Whistleblower

[Adre]

Well then you're off topic.

We were talking about the duties and obligations of the POTUS, not a bunch of subjective bullshit.

Not surprising in the least that you believe leadership and respect for institutions are bullshit. You demonstrate that with your support of this clown in the WH and your lunatic rants every day. I’m cheered by the evidence that he and his clown posse seem to be losing more public support every day.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Not surprising in the least that you believe leadership and respect for institutions are bullshit.

Not bullshit....SUBJECTIVE bullshit, especially "leadership".

Because they are, the actual obligations of the POTUS are not.

As for respect for our institutions?? That's fucking hysterical coming from a liberty and pursuit of happiness loathing socialist.

You demonstrate that with your support of this clown in the WH and your lunatic rants every day.

I only support him to the extent he drives anti-American leftist fucking insane.

Otherwise I treat him no different than Obama....some stuff he does I support, most I don't.

What lunatic rants??

I’m cheered by the evidence that he and his clown posse seem to be losing more public support every day.

Buy that MSM story!!

How many times are they going to point blank lie to you before you figure out they are full of shit??

 

[Aglaopheme]

Ooooohhh that sounds ONEROUS!

That has got to be much more serious than Bill and Hillary Clinton shaking down world leaders for actual cash donations.

Your interpretation is absolutely silly. And in-kind donation would be the sort of thing like Fusion GPS spending actual cash money on something of value and spending their time on it after accepting money from Hillary and the DNC for totally not that thing that they ended up producing.

Seriously though an end kind contribution is going to be something where you're providing something that you normally charge for. A lawyer could provide in-kind contributions. A person walking door-to-door and hanging door hangers without being compensated for their time is not an in-kind contribution. Neither would someone giving James Carville some dirt that's going to benefit Bill Clinton if providing dirt is not their primary occupation. You might be able to argue it if the person providing the dirt was an actual investigator and donated his time to dig up that dirt. But just because something is valuable to a campaign doesn't make it a thing of value that is conveyed. If the thing has no particular to Value to the person that's giving it to you they're not conveying any value.

Have you ever actually dealt with the FEC? Are you an attorney? Do you have any type of training or working knowledge in either field? You type these tomes as if lots of words make it seem like you know what you're talking about. It doeen’t

Okay I'll bite, Miss Junior Civitan. Let me know when the last time somebody was prosecuted or even investigated as having made an in-kind contribution because they provided dirt to another candidate.

I'll wait.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/3rXvLY1BtHPLtP3i2l/giphy.gif

 

[Aglaopheme]

So nothing, huh? Let me let you off the hook. . .

You used to have much better sources for your talking points. You apparently don't know that the herd has already moved on past, "This was totally a crime!!" to "We don't need a crime, we don't have to have a crime, we don't have to show you any stinking crime!"

Pretty interesting that the New York Times has decided not to put this particular article behind their pay wall. It's almost like they have an agenda or something.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/opinion/trump-impeachment.html

Catch up, "sporto," whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. I wouldn't think that you're even old enough for a Breakfast Club reference and that's probably right because you don't seem to know how to use it.

That pay wall?

The truth is not a talking point. It doesn’t need to be disseminated to the cult.

 

[Adre]

Buy that MSM story!!

How many times are they going to point blank lie to you before you figure out they are full of shit??

Then why’s Trump’s clown posse out in full force on this past Sundays MSM delivering spittle laden defenses of their Dear Leader? You say they’re not concerned?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Then why’s Trump’s clown posse out in full force on this past Sundays MSM delivering spittle laden defenses of their Dear Leader?

Because he's under attack, likely a highly dishonest and unsubstantiated one....Kavanaugh style.

It is the hallmark of the progressives.

Don't like democracy? Try to use authority until you get what you want.

You say they’re not concerned?

Never said that. Of course they are concerned.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It's also clear you need a super majority of the Senate, which unless (D)'s can prove he committed a legit crime? You have no hope of getting.

No doubt you and yours did, they would be actively subverting and effectively ending democracy in the USA.

 

[Adre]

Don't like democracy? Try to use authority until you get what you want.

^^^^^Exactly why he’s under attack. He fears a fair and democratic election.

 

[Wrong Element]

This controversy has reminded us of something that's been clear all along, though usually implied rather than stated outright: the "Republican base" was never opposed to the idea of Russia interfering in the 2016 election of behalf of Trump, because it believes anything that helps Trump/hurts his opponents is good by definition.

And it isn't opposed to enlisting foreign countries to help Trump win in 2020, for the same reason.

 

[BotanyBoy]

^^^^^Exactly why he’s under attack.

Bullshit, he's under attack because
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/424/601/0a6.gif

The ONLY people trying to use power to subvert democracy in the USA are the (D)'z. Have been since their FBI verified criminal and elitist HRC lost the election.

 

[BotanyBoy]

This controversy has reminded us of something that's been clear all along, though usually implied rather than stated outright: the "Republican base" was never opposed to the idea of Russia interfering in the 2016 election of behalf of Trump, because it believes anything that helps Trump/hurts his opponents is good by definition.

