You want evidence? Bolton book outlines Trump is guilty

[veritas1]

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.

Why do you guys keep making this statement? NONE of the House witnesses claimed to have any firsthand knowledge of quid pro quo, bribery or any other crime. Just repeating a falsehood doesn't make it true.

 

[veritas1]

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

No doubt you can show how the election is a sham. No doubt you can show how a single vote will be changed. I guess it's a sham because you're going to lose. Got it.

 

[veritas1]

You describe yourself.

Why do you use an image of Alexander Hamilton?

BS. History doesn't support this flimsy, politically driven scam devoid of any specific charges or evidence. It's over now. Blame Schifty and the rest of the House incompetents out to sink Trump. They've only guaranteed his victory.

 

[veritas1]

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

Which has exactly what to do with impeachment? Oh right, it has nothing to do with it. If it did, I'm sure Schifty and Co. would have had it in their articles. Poor Munchkins.

 

[jpn]

BS. History doesn't support this flimsy, politically driven scam devoid of any specific charges or evidence. It's over now. Blame Schifty and the rest of the House incompetents out to sink Trump. They've only guaranteed his victory.

Your home-school version of history is doubtless one weird tale. Speaking of history, why would a conservative use Alexander Hamilton as an avatar? He was basically the Nancy Pelosi of the 18th Century. Did you think the picture was actually Thomas Jefferson? Do you know enough about American history to understand my question?

 

[jpn]

Which has exactly what to do with impeachment? Oh right, it has nothing to do with it. If it did, I'm sure Schifty and Co. would have had it in their articles. Poor Munchkins.

Right, Trump's long, long track record of dishonesty and scamming people has nothing to do with being accused of trying to bribe a foreign nation in order to obtain help in his next election. Totally separate.

Why the Hamilton avatar? Don't you understand what Hamilton represents, Mr Conservative?

 

[mrjurrs]

Why? The directive from legal arguments is as follows:

"When you stand well, stand still".

Or, as I was advised by my first Sales Manager as a very young and naive salesperson: "When you've made the sale, STFU!"

The Democrat-Socialist case is based on nothing. When your opponents are hurting themselves, don't try to stop them.

There are only two ways you can say the case is based on nothing.
1-intentional ignorance
2-unintentional ignorance

 

[jpn]

There are only two ways you can say the case is based on nothing.
1-intentional ignorance
2-unintentional ignorance

Two for two! Bingo!

When ever-Trumpers decided the Access Hollywood tape was totally fine with them, I knew they were lost souls.

 

[veritas1]

Your home-school version of history is doubtless one weird tale. Speaking of history, why would a conservative use Alexander Hamilton as an avatar? He was basically the Nancy Pelosi of the 18th Century. Did you think the picture was actually Thomas Jefferson? Do you know enough about American history to understand my question?

Wow, am I chagrined.:lol: A liberal castigating others for not having swallowed their historical revisionism. FWIW, I've had Hamilton as my avatar a long time, well before I came here. I've always thought he was a vastly underappreciated genius for many reasons, not the least of which was his understanding that this was going to be an industrialized and urban country going forward, not one of pastoral farms as Jefferson thought. Thus, he designed a financial system to deal with that reality.

Oh, and having seen Hamilton on stage doesn't pass for history knowledge. I thought you'd like to know.

 

[veritas1]

Right, Trump's long, long track record of dishonesty and scamming people has nothing to do with being accused of trying to bribe a foreign nation in order to obtain help in his next election. Totally separate.

Why the Hamilton avatar? Don't you understand what Hamilton represents, Mr Conservative?

You need to put a sock in your pie hole. Yes, it has NOTHING to do with the current charade. Democrat lying, duplicity and unbridled rage has EVERYTHING to do with it.

Hamilton pointed out the dangers of a wholly political impeachment in Federalist #65. Even Pelosi and Nadler echoed the exact same warnings in 1998. Until Trump arrived, of course. Now, completly partisan impeachments are just fine.

 

[jpn]

You need to put a sock in your pie hole. Yes, it has NOTHING to do with the current charade. Democrat lying, duplicity and unbridled rage has EVERYTHING to do with it.
Hamilton pointed out the dangers of a wholly political impeachment in Federalist #65. Even Pelosi and Nadler echoed the exact same warnings in 1998. Until Trump arrived, of course. Now, completly partisan impeachments are just fine.

