Where Is Rudy's Evidence? Trump Is Drowning And Needs A Lifeline

  
By:  john-russell  •  one month ago  •  89 comments

Where Is Rudy's Evidence? Trump Is Drowning And Needs A Lifeline
Giuliani has repeatedly bragged that he has the goods on the Bidens, I think he recently said he has a 20 page report detailing Biden's corruption in Ukraine. He claimed to have the report in his briefcase.  Wouldnt this be the time to open up that briefcase on the floor of the Senate and let his evidence exonerating Trump pop out? 

I've been watching and or listening to the impeachment prosecution , some, for the last two days, and it seems to me that they've got Trump wrapped up in a big bow and ready to send him up the river.  Dates, times, names, this is enough information to lock Trump up for the rest of his life, were this a criminal trial.  I think the jury would be out for about 20 minutes. 

SO, everyone wants to know, where is Trump's cavalry?  Where is Giuliani riding in with the evidence that Biden and his son WERE up to their necks in stealing money in Ukraine. Giuliani has repeatedly bragged that he has the goods on the Bidens, I think he recently said he has a 20 page report detailing Biden's corruption in Ukraine. He claimed to have the report in his briefcase.  Wouldnt this be the time to open up that briefcase on the floor of the Senate and let his evidence exonerating Trump pop out? 

Now, when the Democrats are getting cocky because they have dumped a ton of incriminating info on Trump's head, is the time for Rudy to come to the aid of his lord and master. 

Or is that briefcase simply empty? 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    one month ago

I dont see the point in waiting any longer to save Trump from further humiliation. 

Rudy, empty your briefcase !

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

Funny you brought up Biden - the guy who says, "No fuckin way am I gonna answer questions in the Senate."

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  squiggy @1.1    4 weeks ago

Funny you brought up Biden - the guy who says, "No fuckin way am I gonna answer questions in the Senate."

Why should he? Trump people ignored how many subpoenas? 9? They aren't going to jail, so Biden should ignore them as well. Besides, Biden literally has nothing to do with trump's impeachment. Add to that, literally no evidence at all of any wrongdoing. NONE. 

 
 
 
sixpick
1.1.2  sixpick  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.1    4 weeks ago
literally no evidence at all of any wrongdoing. NONE. 

Now, I don't want to get on your bad side, Mr Frost, but could that be because there hasn't been any investigation?  If there has, I haven't heard about it.  Be happy to read anything you can produce about it.

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.3  MrFrost  replied to  sixpick @1.1.2    4 weeks ago
Now, I don't want to get on your bad side, Mr Frost, but could that be because there hasn't been any investigation?

Rudy has been over there for over a year. He claims to have lots of evidence of wrongdoing, but never tells anyone what it is. I think if he had ANYTHING damaging, he would be making the media rounds to spread it. So, I cannot give you a link, because Rudy won't release the info he has....which is probably none at all.

See, here's the thing. Trump never wanted an investigation into the Bidens, he just wanted the announcement. It was all about attacking his most likely political opponent in 2020. I don't know if Rudy went to the Ukraine on his own to dig up dirt, or, if trump told him to. Either way, it looks like Rudy played the useful idiot in this entire story.

If trump wanted an investigation into the Biden's, why not ask the DOJ? Obviously Barr will do anything trump asks, so why not just ask them? Answer? Because it wouldn't have much of an impact on voters. Most people know Barr is obviously aligned with trump, an announcement of an investigation would be met with, "yea yea, whatever..". But the Ukraine saying they were investigating? THAT would have an impact on voters. 

All of this, every bit of it, is 2016 all over again. Hillary was Trumps biggest opponent, and wikileaks released just enough information to keep Hillary in a bad light all the way to election day. This Ukraine flap? Exact same playbook, just different plays. 

One last thing...(ok, not last, but I have a ton of things to get done today)..

Trump authorized Ukraine funding in 2017 without a hold.

Same thing in 2018. 

2019: Trump authorized the funding, but something happened. Biden said he was running for president. In the following 3 weeks, even fox news had Biden leading trump by double digits nationally, just like Hillary was in 2016. That's when trump started the, "Ukraine scandal", and held up the aid. 

