expect Barr to attempt to scrub the whole thing!

Barr has already gone too far down the rathole with his idiotically transparent four page letter to back out now. As so many have said before, nobody Trump touches escapes clean of the sewage that spews out of that man.
 
Mycroft said:
Do you seriously think Barr would base the principle conclusion on something that was not in Mueller's report? If Mueller's report had said "beyond a reasonable doubt" that's what Barr would have said.

Barr said "The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

Barr actually quoted verbatim from Mueller's report.

Seriously, it can't be any more clear than that. It simply did not happen. "Reasonable doubt" does not apply.

You need to get over it...and tell Schiffty to get over it, too.
Click to expand...

Excon said:
Wrong. You can not hack a server that is not on-line.



Delusional thinking.

Like I said; Delusional.


iLOL Oy vey! Like I said; Delusional.

He could claim that he wanted them to release them to the press if they had them, which is exactly what he said. Duh!


Like I said; Delusional.



Delusional dreams do not have to be rebutted.
Click to expand...

Since when do facts, such as these, matter to Democrats? Especially when it blows a huge hole in their position?
They just keep going as they were, ignoring it, making the same statements to their base, which ignores it as well, and believes as they are told to believe.

:shrug:
 
Lesh said:
"Do you seriously think Barr would base the principle conclusion on something that was not in Mueller's report? "

Yes.

In a word.

Yes. That was what he was HIRED to do
Click to expand...

Nonsense.

If Barr did that, Mueller would have his ass.
 
bubbabgone said:
Well let's look at it this way.

- Schiff keeps saying he saw solid non-circumstantial evidence of Trump collusion.
- No one ever seems to want to ask him what that evidence is.
- Granted, that's only because of who's interviewing him.
But anyway ...
- That would mean Mueller must've missed it.
- The chances of that are slim, right?
- That would make Mueller, his team, and the FBI terribly incompetent.
- Or that would make Schiff truly full of ****.
- But let's say Schiff actually has something Mueller doesn't.
- That would mean Schiff should have turned it over to Mueller but he didn't.
- That would make Schiff guilty of obstruction of justice, wouldn't it?

Doesn't look good for Schiff any way you look at it.
Click to expand...

We are right back to shouting the lie loud enough and long enough and the people will think it is true. The witch hunt continues with a new face shouting witch with no evidence. Maybe we can start a new investigation without any evidence and once again misuse our justice system for political gain. Isn't what they are doing to Trump rigging an election. At least the Russians told the truth.
 
bubbabgone said:
Well let's look at it this way.

- Schiff keeps saying he saw solid non-circumstantial evidence of Trump collusion.
- No one ever seems to want to ask him what that evidence is.
- Granted, that's only because of who's interviewing him.
But anyway ...
- That would mean Mueller must've missed it.
- The chances of that are slim, right?
- That would make Mueller, his team, and the FBI terribly incompetent.
- Or that would make Schiff truly full of ****.
- But let's say Schiff actually has something Mueller doesn't.
- That would mean Schiff should have turned it over to Mueller but he didn't.
- That would make Schiff guilty of obstruction of justice, wouldn't it?

Doesn't look good for Schiff any way you look at it.
Click to expand...

You really should have listened to the words Schiff said yesterday and has said all along. He has been talking about Junior, Kushner and Manafort agreeing to meet with representatives of the Russian government based on email exchanges saying that 1, the Russian government wanted to help Trump win, and 2, they had compromising information on the former Secretary of State. Why did you say he has never said why he believes there was coordination between the campaign and the Russians, and nobody has ever asked him? He has and they have. You are free to disagree with him, but you shouldn't lie.
 
Lutherf said:
That was epic?

Hmm....

2 years ago Devin Nunes was running that committee and stepped aside when he was accused of being too close to the White House. Now, ironically enough, Nunes has been cleared of wrong doing and Schiff doesn't have the integrity to step aside when he's been stone cold busted running a propaganda campaign against the president. Today's speech was a gross misrepresentation of the facts and served as nothing more than additional evidence of Schiff's character or, rather, the lack thereof.
Click to expand...

That is great spin.

But it is NOT like there was nothing to be suspiscious about.

You are all behaving like they caught someone with a Rolex stolen in a robbery murder and it is unfair to investigate whether the person just received stolen property or was actually involved in the burglary or murder.

And that everyone they know lying about where they were and what they were doing sohoulent cast additional suspiscion.

We are pattern recognizing animals. There was a LOT of smoke. It is perfectly reasonable to suspect it came from a fire.

Sometimes we get it wrong.

And sometimes there just isn't enough evidence to charge and convict. But absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence. Our laws just prevent action withourmt evidence. They do not not prevent investigation.

I suspect the report says something along the lines of "not enough evidence to charge" rather than "trump is definitively innocent".

If they only let us see three hundred pages with a handful of words not redacted per page then I'm probably right.

It will be that or clear evidence that the Russians did tip the election to trump. Which would open an entire can of worms as to trumps legitimacy.

What the right is doing right now would be ridiculous in any other criminal investigation. The idea that a subject was investigated and no or insufficient evidence was found that the perp was therefore innocent and the prosecutors should be charged for their investigation and prosecution.
 
HumblePi said:
It's just incredible how republicans can just spread a little butter on something like what Devin Nunes did and expect it will just slide away. Devin Nunes didn't "step away" because he has any integrity, he was pressured by both republicans and democrats to step down. Devin Nunes was given no other choice but to get his ass out of that Chairman's seat, that's the only way Nunes would ever give it up. There's not a hair's breadth of integrity between every republican sitting shamelessly on that committee. It was Nunes who came to the defense of traitorous Michael Flynn even while the White House called Flynn a liar and Nunes referred to Flynn as "being too pure for politics." Obviously Devin Nunes himself isn't too pure for politics.

Adam Schiff is a Harvard educated, experienced prosecutor and he came prepared with facts, not conjecture, or theories, he brought FACTS that not one of those sycophantic republicans could deny or refute.
Click to expand...

Right winger don't understand nor care about facts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom