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.
But but but they said they would cooperate once the process had a formal vote!
They wouldn't lie now would they?
post 649:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
I wonder if he was getting a kickback from Hunter Biden?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
Go look at them folks, they were today, not yesterday when the vote was actually taken. So how can I be wrong? I cannot be....no matter how my zzz states I am.....
Neither of those posts mention subpoenas at all, yet your rebuttal was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
What actual subpoenas have been handed out since the actual vote?:roll eyes:
You both have failed.
So um, how exactly is that even a rebuttal at all? You rebutted a point that wasn't even made.
God. Duffy was on CNN just now. He strongly suggests Vindman—the war hero—is more loyal to Ukraine than the US.
Looking at Vindman's background, I strongly suggest that Vindman ( being not only from Ukraine, but from a Jewish family,) is loyal to anti-Russian sentiment more than anything else.
His year of birth/immigration and professional background are very indicative of that I'd say...
"Beginning in 2008, Vindman became a Foreign Area Officer specializing in Eurasia. In this capacity he served in the U.S. embassies in Kyiv, Ukraine, and Moscow, Russia. Returning to Washington, D.C. he was then a politico-military affairs officer focused on Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."
Now can you answer 648? Don't think so...but please amuse us.
Sure I can. 648 makes no mention of subpoenas whatsoever and is talking about upcoming testimony that has not occurred yet, but your rebuttal was asking what subpoenas had been issued since the vote - which makes no sense because the post you were responding to never mentioned subpoenas at all.
Am attempt is just that, an attempt. The conditions of any perceived contract were never met.
" it would have "
You can't predict the future.
I wasn't aware that being a " candidate " for an election a year away is an automatic immunity for any investigations. As a matter of record, there are numerous cases of politicians being charged with crimes all the time.
Does this alleged " immunity " from investigation extend to Biden's son ? How about the person running for Mayor in a local Town ?
" A front runner" . Once again, is anyone designated by Polls and the media as a " front runner" granted immunity from investigations ?
Or is this a matter of a " whistle blower " who actually worked with Biden , and saw that Biden possibly risked some type of exposure ? In that the phone call was expanded to now include opinions of foreign policy by a Parade of Experts?
It is nonsense. The alleged " victim" , the President of Ukraine doesn't indicate that he was harmed in any way. How can an Impeachment proceed for a matter where the alleged " victim" , does admit to being a " victim" ?
Is it really all about words, policy and intent ? Is that all there is?
I keep saying, who was harmed? Who was damaged ? How were American citizens negatively affected ? These are the questions that need to be answered if Impeachment is on the table.
Impeachment is for circumstances where the Public Official is unable to do their job, and/or that while doing their job , has behaved in a matter that has a serious affect on the lives of the citizens that elected the person.
Beyond that, there isn't any exemplar for calls with POTUS and World Leaders. Perhaps if the Democrats want to put their entire case on the content and perceptions of what was stated, we should have the ability to examine calls made by past Presidents. I have said this before.
Sure I can. 648 makes no mention of subpoenas whatsoever and is talking about upcoming testimony that has not occurred yet, but your rebuttal was asking what subpoenas had been issued since the vote - which makes no sense because the post you were responding to never mentioned subpoenas at all.
I edited my previous post.....
But still does not negate what you said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzzSnorlax
But but but they said they would cooperate once the process had a formal vote!
They wouldn't lie now would they?
How can they cooperate to a vote that just happened?
But requested prior to the actual vote...got it...
Now can you follow the dots?
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.