All in all, it was trump playing politics with the forced help of the Ukraine. People can dispute that all they like, but the timeline is really damning for trump. The aid was released just a few days after the WB report was filed. Zelinsky ran on rooting out corruption, that's why he refused to announce investigations, because he saw immediately that what trump was doing WAS corruption. I hear people say that Z didn't feel pressured. Pretty unlikely that he would say he felt pressured publically and risk not getting the aid. 

Six.. When you put together all of the evidence, and marry it up to a timeline, it's painfully obvious what trump was trying to do. He even admitted to it on live TV, as did Mulvaney and Rudy. 

The biggest difference between 2016 and 2020? This time, trump got caught and now his surrogates are desperately trying to bury the evidence against him. Remember, trump blocked 9 people from testifying and didn't submit even one piece of paper in his defense in the House Impeachment phase. Nothing at all. No one would block people from testifying that could exonerate them. NO ONE, would do that. 

The only people around here that get on my bad side are trolls, you are obviously not a troll. 

Enjoy your Sunday, hope this helps. 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 weeks ago

This may not be EVERYTHING that Giuliani has in his briefcase but here's the file he gave to Pompeo. 

I suggest you make popcorn and put a keyboard protector on before you read it. 

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

Start on page 59. Much of it is Solomon BULLSHIT. I'd like to know who made the notes on the documents. Pompeo? 

Oh and for the Trump sycophants here, it's ALL HEARSAY so nothing to see...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2  Sean Treacy    one month ago

You must be watching a different trial. Just today, Lisa Murkowski, probably the easiest Republican "get" for the partisan line impeachment, has already said she's very offended by the impeachment manager's insults

You'd think persuading the jury would matter, but I guess that's only if your motivation was to win, and not simply try to score political points for 2020.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago

Sean, where is the evidence that Biden was corrupt in Ukraine? 

They are pounding on Trump. It doesnt matter if Murkowski wants to remain loyal to her party instead of her conscience, a massive amount of negative information about Trump is being put on the record. How the hell is he going to run for re-election with this cloud over him? 

Where is the cavalry? Where is the info on Biden that Giuliani claims he ALREADY has ?  

Wouldn't this be the time to play that card? 

The Democrats need to stop being so nice to the Trump and Giuliani cabal. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one month ago
Sean, where is the evidence that Biden was corrupt in Ukraine?

Perhaps we will never know...........unless a witch hunt, much like the present one, takes place. I hear it's scheduled to begin the 30th of February.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    one month ago

All I want to know is where are the goods that Giuliani collected on the Bidens?    Trump needs help NOW, not after he's thrown out, or rotting in prison - NOW !

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.3  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one month ago
a massive amount of negative information about Trump is being put on the record. How the hell is he going to run for re-election with this cloud over him? 

You're not living in reality JR. Donnie's doing just fine and will be exonerated in the final tally.

He'll easily win reelection, and the Dems will most likely lose the House

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  WallyW @2.1.3    one month ago

Wally, where is the goods on Biden? Giuliani has been over there for a year with his crack detective team, and he says he has found out a lot. So where is it? His president* needs him now. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.1.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one month ago
where is the evidence that Biden was corrupt in Ukraine

https://johnsolomonreports.com/joe-bidens-conspiracy-theory-memo-to-u-s-media-doesnt-match-the-facts/

There's plenty of evidence summarized here to believe an investigation into the Bidens is justified.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.5    one month ago

Sean, Giuliani has been investigating this for a year.  Where are his results, even if incomplete? 

John Solomon is a co-conspirator with the Trump cabal, not a reporter. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.1.7  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    one month ago

Soloman is a co-conspirator with the Trump cabal, not a reporter. 

His reporting has been more accurate than about anyone else recently. Besides, most of the evidence listed in his report is simply compilation of other's reporting. 

Trump doesn't have to prove Biden did anything. But the evidence compiled by Solomon certainly shows its reasonable to believe an investigation  was reasonable.

It's astounding that the VP's son took this job. The conflicts of interest are so obvious and there was no reasonable reason for Hunter Biden to be offered that job but to buy influence.  Maybe the Bidens thought it was an innocent money grab where they could just take millions and not actually do anything to help Burisma overtly.   That's the most charitable interpretation.  But the Bidens have no one to blame but themselves that people are interested in just what the hell they were doing. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.8  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    one month ago

Freedom of the press unless he disagree's with you then it's fake news wait that sounds familiar. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.1.9  MrFrost  replied to  MUVA @2.1.8    4 weeks ago
it's fake news wait that sounds familiar. 

