Reversing course, many in GOP say Trump’s guilt is now irrelevant

  
Via:  john-russell  •  2 months ago  •  118 comments

Reversing course, many in GOP say Trump’s guilt is now irrelevant
t’d be an overstatement to suggest every congressional Republican has embraced this new posture, but the list of prominent GOP officials touting the new talking point isn’t short. It includes Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who argued, “[E]ven if the president said [to John Bolton that he was withholding military aid in exchange for investigations], it does not raise to the level of removal from office.”

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Reversing course, many in GOP say Trump’s guilt is now irrelevant


Several prominent Republicans seemed to collectively breathe a sigh of relief yesterday. After spending months kicking around a series of talking points intended to defend Donald Trump in his Ukraine scandal – some of which were contradictory, some of which were laughable, each of which was woeful – many in the party finally started to settle on the one assertion that can’t be discredited or debunked:

Republicans no longer think it matters whether the president is guilty.

For months, the president’s GOP allies fought a losing battle, challenging the available facts, insisting Trump did not do what the evidence said he did. But on Monday night, during the impeachment trial, Alan Dershowitz stood on the Senate floor and  argued , in reference to the reported revelations from John Bolton’s book, “[N]othing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense.”

It was as if a lightbulb flickered on in the Republican cloakroom. The  Washington Post   reported  overnight:


“Let’s say it’s true, okay? Dershowitz last night explained that if you’re looking at it from a constitutional point of view, that that is not something that is impeachable,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) told reporters Tuesday morning.

“Alan Dershowitz said it was not” impeachable, said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a top ally of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “And I don’t disagree with that.”

The ramifications are striking and could have long-term implications. The argument suggests senators believe a U.S. president can use taxpayer dollars to pressure an ally to investigate an American citizen who happens to be challenging him for president, without any repercussions.

A CNN  report  added, “A growing number of GOP senators are now acknowledging that President Donald Trump may have leveraged US military aid to Ukraine in exchange for an announcement of investigations that could help him politically – but they contend that even that conduct does not warrant removal from office or hearing from additional witnesses.”

It’d be an overstatement to suggest  every  congressional Republican has embraced this new posture, but the list of prominent GOP officials touting the new talking point isn’t short. It includes Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who  argued , “[E]ven if the president said [to John Bolton that he was withholding military aid in exchange for investigations], it does not raise to the level of removal from office.”

The party’s indifference seemed liberating. If Trump’s culpability is no longer relevant to his GOP acolytes, then the answer to every question could be effectively the same: “It doesn’t matter.”

Even if every allegation is true, even if the president did exactly what he’s accused of doing, even if he abused the powers of his office in the precise way Democrats claim, much of the Republican Party has convinced itself, quite suddenly, that the presidential misdeeds simply don’t meet the arbitrary threshold for importance.

And if the allegations are no longer relevant, then the trial is no longer relevant, and the need for witness testimony is no longer relevant. Dershowitz effectively handed the GOP a key to get his client out of this mess, and several Senate Republicans rushed to use it.

As a substantive matter, the party’s new posture is indefensible. Trump’s abuse of power was staggering on a historic scale and, according to Congress’ independent watchdog,  blatantly illegal . For lawmakers to say it’s perfectly permissible for a president to ignore the law, withhold congressionally approved aid to a vulnerable ally, as part of an extortion scheme the president hoped to use to cheat in an election, is madness.

But as of this morning, much of the Senate Republican conference has decided the smart move is to simply not care. The more Democrats point to evidence of Trump’s misconduct, the more GOP senators will reply, “So what?”


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 months ago

Republicans and conservatives have now reached the totally inevitable stage of , "he did it, so what?"

It was always going to come down to that and now it is out in the open. 

This is why we say that Trumpism is a cult, and why some say that some Trump supporters are the worst people in America. 