That's because "Russia interfering in the 2016 election of behalf of Trump" is a conspiracy theory promoted by people who can't get over the fact that their elitist criminal candidate lost the election.

Russia didn't interfere with the 2016 election.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/uKoyoitycZu6Y/source.gif

 

[icanhelp1]

Not bullshit....SUBJECTIVE bullshit, especially "leadership".

Because they are, the actual obligations of the POTUS are not.

As for respect for our institutions?? That's fucking hysterical coming from a liberty and pursuit of happiness loathing socialist.



I only support him to the extent he drives anti-American leftist fucking insane.

Otherwise I treat him no different than Obama....some stuff he does I support, most I don't.

What lunatic rants??



Buy that MSM story!!

How many times are they going to point blank lie to you before you figure out they are full of shit??

Isn't the office of the presidency an institution?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Isn't the office of the presidency an institution?

Yea...but it's currently convenient for the left not to respect THAT institution.

So it's different, because reasons n' stuff.

 

[icanhelp1]

That pay wall?

The truth is not a talking point. It doesn’t need to be disseminated to the cult.

I hope you also understand that impeachment and removal is still untested and mostly theory at this point. The chief justice presides over the Senate trial and we have no idea what his role could be absence of a crime. So people who keep spewing media talking points don't know what they're talking about.

 

[Aglaopheme]

 

[phrodeau]

That's because "Russia interfering in the 2016 election of behalf of Trump" is a conspiracy theory promoted by people who can't get over the fact that their elitist criminal candidate lost the election.

Russia didn't interfere with the 2016 election.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/uKoyoitycZu6Y/source.gif

It’s obvious that Russia has interfered with you.

Russian attempts to interfere in the election were first disclosed publicly by members of the United States Congress on September 22, 2016, confirmed by United States intelligence agencies on October 7, 2016, and further detailed by the Director of National Intelligence office in January 2017. According to U.S. intelligence agencies, the operation was ordered directly by Putin. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation of Russian interference on July 31, 2016, including a special focus on links between Trump associates and Russian officials and suspected coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. The FBI's work was taken over in May 2017 by former FBI director Robert Mueller, who led a Special Counsel investigation until March 2019.[1] Mueller concluded that Russian interference "violated U.S. criminal law", and he indicted twenty-six Russian citizens and three Russian organizations.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections

 

[beezzz]

Mukasey Op-ed Should Strike Fear in Democrats

 

[Wrong Element]

I hope you also understand that impeachment and removal is still untested and mostly theory at this point. The chief justice presides over the Senate trial and we have no idea what his role could be absence of a crime. So people who keep spewing media talking points don't know what they're talking about.

Several people have been both impeached and convicted in American history. It's not theoretical in the least.

 

[Aglaopheme]

That's because "Russia interfering in the 2016 election of behalf of Trump" is a conspiracy theory promoted by people who can't get over the fact that their elitist criminal candidate lost the election.

Russia didn't interfere with the 2016 election.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/uKoyoitycZu6Y/source.gif

Tell that to the #traitorsquad because even they don’t believe you.

 

[jaF0]

Sen. Grassley Distances Himself from Trump, Says Whistleblower 'Ought to Be Heard Out and Protected'
Law & Crime | Tue Oct 01, 2019 16:06 UTC

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released a statement on Tuesday distancing himself from the Trump stance of seeking out the identity of the Ukraine whistleblower, despite federal law protecting that person from retaliation.

 

[icanhelp1]

Several people have been both impeached and convicted in American history. It's not theoretical in the least.

Not a presidential impeachment, trial.

Two presidents Johnson acquitted.
Clinton acquitted.
Nixon resigned before impeachment proceedings.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Tell that to the #traitorsquad because even they don’t believe you.

Efforts to influence voters =/= interfering in an election.

Influencing voter is putting out propaganda, smear campaigns, advertising.

Interfering in an election is hacking our voting machines, corrupting vote counters, intimidating voters, trying to buy votes etc.

Another fine example of the lefts dishonest and divisive use of language....subtle but effective.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Efforts to influence voters =/= interfering in an election.

A foreign government spending money in efforts to influence American voters is a textbook case of "interfering in an election", your pathetic insistence to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

https://i.ibb.co/Pgr7Phm/SAVING-PRIVATE-BONE-SPURS.jpg

 

[Aglaopheme]

Efforts to influence voters =/= interfering in an election.

Influencing voter is putting out propaganda, smear campaigns, advertising.

Interfering in an election is hacking our voting machines, corrupting vote counters, intimidating voters, trying to buy votes etc.

Another fine example of the lefts dishonest and divisive use of language....subtle but effective.

Of course it says interference right there in the statement. This is also not a statement from the left, it’s from Pompeo’s spokesperson.

Geesh

https://i.ibb.co/Pgr7Phm/SAVING-PRIVATE-BONE-SPURS.jpg

Ha! Love it!