Indeed, trump has been screaming that since he took office. None of it was actually fake news, but of course trump supporters bought it all. 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    4 weeks ago
I hear it's scheduled to begin the 30th of February.

So two YEARS after Biden 'confessed'? WOW, so much for Trump being a law and order guy…jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
sixpick
2.1.11  sixpick  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.7    4 weeks ago

In a Business Insider article dated January 6, 2018 the Kushner Family Business was being investigated for what the Washington Post calls a controversial program, the EB-5 Visa Program.  Although, Jared Kushner has resigned upon taking his job at the White House, they are all over him and his company, even though Chinese investors have spent at least $7.7 billion — and received more than 40,000 US visas in return — thanks to the EB-5 program in the last decade.

Now this was an article dated January 6, 2018 and that is as much as I know.  Obviously they haven't put him in jail and I haven't heard of anything more about it, basically because I haven't looked for anything at this point in time.

As far as I know there hasn't been any significant investigation into Biden or his son, only reactions to any questions about it saying it has been debunked.  Show me the beef, like the Republican Senators and Lawyers did this morning when they debunked a number of statements and accusations coming from Adam Schiff's mouth over the last couple of days or should I say years.

Here's the article:  Without a thorough investigation, which Trump has gone through several over the last 3 years, Biden may be subject to bribery and we don't want to take that chance.  Is Biden above the law and can't be investigated?  I understand several members of Biden's family have become multi-millionaires.  How did they do that?  I'm a little disgusted with this one-sided justice system, aren't you?

The SEC is investigating the Kushner family's company over its use of a controversial visa program

https://www.businessinsider.com/sec-launches-probe-into-kushner-companies-for-use-of-eb-5-visa-program-2018-1

 
 
 
sixpick
2.1.12  sixpick  replied to  MrFrost @2.1.9    4 weeks ago
Indeed, trump has been screaming that since he took office. None of it was actually fake news, but of course trump supporters bought it all. 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.13  Dulay  replied to  sixpick @2.1.11    4 weeks ago
Biden may be subject to bribery and we don't want to take that chance.

Why not, y'all did with Trump. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.14  MUVA  replied to  MrFrost @2.1.9    4 weeks ago

Russia hoax?

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.2  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago
she's very offended by the impeachment manager's insults

Yeah. I don't know if they planned it or if they're just arrogant pricks, but the way Schiff and Nadler have assaulted the integrity of the Senate has been so over the line, it's embarrassing. Even if you think the judge or a jury might be biased against you, you don't march into court and just have at them like that over and over. It's pretty disgraceful.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @2.2    one month ago

This seed is not about what Republican had their feelings hurt by Nadler.  The president* these people worship has been insulting innocent people for more than 4 years.  9 if you go back to his birther days.  

This seed is about "where is Rudy's evidence against the Bidens?" 

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.2.2  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.1    one month ago

Tell you what John, Rudy will produce his evidence the second Schiff produces his against Trump. You know the damning evidence Schiff has been sitting on for over two years now.

Same shit different day. Isn't there a rule about spamming articles somewhere?

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.1    one month ago

YOU WON'T BELIEVE THE EVIDENCE HE HAS AGAINST THE BIDENS, because he doesn't have any.

IT'S UNBELIEVABLE!

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.2.4  MrFrost  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.2    4 weeks ago
Tell you what John, Rudy will produce his evidence the second Schiff produces his against Trump.

Where have you been for the last 3 days? 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.5  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.2    4 weeks ago

We'll see how disgraceful you think it is after they tear into the House managers. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.2.6  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @2.2.5    4 weeks ago
We'll see how disgraceful you think it is after they tear into the House managers.

I'll feel exactly the same way because the House managers are opposing counsel. Not judge. And not jury. Ripping opposing counsel is normal. They're the enemy. You're trying to persuade the judge and jury.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.2.7  Ronin2  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.4    4 weeks ago

That is the evidence that Schiff has been sitting on for the past 2.5 years? BS.

Seems you have forgotten all about Schiff's claims to have evidence that Trump colluded with Russia- that he never produced.

