You want evidence? Bolton book outlines Trump is guilty

[code1211]

A lynch mob, by definition, hangs someone without a trial.

You are saying that the Senate and the officers of that trial, including the Chief Justice, is a lynch mob.

Apparently, you haven't thought your implication through.

The Lynch Mob only needs to be a mob wanting to lynch somebody to be a Lynch mob. Accomplishing the deed is only subsequential to the effort.

The Minnesota Vikings are a football team the is trying to win a Super Bowl. Same general concept.

 

[What if...?]

Just to help you to constrain your runaway passions on this:

The manuscript is not released. The unreleased manuscript was not read by the publishers of the leaks. The source of the leaks, as always, is attributed to an "Anonymous Source".

It seems more likely than not that, once again, anonymous is just French for non-existent.

Like their sources, the reliability of journalists in our world has fallen to a level just south of non-existent.

Or, it's all exactly what it looks like it is.

So there's that...

 

[code1211]

So, in the annals of the history of published books, the profit motives impugns the integrity of all authors.

Again, it's obvious you do not think your implications through to their logical consequences.

Because, if you did, you'd see the absurdity of it.


If Bolton were lying, and it was proved that he was lying, not only would his reputation be destroyed, his career as a politician and consultant on foreign affairs be destroyed, his book will sell less, not more. The kinds of people who purchase such a book are not the kinds of people who read the National Enquirer, i.e, the MAGA hat crowd.


You really haven't given your implication much thought, have you.

You have apparently missed the key to this: The manuscript is not yet released. The NYT released the interpretation of a particular part of the manuscript as relied to them by an anonymous source.

When any "news" organization uses an "anonymous source", we should now be ready to discard everything they are guessing at.

Haven't you earned any caution from the anonymous source reporting on Russian Collusion, Mueller, the entire impeachment inquiry, the basement inquisition, Kavanaugh hearings and all the rest?

What does it take for you to even start to see the ongoing sham(s) for what they are.

The NYT is a waste of paper and broad band. Used to be the gold standard of reporting. Now, it's not even good fish wrap since it's mostly electronic.

 

[code1211]

Nothing is covered by executive privilege that concerns misconduct.

The book was approved by the NSC for release, so it's already out there, any testimony by Bolton to confirm or deny the veracity of it's comments cannot be prevented by executive privilege.

Do you have a link for that?

 

[veritas1]

He did not say abuse of power was not grounds for impeachment and that is why he did not testify in the Senate. Trump is asking to be crowned King.

Kings don't need to win elections. Your comment is simply stupid.

 

[veritas1]

Josh Marshall is a guy who runs a website that contains arguments that make conservatives cry. Like this:

That would be really interesting had Trump done any of them.:lol:

 

[veritas1]

Then why were Republicans asking for him to testify?

To show that he has nothing and that impeachment is a scam.

 

[veritas1]

Odd, how almost no legal constitutional scholars agree. I wonder if you deny global warming, too. Evolution?

What a gaggle of Trump-hating leftwing academics like the fools paraded up to Capitol Hill think, means nothing whatever to me.

 

[code1211]

Lynch mobs convict and exact punishment without a trial.

Quit lying.

And that's what they did.

That is why they are now asking the Senate to do what is required by the Constitution that they do.

IF they had actually, in good faith, conducted the inquiry to find out what actually had happened, that's what they would have done. Instead, they continued what they've been doing since Trump won in a landslide.

They are a Lynch mob who knows who to lynch, they just haven't conjured up the crime to use as an excuse. This is exactly how a Lynch mob operates.

This particular lynch mob is equal parts partisan witch hunter and Warner Brothers Coyote.

Pictured below is Adam Schiff as he initiates his next brilliant attack on Trump:

• 

 

[jpn]

What a gaggle of Trump-hating leftwing academics like the fools paraded up to Capitol Hill think, means nothing whatever to me.

Oh, it's quite clear that only people who believe what you believe mean anything to you.

By the way, do you know that your avatar image is Alexander Hamilton? He's the antithesis of the conservative ideology. Do you know that?

 

[veritas1]

Clearly, only people who believe what you believe mean anything to you.

Nope but when people are willing to sacrifice all logic, precedent, fairness and norms in the service of ideology and/or the accumulation of power, those people should be rejected.

 

[veritas1]

And that's what they did.

That is why they are now asking the Senate to do what is required by the Constitution that they do.