It's just not that hard to figure out. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

Kinda painting with the broad brush of sweeping generalization there John, aren't ya? It really doesn't matter what Trump did or did not do, Trump will remain in office. Even some democrats are having second thoughts about the wisdom of this insanity.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/feinstein-stirs-confusion-with-comments-on-impeachment-vote/ar-BBZq3wP?ocid=AARDHP

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 months ago
It really doesn't matter what Trump did or did not do, 

We can always count on you to prove the point of the seeded articles. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago

We can always count on the left to miss their own hypocrisy.

Consider this payback for Bill Clinton.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.3  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago
We can always count on you to prove the point of the seeded articles. 

Hardly, your own "seeded article" did that.  And I quote;

even if true

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago

Trump is the original Teflon Don. None of the shyt thrown at him for past three years has stuck. All the lies and false charges have lamely bounced off.  His popularity numbers have remained unchanged. And once again, you cannot refute anything I write, but have to resort to making a negative personal remark.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.4    2 months ago

All I said is that your comment proved the truth of the article.  If that strikes you as "negative" then maybe you should reconsider your comment. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago
It's just not that hard to figure out.

It's true though, to the GOP his guilt is irrelevant.  They were going to acquit one way or another.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.2.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Ozzwald @1.2    2 months ago
They were going to acquit one way or another.

Is there a point you're trying to make?  The Republicans knew from January 2016 that the Democrats would do everything in their power to find something, anything to impeach the President for.  Hell, they were talking about it even before he was elected.  They were so desperate that 100 Democrats voted to approve an impeachment resolution for Trump complaining about the NFL taking a knee.  

Now that the Democrats have impeached Trump, it's up to them to provide the evidence they used for that decision.  To date, they've provided only something rational people use to wipe their asses with and flush away.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  XDm9mm @1.2.1    2 months ago
Is there a point you're trying to make?

I already made it, didn't you read the comment you replied to?

To the GOP his guilt is irrelevant, they were going to acquit him guilty or not.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

Most Trump fans logic works like this:

Trump didn't do it.

But if he did do it, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was bad, that's not a big deal.

And if it was a big deal, then it's not his fault.

And if it was his fault, he didn't mean it.

And if he did mean it, then they must have deserved it...

It's the same mentality that has allowed despots and vile worthless narcissists to gain power and destroy lives throughout history. The justification of the ignorant.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.3.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 months ago

You left out their final excuse,

Yea, but even if he did shoot someone on 5th avenue, 

it does not rise to an impeachable offense.

.

I actually agree and have to admit, i probably could forgive Trump for shooting someone on 5th Avenue, but,

i don't condone suicide.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.3.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.3.1    2 months ago

If the damage was only to himself I'd have to agree and could almost forgive him. Sadly, it's going to take many years for America to recover from the damage this inept fool has done to our nation.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.3.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.2    2 months ago

agreed

he has set US back, at minimum, a decade.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2  It Is ME    2 months ago

"Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who argued, “[E]ven if the president said [to John Bolton that he was withholding military aid in exchange for investigations ], it does not raise to the level of removal from office.”

Didn't see the name "Biden" in that comment. jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

Just Puts Trumps comment in the same realm of Joe "BIDENS" comments about firing someone.....OR ELSE ! jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif

What Joe "THREATENED"….. was Okay. jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  It Is ME @2    2 months ago

Even you ME,

know you cannot compare the two yet you do and others overdue as well, cause you HAVE NOTHING

Biden's was AN APPROVED and backed request. Backed by POTUS Obama, all of our Agencies, our NATO and European Allies, while Trump had ALL LIES, Lied about them at every turn, cause you can't get a straight away clear cut answer out of the LIAR in Chief, who's pathetic Party of partisan purveyors of purely pathetic puke, throw up

hands and shovels, as they keep digging up the foundation of the goal posts proving persistently, as they insist consistently, that what we see clear as day, is something different and can be explained in a different way, time after time hoping the truth gets lost in the fray, as they and he are afraid of the truth. Starts out with Lies about phone call, then explained as a 'perfect' phone call, then , get the whistleblower, his spokesman says prid pro qou happens all the time,  then Trump examples it on live TV, all while he refuses to allow the witnesses that KNOW the damn truth, to testify.  