Oh, and his new evidence sucks rocks. 2nd and 3rd hand information isn't worth shit; and not one of his "witnesses" claimed Trump broke any laws.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3  Texan1211    one month ago
I've been watching and or listening to the impeachment prosecution , some, for the last two days, and it seems to me that they've got Trump wrapped up in a big bow and ready to send him up the river.  Dates, times, names, this is enough information to lock Trump up for the rest of his life, were this a criminal trial.  I think the jury would be out for about 20 minutes. 

On what specific criminal charges?

And you get that this is an impeachment--not a Biden trial?

See, Trump and company don't have to prove a thing. The prosecutors must prove that he did something deserving of impeachment and removal.

Good luck with that!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3    one month ago

Texan, you are up on all this. Where is the damaging information proving that Joe Biden was corrupt in Ukraine? 

Do you mean with Trump's presidency on the line , and all of their reputations on the line, and after Giuliani told everyone he had such information, he hasn't produced it?  Why? What is the delay? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago

How would that help Trump in his impeachment trial?

You are up on all things Trump--so why did the articles only include something that happened in the last 6 months despite Democrats working on it for over 2 years? Whatever happened to the Great Mueller Report and how it would bring Trump down?

Besides, everyone here knows what your reaction to that would be.

You would be the one hollering the loudest and longest about how it is just a distraction from Trump's impeachment trial. A deflection, if you will.

Dems have the chance to prove their case, and then the Senate will ultimately vote.

I sure hope Democrats forget how many seats it cost the GOP to impeach and NOT remove Clinton. 

But I'll be here to remind them in November!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.1    one month ago
so why did the articles only include something that happened in the last 6 months despite Democrats working on it for over 2 years? Whatever happened to the Great Mueller Report and how it would bring Trump down?

Well unlike you, I actually know the answer to your question. Pelosi and Schiff decided it would be more focused and productive to stay on one set of "crimes" instead of jumping all over the place. 

I would rather have seen them include the obstruction of justice connected to the Mueller report, but they didnt want to wait forever to get Don McGahn's testimony. 

Their decision. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago
Well unlike you, I actually know the answer to your question. Pelosi and Schiff decided it would be more focused and productive to stay on one set of "crimes" instead of jumping all over the place. 

Sounds more like none of the shit they threw against the wall in the first 2 years didn't stick.

They didn't have the balls to do what YOU wanted. Nor the evidence.

Remember, Trump is such a menace that he MUST be removed immediately. Except the Democrats' own actions tell us that is a freaking lie, as they took so long to impeach him, and Nancy STILL sat on it for a few weeks more.

"Abuse of Power" in this case looks more and more like "We don't like you or what you do, so we will impeach you for it".

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago
Pelosi and Schiff decided it would be more focused and productive to stay on one set of "crimes" instead of jumping all over the place. 

So what evidence did the Democrats come up with in the first two years of them working on it? The Mueller Report was released in April of 2019, so surely the Dems had come up with something over 2 years into their heroic efforts to save democracy.

And I also call bull on Nancy focusing. She claimed she wasn't for impeachment before she was for it.  Now that sounds like whatever evidence they had against Trump wasn't even enough to convince someone like Pelosi to impeach.

 
 
 
lib50
3.1.5  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    one month ago

You aren't even watching the hearings if you still believe anything about the Biden/Burisma/Ukraine 'scandal' is anything except a gop wet dream.  That was dealt with today.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @3.1.5    one month ago
You aren't even watching the hearings if you still believe anything about the Biden/Burisma/Ukraine 'scandal' is anything except a gop wet dream.  That was dealt with today.

You have an amazing talent for posting completely off-the-wall, impertinent-to-the-discussion remarks.

No one in this thread has mentioned whether they believe anything about the Biden/Burisma/Ukraine scandal.

Are you sure you responded to the right person on the right subject?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.7  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    one month ago

Of course Trump is a menace, hes a freaking moron, and a pathological liar.  You don't think that having a moron and serial liar in a high office like that is a menace?

Oh wait a minute, of course you dont. You dont care that he's lied 16,000 times as president. 

Oh well. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.8  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    one month ago

I think the 3 million lie's that Schitt told Trumps Trump's mear 16,000.Schitt the swamp dweller has been in congress for almost 2 decades.In short Adam schitt is a shit. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.9  MUVA  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.6    one month ago

Adam Schitt said it was true that's good enough for some.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.10  author  JohnRussell  replied to  MUVA @3.1.8    one month ago

There is someone at the Washington Post whose JOB it is to keep count and track of Trump's lies.  It is virtually a full time job. 