My my, someone is being intemperate and it's not moi.

Oh yes, impeaching a president who tries to bribe a foreign country into helping him win an election is nothing but a political witch-hunt. :roll: And climate change is a hoax. And tax cuts raise revenue.

It must be so weird to be a conservative.

 

[veritas1]

My my, someone is being intemperate and it's not moi.

Oh yes, impeaching a president who tries to bribe a foreign country into helping him win an election is nothing but a political witch-hunt. :roll: And climate change is a hoax. And tax cuts raise revenue.

It must be so weird to be a conservative.

If any bribery had taken place, it would have been in the articles. It must be so weird being a liberal.

 

[iguanaman]

No doubt you can show how the election is a sham. No doubt you can show how a single vote will be changed. I guess it's a sham because you're going to lose. Got it.

Trump has been shown multiple times to solicit foreign powers to help him in elections. The Senate will be giving him free reign to do all he can to corrupt the results of the coming election. You like that because Putin helped Trump win last time. Show me some posts where you didn't approve of Trump welcoming help from Russia and expecting to benefit from it. Without such proof you are that same as the GOP Senators and are complicit with Trump's crimes against the Constitution and his oath.

 

[iguanaman]

If any bribery had taken place, it would have been in the articles. It must be so weird being a liberal.

Abuse of power includes the bribery charge. Withholding the aid because you want a personal favor first is bribery.

 

[veritas1]

Trump has been shown multiple times to solicit foreign powers to help him in elections. The Senate will be giving him free reign to do all he can to corrupt the results of the coming election. You like that because Putin helped Trump win last time. Show me some posts where you didn't approve of Trump welcoming help from Russia and expecting to benefit from it. Without such proof you are that same as the GOP Senators and are complicit with Trump's crimes against the Constitution and his oath.

You're a real laugh riot. You're the one making specious, idiotic claims. Show us one scintilla of evidence that ANY votes were changed in 2016. You have none, of course. Nobody does. It's like some weird psycho-babble so ingrained into your brains that you really think it happened. Russia's "effort" amounted to some cheesy click bait on Facebook. You lost because you had a horrible nominee that couldn't keep up. You'll lose again but I'm sure that maybe Martians will be to blame this time. It really has gotten beyond sad and pathetic.

 

[veritas1]

Abuse of power includes the bribery charge. Withholding the aid because you want a personal favor first is bribery.

Nonsense. The Constitution SPECIFICALLY mentions bribery. Had the Dems had any proof whatever, it would have been front and center in the articles.

Now, Biden, yea, that looks much more like blatant bribery.

 

[iguanaman]

Why do you guys keep making this statement? NONE of the House witnesses claimed to have any firsthand knowledge of quid pro quo, bribery or any other crime. Just repeating a falsehood doesn't make it true.

Didn't you see Lamar Alexander's comment? He stated we don't need witnesses because the Dems have already proven their case. The Trump lawyer have not contested the facts in the case and have provided no witnesses to testify that Trump is innocent of anything charged. He has plead guilty and Republicans will acquit him anyway because they a claiming that is not an impeachable offense

 

[jpn]

If any bribery had taken place, it would have been in the articles. It must be so weird being a liberal.

So the Republican Party has finally come to this. It's okay with naked racism if that helps them keep power. It's okay with using fake allegations of voter fraud as a means to suppress the vote by minorities. It's okay with national leaders who brag about grabbing women in the crotch to strangers. It's okay selling out to Russia at the expense of an ally. It's okay with exploding the deficits and using lies to justify them. It's okay to ignore climate change. It's okay to separate children from their parents and toss them into cages. It's okay to try to bribe foreign countries to interfere in our election as long as it's a Republican doing the coercing. It's okay to erode our free press and our judicial system.

Because, after all, you're such patriots.

 

[jpn]

Didn't you see Lamar Alexander's comment? He stated we don't need witnesses because the Dems have already proven their case. The Trump lawyer have not contested the facts in the case and have provided no witnesses to testify that Trump is innocent of anything charged. He has plead guilty and Republicans will acquit him anyway because they a claiming that is not an impeachable offense

Yes, Alexander tweeted:

There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine.
There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a “mountain of overwhelming evidence.”
It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation.
When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law.