What a disgrace these Republican Senators are to our once great Country

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1    2 months ago
know you cannot compare the two

True ! jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

Trump's was a " REQUEST " ! jrSmiley_41_smiley_image.gif

Biden's was a.... " Prid-Pro-Quo THREAT/DEMAND " ! jrSmiley_32_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3  XDm9mm    2 months ago
“[N]othing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense.”

Just for the reading impaired, I've copied and pasted the most relevant three words of the vitriolic anti-trump screed posted by the Trump hater of record, one John Russel.

even if true

In other words, the screed posted has little if any relevance to anything other than supporting other Trump haters.  TDS runs strong and deep in some,strong and deep indeed.

 
 
 
loki12
3.1  loki12  replied to  XDm9mm @3    2 months ago

Clinton sexually assaulted a women and paid almost a million to silence her. lied under oath, intimidated witnesses, hid evidence, but trump maybe did something and his followers are a cult because they want evidence before his removal? That is some retarded thinking in anybodies book.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  loki12 @3.1    2 months ago
That is some retarded thinking in anybodies book.

Well, simply look at the source of that insanity and you'll understand!!  jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4  seeder  JohnRussell    2 months ago

If you imagine back 40 or 50 years ago and the allegation was made that Gerald Ford tried to arrange a foreign investigation of Jimmy Carter, or , later, Carter tried to arrange a foreign investigation of Ronald Reagan, what we know in our hearts and minds is that once that information became public, at the least Ford or Carter would have had to declare they were not going to run for re-election, out of shame, and/or they would have resigned from the presidency, out of shame.     We all know this. 

Today, lying , gaslighting, and constant buffoonery are the defining activities of the US presidency as expressed by Donald Trump. So much so  that allegedly decent people who support him are reduced to saying "so what?" in his defense. 

The United States of America has been brought low. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @4    2 months ago
at the least Ford or Carter would have had to declare they were not going to run for re-election, out of shame, and/or they would have resigned from the presidency, out of shame.     We all know this

Who is we

jrSmiley_14_smiley_image.gif

and you can't possibly know who would have done what. If they resigned it would have been because they were exhausted by all the bullshit. Thankfully they did not.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4    2 months ago
The United States of America has been brought low.

Don't worry JR.   We're digging out of the swamp a little at a time.  Can you imagine how mired in the muck we would be if it was never brought to light who paid for the dossier Clinton and the DNC tried to use to take down Trump?   Hell, we're still trodding through the mud and muck, but at least we're only ankle deep as opposed to being stuck up to the hips.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2    2 months ago
Russia if you can find Hillarys missing emails you will be mightily rewarded

Do you seriously believe that the person who said that should not have been investigated?   What is wrong with you? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.1    2 months ago
Do you seriously believe that the person who said that should not have been investigated? 

Investigated for WHAT exactly?

Saying what many were thinking at the time?

Is speech illegal to Democrats now if it comes from a Republican?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.3  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.1    2 months ago
Russia if you can find Hillarys missing emails you will be mightily rewarded
Do you seriously believe that the person who said that should not have been investigated?   What is wrong with you? 

Ok JR....   here's your assignment for the day.  Provide the EXACT quote you're obviously attributing to Donald Trump.  And provide the context for that.   Did it have anything to do with the 30+ thousand emails one particular politician deleted that were under Congressional subpoena?   How about an investigation of that JR....  or is that too much to ask?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.2    2 months ago
Investigated for WHAT exactly?

What he was investigated for. 

The problem is Trump supporters have ZERO standards that they want him to conform to. Zero. 