No one has such a job concerning Schiff. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.8    one month ago

Now you're just making shit up.

Do you have any original ideas/thoughts whatsoever?

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.12  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.10    one month ago

You really think a leftist rag would tell you about Schitt lies?If you believe that I have a swamp I will sell you.

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.13  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.11    one month ago

I'm either making this shit up or I don't have a original thought make up your mine which is it ? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    one month ago

If Trump is such a menace, why didn't Nancy allow impeachment to begin much earlier? You know, like sometime in the over-2 years that Dems were working on it?  And why did she sit on the articles for so long, if Trump is a Constitutional crisis?

 
 
 
bugsy
3.1.15  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.14    4 weeks ago
And why did she sit on the articles for so long, if Trump is a Constitutional crisis?

I have noticed that when libs try and say Trump is a danger and must be removed immediately, conservatives bring up this little tidbit and libs go silent.

Wonder why...

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3    4 weeks ago
On what specific criminal charges?

What do criminal charges have to do with impeachment Tex? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.2    4 weeks ago

Read what I responded to and figure it out.

It isn't really all that hard if you bother to read.

After reading what I responded to, if you still need help, I'll be right here with time to kill to get you up to speed.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.1    4 weeks ago
Read what I responded to and figure it out. It isn't really all that hard if you bother to read.
After reading what I responded to, if you still need help, I'll be right here with time to kill to get you up to speed.

I did.

Answer? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.2.2    4 weeks ago

You seriously didn't get it?

Really?

Obtuse much?

The claim was made that the "crimes" would keep Trump locked up for life if impeachment were a criminal trial.

I asked what crimes would he be charged with.

Not hard to figure out at all for someone reading the entire statement.

I never claimed that criminal charges had a thing to do with impeachment, so your question was rather stupid.

Had I claimed such, then you might have actually had a point.

Now, it just looks like trolling.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.4  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.3    4 weeks ago
You seriously didn't get it?

Really?

Obtuse much?

The claim was made that the "crimes" would keep Trump locked up for life if impeachment were a criminal trial.

I asked what crimes would he be charged with.

Not hard to figure out at all for someone reading the entire statement.

Nope. The term 'crimes' was not used in the comment you replied to. Yet you doubled down on it by putting the term in quotes. 

FAIL. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.2.4    4 weeks ago
Nope. The term 'crimes' was not used in the comment you replied to. Yet you doubled down on it by putting the term in quotes. 

jeez...….....I didn't say that the post said crimes, now did I?

But "send him up the river.  Dates, times, names, this is enough information to lock Trump up for the rest of his life, were this a criminal trial.  I think the jury would be out for about 20 minutes." means nothing at all whatsoever to you.

I figured any competent reader would be able to put 2 and 2 together. 

I keep forgetting my audience--I must remind myself to dumb down my replies if you insist on reading (or not reading them) and replying.

My statement stands, whether you like it or not and whether you are capable of understanding it or not. I don't give a flying fuck either way.

Please, go troll someone else for a while.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.6  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.5    4 weeks ago
jeez...….....I didn't say that the post said crimes, now did I?

Jeez so you're saying that when your state:

The claim was made that the "crimes" would keep Trump locked up

And you put quotation marks around the term "crimes", you meant that the claim was made WITHOUT the term "crimes" in it but you couldn't resist throwing that term out anyway? 

I figured any competent reader would be able to put 2 and 2 together. 

Any competent reader would recognize that you used a term that didn't exist in the post you replied to, put quotation marks around it and now want me to accept that it's inferred by the comment. 

Nope. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.2.6    4 weeks ago

here is a fucking clue for you--we don't lock people up without them being convicted of a crime. The poster said that if impeachment were a criminal trial (which it is not), then Trump would be locked up for life. That would mean that the poster feels Trump has committed a crime. So I ASKED what crime he would be charged with.

This isn't fucking rocket science, but one must be able to read AND comprehend.

I hope for your sake your day to do that comes soon.

Please stop fucking trolling me--go bother someone else.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.8  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.7    4 weeks ago
here is a fucking clue for you--we don't lock people up without them being convicted of a crime.