The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did

The framers believed that there should never, ever be a partisan impeachment.​

So, no doubt Trump did it.
But it's okay, since one party is so partisan that they won't break ranks and admit it was wrong.
So from now on, impeachment in the Constitution is no longer operative as long as one party is extreme and nihilistic enough to put themselves above all principles.

 

[jpn]

Nonsense. The Constitution SPECIFICALLY mentions bribery. Had the Dems had any proof whatever, it would have been front and center in the articles.

Now, Biden, yea, that looks much more like blatant bribery.

It's spelled "yeah."

 

[iguanaman]

Nonsense. The Constitution SPECIFICALLY mentions bribery. Had the Dems had any proof whatever, it would have been front and center in the articles.


Now, Biden, yea, that looks much more like blatant bribery.

Did you read the articles? Article 1 charges that Trump withheld important military aid to Ukraine to bribe or extort them into announcing investigations for his own political gain. That is pretty clearly bribery.

So who bribed the State dept., the IMF and European diplomats to demand removal of Shokin?

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

"Civil society organizations in Ukraine were pressing for his resignation," Kaleniuk said, "but no one would have cared if there had not been voices from outside this country calling on him to go."

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

 

[iguanaman]

You're a real laugh riot. You're the one making specious, idiotic claims. Show us one scintilla of evidence that ANY votes were changed in 2016. You have none, of course. Nobody does. It's like some weird psycho-babble so ingrained into your brains that you really think it happened. Russia's "effort" amounted to some cheesy click bait on Facebook. You lost because you had a horrible nominee that couldn't keep up. You'll lose again but I'm sure that maybe Martians will be to blame this time. It really has gotten beyond sad and pathetic.

So you are saying that millions of illegal Russian propaganda posts on social media could not have changed any votes. That is a laugh. Of course votes were changed. In fact the Russian trolls used Trump campaign polling data to target Bernie supporters and changed enough of their votes to give Trump the win.

Bernie Sanders Voters Helped Trump Win and Here's Proof

 

[Integrityrespec]

Trumpsters, suck on this....




DIRECT EVIDENCE.

So you have read the book. Please share the page number and statements you refer too. Oh, and the bookstore where I can get a copy.

 

[code1211]

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

Your ridiculous response is ridiculous. If you seriously did not know, the term "Witch Hunt" has almost nothing to do with actual witches. It's comically tragic that you think it does.

A Witch Hunt is by definition an activity that departs from anything, including truth, that does not lead to the goal of harassing and attacking the targeted victim.

To help in your understanding if that is possible:

Witch-hunt - definition of witch-hunt by The Free Dictionary
[h=2]witch-hunt[/h] also witch hunt (wĭch′hŭnt′)n.An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and underminethose with differing views.

 

[code1211]

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


Quit lying.

If Dems wanted a trial, they would have conducted a fair review in the House when witnesses were called.

As Jay Sekulow so accurately noted, he was not allowed to interview any witness called to the Star Chamber in Shifty's underground bunker during the Impeachment.

Both Mussolini and Pencil Neck were pretty good at making the Railroad process timely.

There was no crime committed, as a result, there is no evidence of a crime having been committed and Trump will be acquitted inspite of the best efforts of the moronic jack wagons in the House of Lunatics.

The Silver Lining is that the House will go back to the GOP this year, the Senate will gain a bigger Republican Majority, Trump will be re-elected and the Republican Party will be reconstituted to reflect the goals of Trump which include:

Working unceasingly to improve and expand all facets of an economy that benefit ALL Americans regardless of any individual demographic descriptions.

Trump and his supporters work to continue to have the most Americans ever employed at the highest wages ever developing the greatest personal wealth for ALL Americans in the history of the Republic. EVER.

The Democrats will continue to promise to stop him. Can you guess what's wrong with the Democrat-Socialist plan?

One other side benefit: Trump will appoint two more justices to the SCOTUS and the Supreme Court will be Constitutionalist for the next 30 years.

So there's that...