That is one of the reasons some people say that some Trump supporters are the worst people in America.  We cant avoid this realization any longer. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.3    2 months ago
Ok JR....   here's your assignment for the day.  Provide the EXACT quote you're obviously attributing to Donald Trump.  And provide the context for that.   Did it have anything to do with the 30+ thousand emails one particular politician deleted that were under Congressional subpoena?   How about an investigation of that JR....  or is that too much to ask?

Im not going to provide you with shit. I dont take orders from trumpsters.  The quote is readily available. 

In the Mueller report he says that Trump asking Russia to help him dig up dirt on Hillary was part of the reason he came under scrutiny. Mueller responded, in part, to things that were in the news as the basis for the direction of his investigation.  If Trump didnt want to be investigated he should not have done something as preposterously stupid as publicly ask Russia, of all places, to try and hack his election opponent. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.4    2 months ago

And you think Trump was investigated for that remark?

LMMFAO!

There isn't a single thing wrong with what Trump said about her emails and Russia. Look, I get that is news you don't like and don't want to hear, but that is just going to have to be tough cookies for you.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.7  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.4    2 months ago
What he was investigated for. 

You'll need to ask the Democrats in the House of Representatives what they investigated.  They did after all have 17 witnesses 'testify' in closed door secret sessions in a SCIF in the bowels of Congress, yet only presented 12 of those 'witnesses' during impeachment proceedings.  Now, thinking people would ask why is that?   Is there something those other "witnesses" said or know that is exonerating evidence of the investigation that the Democrats had to rush to meet a Christmas deadline and then wait for about a month to present to the Senate for action.   Curious intelligent inquiring minds want to know JR.  Do YOU know?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.8  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.5    2 months ago
Im not going to provide you with shit. I dont take orders from trumpsters.  The quote is readily available.

That's a nasty way of saying, 'I pulled it out of my ass and can't substantiate it at all.  So there!'

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.9  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.6    2 months ago
There isn't a single thing wrong with what Trump said about her emails and Russia.

As I have said all along, Trump supporters have no standards they need him to conform to.  That is why many people say that some Trump supporters are the worst people in America. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.5    2 months ago
 If Trump didnt want to be investigated he should not have done something as preposterously stupid as publicly ask Russia, of all places, to try and hack his election opponent. 

That statement is a flat-out LIE.

Please quote Trump asking Russia to hack Hillary.

Should we wait, or is this just another lie you can't prove but insist on pushing, as if smart people can't read what he actually stated for themselves?

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.2.11  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.1    2 months ago

Would you at least get the quote right! After the number of times you have brought it up you should have it memorized!

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-asked-russia-to-find-clintons-emails-on-or-around-the-same-day-russians-targeted-her-accounts

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,” Trump said in a July 27, 2016 news conference.

Jesus, you are enough to make me start believing in God just so I can curse properly!

By our press John, by our press!  You know the same morons that can't find anything w/o leaking it to themselves- and then repeating the same damn lies over and over. He said the press would reward Russia mightily for finding the 30,000 emails. 

Of course Trump was wrong about that. The ungrateful morons in the press didn't thank Russia. It was above all else John a sarcastic joke, and poke at our lack of intelligence agencies, Hillary, and Comey's investigation.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.9    2 months ago
That is why many people say that some Trump supporters are the worst people in America. 

Sorry, JR, but I am not shallow enough nor stupid enough to think that what others think should dictate what I think.

I don't give a good flying fuck what morons think.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.13  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.10    2 months ago
Please quote Trump asking Russia to hack Hillary. Should we wait, or is this just another lie you can't prove but insist on pushing, as if smart people can't read what he actually stated for themselves?

We have been through all this before.  Later that same day Russians tried to hack into Hillarys computer system. 

The Russians knew he was asking them if they were willing to hack Hillary, but you dont. 

Ok, you are entitled to your opinion. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.14  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.5    2 months ago
If Trump didnt want to be investigated he should not have done something as preposterously stupid as publicly ask Russia, of all places, to try and hack his election opponent. 