There are THOUSANDS of people locked up right now that haven't been convicted of a crime. Their ONLY crime is being unable to make bail. 

YUGE FAIL.

The rest is just Blah, blah, blah backtracking....

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.2.8    4 weeks ago

[Deleted]

And since I know how important it is to you, take the last word.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.2.10  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.9    4 weeks ago

Removed for context - s

what are you a tempting to say...?

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.11  Dulay  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.2.10    4 weeks ago

He's attempting to say that he couldn't support his claims and doesn't appreciate anyone pointing that out, especially me...

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.2.10    4 weeks ago

Thanks for the reminder of why I had you on ignore.

Back ya go!

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.2.13  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dulay @3.2.11    4 weeks ago

i N Joy playing with Tex,

but i've never been apriviledged with a FUCK OFF,only whatever an impasse is...

i impassed out on an over once, ....

woke up in a tunnel  ?

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.14  Dulay  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.2.13    4 weeks ago

I seem to be someone who causes a snowflake reaction in conservatives. 

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.15  Ender  replied to  Dulay @3.2.14    4 weeks ago

I have come to the conclusion they are going to have a reaction regardless.

No matter what, they always break down and lash out.

Not to take away from your great work.  : )

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4  Dismayed Patriot    one month ago

"Trump Is Drowning And Needs A Lifeline"

There's simply no way that fat orange clown would be considered a witch if thrown in the middle of a deep pond... [ deleted ]

"Ordeal by water was associated with the witch hunts of the 16th and 17th centuries: an accused who sank was considered innocent, while floating indicated witchcraft"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunking

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4    one month ago

Or, we can simply wait until the Senate votes.

It won't be too long to wait, especially after 2 1/2 + years of working on impeachment.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.1.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1    one month ago
especially after 2 1/2 + years of working on impeachment.

Well, dishonest Donald has spent the last two and a half years fucking up, being an embarrassment to our nation, lying over 15,000 times and generally acting like a complete ignoramus. The really sad commentary on America today is the fact that so many Republicans have apparently abandoned any semblance of moral standards and now embrace the unethical behavior their Dear Leader displayed daily.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.2  MUVA  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.1.1    one month ago

One man standards don't mean shit to me who exactly is setting the standard you?jrSmiley_25_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  MUVA @4.1.2    one month ago

MUVA, what moral standards does Trump uphold? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    one month ago

You'll never get an answer to that question because he has no morals whatsoever, tRump that is

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.5  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    one month ago

What moral standard do any of us uphold do you think being self righteous is moral standard I not religous so anyone telling me they have the moral high ground can take a fucking hike.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  MUVA @4.1.5    one month ago

Why dont we all walk around punching each other in the face then?  That is what would happen in a world without morality. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.1.1    one month ago

@4.1.1

Gee, maybe Dems should have included some of that in the articles instead of NOTHING from Trump's first 2 1/2 years.

Sounds much more like they couldn't find shit to impeach him for and just kept digging. Then Nancy was persuaded to change her mind and finally, after the Great Mueller Report (which had ZERO to do with impeachment articles, although we were promised they would sink Trump) struck out, Nancy sat on the articles instead of immediately shipping them over to the Senate.

Doesn't sound like any crisis to me!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4    one month ago

deleted

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tacos!
5  Tacos!    one month ago
Dates, times, names

are nothing more than dates, times, and names. What Democrats do is take that ordinary information, raise their eyebrows, nod their heads, and say "harrumph!" a lot, so that you think something bad happened. But if you wash away the sleep and hypnosis, and look around a little, you'll see that all is right with the world and you don't actually have anything to be upset about. They want you to be freaked out so you'll vote for them to save you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @5    one month ago
What Democrats do is take that ordinary information, raise their eyebrows, nod their heads, and say "harrumph!" a lot, so that you think something bad happened.

LOL.  Maybe youve been sleeping. Or busy at work. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    one month ago
LOL.  Maybe youve been sleeping. Or busy at work. 

You left out one.

Watching the Democratic clown show in full swing.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
6  Larry Hampton    one month ago

The only evidence fruity Rudy has, the substance  of his morality, is located in his large intestine. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @7    one month ago
Starting tomorrow we will begin cracking through the Swamp media’s cover-up of TOP level Democrats selling their public office, resulting in multi-millions, in Ukraine and the conspired attempt with foreign officials to “destroy” the Trump candidacy.