IF they had actually, in good faith, conducted the inquiry to find out what actually had happened, that's what they would have done. Instead, they continued what they've been doing since Trump won in a landslide.

They are a Lynch mob who knows who to lynch, they just haven't conjured up the crime to use as an excuse. This is exactly how a Lynch mob operates.

This particular lynch mob is equal parts partisan witch hunter and Warner Brothers Coyote.

Pictured below is Adam Schiff as he initiates his next brilliant attack on Trump:

• 

Lavrenti Beria, Stalin's KGB henchman once said, "Show me the man and I'll find you the crime." That is the premise upon which the current Democrat party operates. We showed them Trump and they've been searching for the crime ever since.

 

[iguanaman]

To show that he has nothing and that impeachment is a scam.

Yet all the charges made by the WB were also verified as fact by 17 witnesses some with 1st hand knowledge. In fact those charges are not even disputed now by the Presidents counsel. They now make the assertion that bribery is legal when a President is the one doing it. Just like Nixon asserted 50 years ago.

 

[iguanaman]

Kings don't need to win elections. Your comment is simply stupid.

Kings and dictators often hold sham elections. That is now what the President is about to be green lighted to do by the Senate.

 

[jpn]

Nope but when people are willing to sacrifice all logic, precedent, fairness and norms in the service of ideology and/or the accumulation of power, those people should be rejected.

You describe yourself.

Why do you use an image of Alexander Hamilton?

 

[jpn]

Lavrenti Beria, Stalin's KGB henchman once said, "Show me the man and I'll find you the crime." That is the premise upon which the current Democrat party operates. We showed them Trump and they've been searching for the crime ever since.

Not hard to find. Trump University.

My favorite is the Trump Foundation. It promised to use donations to fund things like veterans. Instead, it was a criminal enterprise Trump used to pay back loans, buy portraits of himself, and fund his political campaign that the Russians were helping him with.

**He was fined $2 million.

**He can never run a "charity" again without supervision. Because he can't be trusted with other people's money.

**His children were ordered to attend how-to-not-be-a-crook-like-dad class. Wouldn't you love to have been a fly on that wall!?! Here are the sulky, privileged Trump brats, petulantly writing "I will not be a crook like Dad" on the blackboard 100 times! :lamo

 

[code1211]

Simple solution to all your questions or points.

Bring Bolton to testify.

You should be all for it, given that Bolton is a Republican, was chosen by Trump, was in his inner circle and represents everything that Republicans want.

You should be asking, requesting, and even demanding he testify, that is of course if you are interested in the truth and not just in perpetrating your personal goals no matter how unlawful or damaging they may be to our nation.

I am interested in truth and THAT is why EVERYTHING about the ongoing witch hunt is reprehensible.

The drive to undo Trump started at about the moment his nomination became a certainty. It has not let up since.

Unremitting lies by Pencil Neck, Ol' Nads, Antsy Nancy, Cryin' Chuck and the entire media complex is surprisingly ineffective since reality opposes EVERYTHING they assert.

In the meantime, EVERYTHING is better in spite of the Democrat-Socialists. The best thing that's happened to the American Worker in 50 years is Trump.

 

[code1211]

Or, it's all exactly what it looks like it is.

So there's that...

What it looks like is this: Manuscript is unreleased and NOBODY knows what it actually says.

The Democrat-Socialists are once again throwing crap on the wall to see what sticks.

There seems to be a group of the usual dupes licking the wall to see what it tastes like this time.

 

[code1211]

Lavrenti Beria, Stalin's KGB henchman once said, "Show me the man and I'll find you the crime." That is the premise upon which the current Democrat party operates. We showed them Trump and they've been searching for the crime ever since.

Exactly!

What the failure of the ongoing witch hunt seems to be demonstrating is the dilution of the strength of the impact the legacy media has on public opinion.

In the past, the constant hammering of 93% negative coverage of the Trump Administration by the yammering pundits would have completely destroyed Trump.

Today, the much wider breadth of opinion and interpretation has dulled their impact. When the execution of al-Bagdahdi gets only 65% positive coverage, that reveals it all.

To those of us who wonder about this stuff, the current bemoaning of the disintegration of journalistic ethics is replaced by the wondering if it was always this propagandistic and only now is exposed by the opposite POV.

To me, the claim made by journalists that they were EVER impartial and fair is a sham.

I FEEL that propaganda is all that we have EVER been fed and we are just now seeing the propaganda for what it is.