Here's a hint JR...  He never did that as YOU well know, but refuse to admit.

Here's the exact quote that YOU modified and said Trump said.  So much for the veracity of your posts.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,” the Republican presidential nominee told reporters.

EXACTLY where did he indicate hacking anything?  Here's another point you refuse to acknowledge.  The purported basement server was off line for a long time.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.15  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.13    2 months ago
Later that same day Russians tried to hack into Hillarys computer system. 

Get your facts straight JR...   they actually tried to hack the DNC systems, oh,and the GOP's also.   

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.16  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.12    2 months ago

History will judge who the morons are, and I am not worried about my side of it at all. 

You dont have to be Einstein to know that Trump will be a disgraced figure in US and world history. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.17  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.15    2 months ago
Get your facts straight JR... 
I usually do. 
A new indictment charges that Russians tried to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails on July 27, 2016—the same day that Donald Trump publicly asked them to do so. David A. Graham July 13, 2018
www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/russia-hacking-trump-mueller/565157/
 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.18  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.13    2 months ago

Trump was specifically referring to the 30k emails Hillary's team deleted from her server. Russia did not hack into that server--according to all reports. Don't you remember Hillary claiming that her server was secure--that no one had breached it?

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.2.19  Ronin2  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.15    2 months ago

Facts don't [matter.deleted]

I can only hope he gets the quote right now at least. It has been properly posted two times on this chain!

I will it a major accomplishment if he can just get the quote right from now on.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.20  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.18    2 months ago
Trump was specifically referring to the 30k emails Hillary's team deleted from her server. Russia did not hack into that server--according to all reports. Don't you remember Hillary claiming that her server was secure--that no one had breached it?

Im not going to "debate" this with you guys all day. It is in the history books now and cant be changed. Part of the reason Trump was investigated by Mueller is because he did things like ask Russia to hack Clinton.  The Mueller Report states that some of their investigating stemmed from items in the news. 

I have gone along with this off topic direction, but this is the end. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  Ronin2 @4.2.19    2 months ago
I can only hope he gets the quote right now at least. 

Don't bother hoping for that. [deleted]

He knows what the right quote is but can't seem to bring himself to use it.

And he certainly can't put it into any context.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.22  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.20    2 months ago
I have gone along with this off topic direction, but this is the end. 

So YOU bring up a topic on YOUR seed, state something false and then get your ass handed to you, so NOW it is all off topic.

Got it.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.23  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.20    2 months ago
Part of the reason Trump was investigated by Mueller is because

Actually, it only had to do with Jim Comey getting fired and illegally leaking privileged information to his buddies in the press.  Then his other best buddy appointed an old friend and gave him a team of Trump haters to use as investigators.

Yeah, not too obvious for even the blind to see, and yet some just refuse to.  Right JR?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.24  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.22    2 months ago

Texan, neither one of us will live long enough for you to hand me my ass in a debate. It isnt even possible. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.2.25  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.17    2 months ago

So what John- you do realize there is a difference between Hillary's emails and the private server?

By the time Russia made the attempt the private server was in possession of the FBI. It also had been wiped clean by Hillary.

Oh, and there were more than just 1 server.

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/a-guide-to-clintons-emails/

When did Clinton set up her private server, and where was it located?

A report issued by the State Department’s independent inspector general in May said Clinton used “a personal email system to conduct business” while she was a U.S. senator and during her 2008 presidential campaign. (She was a senator from New York from January 2001 to January 2009, when President Obama nominated her to be secretary of state.) “She continued to use personal email throughout her term as Secretary, relying on an account maintained on a private server, predominantly through mobile devices. Throughout Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the server was located in her New York residence,” the IG report said.

FBI Director James Comey said there were “several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department.” The FBI director added, “As new servers and equipment were employed, older servers were taken out of service, stored, and decommissioned in various ways.”

Furthermore, the emails they were looking for many were on those decommissioned servers.

How many emails were on Clinton’s personal server, and what did she do with the emails when she left office? 