We know. The Ukrainian ambassador to the US wrote a newspaper op/ed against trump's candidacy in 2016.  We know.  Giuliani can say a thousand times that this represents a plot against trump and he will look stupid every one of those thousand times. 

Giuliani is going to expose politicians selling their "public office" ? lol. I hope he tells his Republican friends so they can stay home that day to avoid the embarrassment.  We know that politicians of all parties make money off their influence.  That is not the same type of issue as the president trying to get foreign governments to help him cheat in our US election. 

Giuliani's 'announcement' sounds exactly like he is going to serve up some warmed over horseshit in a new bun.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
7.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    one month ago
That is not the same type of issue as the president trying to get foreign governments to help him cheat in our US election. 

you lost any trace of credibility right there.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @7.1.1    one month ago

lol. 

Be prepared to be totally let down by Giuliani tomorrow. 

He has been threatening this same "expose" for weeks. 

And even if he does say something , rest assured it will be irrelevant to the impeachment issues. 

The GOP is underwater in conspiracy theories, dimwits, and clowns.  Very sad. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
7.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    one month ago
Be prepared to be totally let down by Giuliani tomorrow. 

I don't care about giuliani either way.

I just provided a link and think it will be fun to watch

rest assured it will be irrelevant to the impeachment issues

I totally agree there...

there is no chance trump will be convicted by the senate regardless of what giuliani does.

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @7.1.1    one month ago
'you lost any trace of credibility right there'

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

That's a fucking riot, YOU, talking about credibility.

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

That's WHACK!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.5  author  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @7.1.3    one month ago
Rudy Giuliani, the personal attorney for President Trump, threatened Thursday to go public with information that would expose corruption by 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

“Everything I tried to tell the press last March is now coming out, and more. I will now start to reveal the evidence directly to you, the People,” the former New York mayor tweeted. “The Biden Family Enterprise made millions by selling public office. Then when Joe was Obama’s Point Man, they ALL made millions.”

Giuliani’s claim that he could reveal evidence detrimental to the former vice president follows his offer to testify in Trump’s impeachment trial taking place in the Senate.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/23/rudy-giuliani-threatens-to-go-public-with-biden-corruption-allegations/?utm_source=twitter_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

Giuliani has claimed to have knowledge of Biden's corruption in Ukraine for MANY months. Spit it out Rudy, or choke on it. 

People like Giuliani, who frankly doesnt seem to have all his faculties any more, think the American people are stupid. 

We're not all Trump supporters Rudy. 

 
 
 
loki12
8  loki12    one month ago

It's amazing to watch Adam Schitt give a 1 hour opening argument over the last 20 hours, Let me boil it down for the low functioning, 

Adam Schitt: " We don't have any evidence and we don't have an impeachable offense, Please Mr Mitch, Save our worthless asses by helping us look for more, Or we will call you mean names." Yes we are morons, but there are a bunch of morons as dumb as us who thinks this is real. They will call you poopy heads too. So please save us! 

Repeat ad nauseum until all the sheep nod along.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1  Tessylo  replied to  loki12 @8    one month ago

tRump's lawyer gave about a 3 minute opening argument/defense.

Not much of a defense.

 
 
 
MrFrost
9  MrFrost    4 weeks ago

Rudy Colludy is a liar, just like trump. He keep screaming about all this evidence on the bidens he has, yet never exposes any of it. If he had ANYTHING, he would be SCREAMING about from the rooftops. 

A dose of reality? 

Trump never had anything on the bidens, he didn't care about investigating them, he just wanted the ANNOUNCEMENT of investigations. Rudy has literally been on a snipe hunt, and now he is being handed his hat by trump. Don't see him on the Senate floor defending his boss, do ya? Nope. 

512

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 weeks ago

As another comment on this very thread claims, Giuliani was supposed to reveal his evidence of "Democratic corruption"  in Ukraine, yesterday I think. Or was it Friday?  Well either way it didnt happen?  Giuliani figures he only has another 20 years or so, at the most, to live so he has begun his stall game.  "Tomorrow" he will prove Trump's innocence. (And his own)

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

dennis smith
Donald J. Trump fan 1
Gordy327


25 visitors