 

[Luckyone]

I am interested in truth and THAT is why EVERYTHING about the ongoing witch hunt is reprehensible.

The drive to undo Trump started at about the moment his nomination became a certainty. It has not let up since.

Unremitting lies by Pencil Neck, Ol' Nads, Antsy Nancy, Cryin' Chuck and the entire media complex is surprisingly ineffective since reality opposes EVERYTHING they assert.

In the meantime, EVERYTHING is better in spite of the Democrat-Socialists. The best thing that's happened to the American Worker in 50 years is Trump.

Do you ever read what you write?

It is funny because you yourself are bringing down your own argument. You say you want truth? May I remind you that even a witch hunt is a hunt for truth. You either find witches or you don't. It is a search for truth.

Did you know that witches do exist?

Are Witches Real? | Time

 

[OscarLevant]

The Lynch Mob only needs to be a mob wanting to lynch somebody to be a Lynch mob. Accomplishing the deed is only subsequential to the effort.

The Minnesota Vikings are a football team the is trying to win a Super Bowl. Same general concept.

Dems want a trial. By your definition, they cannot be a lynch mob.


Quit lying.

 

[OscarLevant]

You have apparently missed the key to this: The manuscript is not yet released. The NYT released the interpretation of a particular part of the manuscript as relied to them by an anonymous source.

When any "news" organization uses an "anonymous source", we should now be ready to discard everything they are guessing at.

Haven't you earned any caution from the anonymous source reporting on Russian Collusion, Mueller, the entire impeachment inquiry, the basement inquisition, Kavanaugh hearings and all the rest?

What does it take for you to even start to see the ongoing sham(s) for what they are.

The NYT is a waste of paper and broad band. Used to be the gold standard of reporting. Now, it's not even good fish wrap since it's mostly electronic.

"Anonymous source" is only a source whose identity is not revealed, the are NOT anonymous to the journalists.

It's common for journalists to protect their sources when the source requests anonymity.

IF they didn't do that, then no one would ever be a source for news, and the news would be much more limited.

This, therefore, is a bogus argument. Yet, Trump as a matter of fact, has no problem with anonymous sources when it's convenient for him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mous-sources-unless-theyre-talking-about-him/



There is plenty of reasons for wanting Bolton's testimony, and the fact of the book, really is a red herring.

He was NSC, that's the reason. Dems wanted his testimony before any knowledge of the book. Dems want his testimony with no fore knowledge of what he might say.

We still don't know, really, what he might say. Nor do dems know what Mulvaney, or Pompeo, etc., might say, but we, believing in the concept of fairness, what relevant witness testimony.

It is clear that Republicans and Trump do NOT want relevant witness testimony. One must wonder why.


Why didn't Schiff subpoena Bolton during the hearing?

First, Schiff subpoenaed his deputy, and his deputy sued. So, from the outset, it was clear that all of the direct witnesses were going to obey Trump, and resist all subpoenas.
There simply was not enough time to go through all that.

When the court tossed out Bolton's deputy's suit, that is when Bolton said he would testify for the trial, which was after the hearings were over.

 

[OscarLevant]

Do you have a link for that?

No, but whether they did or did not, it's a moot point, given rebuttal #647

 

[Athanasius68]

He was NSC, that's the reason. Dems wanted his testimony before any knowledge of the book. Dems want his testimony with no fore knowledge of what he might say.

We still don't know, really, what he might say. Nor do dems know what Mulvaney, or Pompeo, etc., might say, but we, believing in the concept of fairness, what relevant witness testimony.

It is clear that Republicans and Trump do NOT want relevant witness testimony. One must wonder why.


Why didn't Schiff subpoena Bolton during the hearing?

First, Schiff subpoenaed his deputy, and his deputy sued. So, from the outset, it was clear that all of the direct witnesses were going to obey Trump, and resist all subpoenas.
There simply was not enough time to go through all that.

When the court tossed out Bolton's deputy's suit, that is when Bolton said he would testify for the trial, which was after the hearings were over.

Trump had already stated that he would not permit Bolton testifying before the Senate.

 

[What if...?]

What it looks like is this: Manuscript is unreleased and NOBODY knows what it actually says.

The Democrat-Socialists are once again throwing crap on the wall to see what sticks.

There seems to be a group of the usual dupes licking the wall to see what it tastes like this time.

Ummmm, whovever put it on lockdown absolutely knows what it says.

Or is it even worse than we thought and it was declared classified without anybody looking at it because it might make trump look guilty?