Clinton’s office disclosed in March 2015 that her private server had a total of 62,320 emails. It said at that time that her lawyers went through the emails and identified 30,490 work-related emails and 31,830 private emails. In December 2014, about 21 months after she left office, Clinton gave the State Department the  30,490 work-related emails totaling roughly 55,000 pages. She indicated that she deleted the others. “I didn’t see any reason to keep them,” she said at a March 10, 2015, press conference .

However, Comey said Clinton had multiple servers during her four years as secretary of state, and not all of her work-related emails were turned over to the State Department.  The FBI recovered “several thousand work-related emails” that were not provided to the State Department, and he said it was possible they included some of the emails “deleted as ‘personal’ by her lawyers when they reviewed and sorted her emails for production in late 2014.”

Now, did Russia hack Hillary's private server before then? Hard to tell.

Did hackers successfully break into her computer and access her emails?

Attempts were made, but the IG and FBI found no evidence that any attempt was successful. That does not mean, however, that none was successful.

The IG report said hackers attempted to access Clinton’s server on Jan. 9, 2011, but Clinton’s technical support adviser shut down the server to deny access. The report also said that Clinton received two phishing email messages on May 13, 2011, that contained suspicious links. Both attempted breaches should have been reported, but were not, according to the IG report.

The FBI director said the lack of direct evidence that Clinton’s server was successfully hacked by “any foreign power or other hostile actors” doesn’t mean it wasn’t.  “[G]iven the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence,” Comey said. “We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”

Facts really don't matter to those with TDS do they?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2.26  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.17    2 months ago

Quit yelling, it does not change the lie that you are trying to push.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.27  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @4.2.25    2 months ago

This is all irrelevant.  The evening of the day Trump asked Russia to find Hillarys emails, they tried to hack Hillary in an attempt to find her emails. 

So dont even try to say that Trump didnt ask them. 

10 year olds have figured that out. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2.28  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.27    2 months ago

You got the direct quote above, it was a joke that any 10 year old could figure out. What about....

the 30,000 unsecured, classified emails that Hillary left dangling for the dastardly Russians to hack...which they ended up doing

 
 
 
loki12
4.2.29  loki12  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.22    2 months ago

And he didn't read his own post proving his "claim" is full of shit.

(Mueller alleges that there had been attempts to hack Clinton’s campaign since at least March 2016.) 

So it wasn't at trumps request as the TDS suffers have been bleating mindlessly, It was ongoing since March. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.30  Texan1211  replied to  Ronin2 @4.2.25    2 months ago
Facts really don't matter to those with TDS do they?

Of course not. Some think that the Russians tried to hack into a server sitting in the custody of the FBI, unplugged and after being Bleach-Bit. Makes SO much sense, right??

If they can't even get a simple quote right, do we really need to know or care what their thoughts are--especially when they conveniently ignore all the real facts?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.31  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.24    2 months ago
Texan, neither one of us will live long enough for you to hand me my ass in a debate. It isnt even possible. 

Now THAT is phucking hilarious!!   THANKS JR.  I knew you were good for something other than Trump vitriol.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.32  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.24    2 months ago
Texan, neither one of us will live long enough for you to hand me my ass in a debate. It isnt even possible. 

Hell, JR, I am just hoping I live long enough for you to learn how to quote accurately.

Think maybe that will be in the next 20 years or so?

 
 
 
Ender
4.2.33  Ender  replied to  Greg Jones @4.2.28    2 months ago

Where do you come up with this...The DNC was hacked...

Plus,

Within approximately five hours of Trump's statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton's personal office,” the report reads, referring to Russia's military intelligence agency.

The Russian officers sent malicious links to 15 email accounts linked to the domain of Clinton’s personal office, and the “investigation did not find evidence of earlier GRU attempts to compromise accounts hosted on this domain," according to the report.

