Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What exactly did Schiff do? I'm reading he read a parody but passed it off as being the actual document. Basically Schiff fixed all you up with a nice great big chit sandwich and every one of you happily took a huge bite and went to social media to brag about it.
No need to take Trump's word for it. You can listen for yourself. He was very clear that he was not quoting the transcript. Trump is lying. And it apparently needs repeating as the Trumpies don't seem to get it. It's not about the WB, it's not about Schiff. It is about what Trump actually said and did with respect to extorting a foreign country to help him in his re-election effort.
Why would not the whistleblower's attorney have reviewed the language before the final form was filed with the IG?
The WH knew about it beforehand; House intel knew a complaint was out there. The real import may be House awareness prevented the WH from burying it.
LOL. We are certainly not going to proceed based on analysis or assumptions provided by those aggressive Democrat left propaganda pushers, the New York Times. Those people lie routinely, without hesitation or remorse, whenever it helps them to push their politically preferred narrative or agenda. And nothing appears to inspire them to lie more than the opportunity to attack President Trump.
You think Schiff coordinated with the whistleblower to fabricate a claim even after the independent IG already confirmed the whistleblower's allegations were credible? Jeez, you guys will buy anything. What a bunch of suckers.
You think Schiff coordinated with the whistleblower to fabricate a claim even after the independent IG already confirmed the whistleblower's allegations were credible? Jeez, you guys will buy anything. What a bunch of suckers.
The IG didn't read the transcripts of the call before calling the report "credible".
This is why career lawyers in the DOJ said the IG lacked sound legal judgment when he said the claim was credible.
You think Schiff coordinated with the whistleblower to fabricate a claim even after the independent IG already confirmed the whistleblower's allegations were credible? Jeez, you guys will buy anything. What a bunch of suckers.
So you are saying that the IG guaranteed that the allegations by the 'whistleblower' were not prepared with any outside assistance, including Adam Schiff?
I hope not. Because that would not be the truth.
Also, the word "credible" does not mean in this context what you seem to want to promote it as meaning. All it basically means is that it is not completely incredible, which would cause it to be ash-canned without a second thought. It does not mean that the information is correct or reliable. If you think it does, you are wrong.
LOL. We are certainly not going to proceed based on analysis or assumptions provided by those aggressive Democrat left propaganda pushers, the New York Times. Those people lie routinely, without hesitation or remorse, whenever it helps them to push their politically preferred narrative or agenda. And nothing appears to inspire them to lie more than the opportunity to attack President Trump.
What we're discussing right now - the so-called great damning revelation - was first reported in the NYT.
The IG didn't read the transcripts of the call before calling the report "credible".
This is why career lawyer in the DOJ said the IG lacked sound legal judgment when he said the claim was credible.
The IG already reviewed the process by which the complaint was lodged and confirmed it to have been the correct one. I’m not sure what more you can ask for.
LOL. We are certainly not going to proceed based on analysis or assumptions provided by those aggressive Democrat left propaganda pushers, the New York Times. Those people lie routinely, without hesitation or remorse, whenever it helps them to push their politically preferred narrative or agenda. And nothing appears to inspire them to lie more than the opportunity to attack President Trump.
"According to the New York Times...'
I almost spit out my chocolate milk from the guffaw that came out of me. Like that's supposed to mean something? That's like saying, "According to my next door neighbor's 6 year old kid..."
I never realized how fun it would be if Trump got elected. He just said something about winning. He never mentioned the non stop Dem melt down and embarrassment after embarrassment for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