Trump faced backlash for his comments in the 2016 campaign when he called on Russia to track down Clinton’s emails.
 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
4.2.34  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ender @4.2.33    2 months ago
Where do you come up with this...The DNC was hacked...

it's like they are from an alien planet, and had just arrived to the party, surprised,

as they were invited, but declined to ever become enlighted.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.35  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.16    2 months ago
History will judge who the morons are, and I am not worried about my side of it at all. 

Still trying to prove Reagan right, I see.

 
 
 
Ender
4.2.36  Ender  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.2.34    2 months ago

They just attack, attack, attack, then after a while get their attacks all scrambled.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
4.2.37  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ender @4.2.36    2 months ago
scrambled

eggzactl;y

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.2.38  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.13    2 months ago

Please quote Trump asking Russia to hack Hillary.

“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.39  XDm9mm  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.38    2 months ago
Please quote Trump asking Russia to hack Hillary.

And EXACTLY where in that "quote" is a request for hacking?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.40  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.39    2 months ago
If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find

"If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find"

recall what the context of Trumps comment was. Everyone was talking that day and at that press conference about Russia being implicated in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee. 

Everyone knew that day what Trump meant, and everyone knows today. He was hoping Russia would hack Hillary personally and not stop at what they had already done to the DNC. 

He could have said "what Russia did with the DNC is intolerable and they should stop right now. "

But he didnt say that, did he? He said the opposite. He said "keep going guys". 

 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.2.41  Sean Treacy  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.39    2 months ago

I guess progressives who claim that  just assume Hillary was lying and still possessed the 30,000 emails the FBI was trying to find.  funny how that’s their default assumption.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.42  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.38    2 months ago

The rules and so forth of NT require us to go through a lot of pretenses when dealing with trumpsters, when we should actually be able to say they are liars. 

Instead we have to pretend that they are engaging in "sincere" debate. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.43  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.41    2 months ago

As I just said,  the day Trump made his plea everyone was talking about Russia hacking the DNC. 

All Trump was doing from that stage was saying "Good job fellas, keep it up".  He was happy that Democratic dirt was emerging and wanted more. Period. 

Trump supporters are the most disingenuous folks on earth. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.44  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.43    2 months ago

P.S. 

the hacking of the DNC was a crime.  Trump was encouraging criminal behavior.  Hasnt stopped since either. 

 
 
 
Ender
4.2.45  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.42    2 months ago

All they do is twist and spin. Spout a lot of bullshit and blame everyone else for his faults.

It is, that is not what he meant or he was joking. 

They will lose any dignity and/or honour, any credibility, just to protect him.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.46  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.40    2 months ago
"If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find"

In the treasure trove of information you received when the idiot Podesta replied to a phishing scheme told someone that his PASSWORD was PASSWORD.

Thanks for reminding us that Russia or whoever ALREADY HAD what they wanted.  Thanks in large part to the willing assistance of none other than John Podesta.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.47  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.42    2 months ago
Instead we have to pretend that they are engaging in "sincere" debate. 

I'm still waiting for that debate JR.  Let me know when you want to start.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.48  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.44    2 months ago
P.S.  the hacking of the DNC was a crime.  Trump was encouraging criminal behavior.  Hasnt stopped since either.

Are you telling us JR, that the firm "Stop it" from Obama was insufficient to stop Putin?  Whodda thunk it.  That "Stop it" was like that blowing in the sand "Red Line".

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.49  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @4.2.45    2 months ago
They will lose any dignity and/or honour, any credibility, just to protect him.

Yep. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.50  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.48    2 months ago

WTF are you talking about?  

You know Trump screwed up when he asked Russia to hack Clinton. Why not just say it and stop with this charade? 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.51  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.50    2 months ago
WTF are you talking about? 

Reality. 

You know Trump screwed up when he asked Russia to hack Clinton.

He never asked anyone to hack anything.

Why not just say it and stop with this charade? 

I could ask you the same,

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.52  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.47    2 months ago
Are you telling us JR, that the firm "Stop it" from Obama was insufficient to stop Putin?  Whodda thunk it.  That "Stop it" was like that blowing in the sand "Red Line".

I'm not going to "debate" someone who regularly says things like this 

Are you telling us JR, that the firm "Stop it" from Obama was insufficient to stop Putin?  Whodda thunk it.  That "Stop it" was like that blowing in the sand "Red Line".

that have nothing to do with the topic. I dont get paid to read Trumpster minds and have no interest in it. 

The topic is Trump and what he has done that is unethical and crooked, not your desire to berate Obama. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.53  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.51    2 months ago
I could ask you the same, but I know your TDS

that is a coc violation

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.2.54  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.43    2 months ago

Trump supporters are the most disingenuous 

You literally just ignored what he actually said and created a fake narrative to justify your false claim.

 Might want to rethink that.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.55  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.52    2 months ago
I'm not going to "debate" someone who regularly says things like this 

You don't want debate.  You want surrender and capitulation to your thought process.  Reality just does not permit that.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.56  XDm9mm  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.54    2 months ago
You literally just ignored what he actually said and created a fake narrative to justify your false claim.

Sean...   Is JR really Adam Schiff in disguise?  He does the same thing and even did it on the floor of the Senate earlier.  Kind of like his parody in the house impeachment charade.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.57  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.54    2 months ago

I know what he said. I also know what he meant. 

Talk about disingenuous. You and the others are claiming that unless Trump literally used the words " I am asking you to hack Hillary Russia", that he couldnt have possibly meant that.  

What he said and what he meant was obvious and people understood it on that day, and ever since. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.58  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.57    2 months ago
I also know what he meant. 

You're a mind reader now or is that a recently added mystical enhancement to your repertoire?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.59  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.55    2 months ago

Im not going to debate you over what you think Obama said to Putin. Not gonna happen. You can keep dreaming though. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.60  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.59    2 months ago
You can keep dreaming though. 

Sleep tight JR.  That Trump Train will go round and round and round in your head rent free until January 2025 when he leaves the White House.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.2.61  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.57    2 months ago
What he said and what he meant was obvious

Yeah, that Russia should find the famous missing 30,000 emails that Hillary deleted after they were subpoenaed. It's obvious he was hoping Russia would help the FBI and find the missing emails.   Do you imagine Trump didn't really want those deleted emails found?

IF you can twist Trump's straightforward request for help finding mysteriously missing emails and turn into something completely different, than words really have no meaning and can we can say anyone said anything because that's what they "really meant."

 
 
 
Ender
4.2.62  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.61    2 months ago

So you are saying he did request it and asked for their help...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.63  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.61    2 months ago

Trump wanted whatever help he could get.  Were the wikileaks releases in the fall of 2016 about Hillarys state dept emails? I dont think so. Yet Trump literally cheered on wikileaks.  He was cheering on Russia too. 

Why are we even having such an absurd debate ? Everyone knows what was going in in his mind. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.2.64  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.49    2 months ago

Too many of them never had those to begin with.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5  r.t..b...    2 months ago

The 'so what' defense is no defense at all. Just the inexpiable icing on the indigestible hyper-partisan cake. Behaviors no parent would tolerate in their children are somehow excusable when exhibited by the highest office holder in the land for political expedience sake. This whole thing is just toxic.

 
 
 
Ronin2
5.1  Ronin2  replied to  r.t..b... @5    2 months ago

This will be the Republican's standing on the White House lawn moment.

The Democrats should really understand that.

Of course the Democrats don't want to talk about the NSA insta leak of the quote in the book. Wonder if they called Bolton directly to find out what page it was on? Yet the left denies there is a Deep State.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    2 months ago
This will be the Republican's standing on the White House lawn moment.

There will be no shortage of garden gnomes.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    2 months ago
Of course the Democrats don't want to talk about the NSA insta leak of the quote in the book. Wonder if they called Bolton directly to find out what page it was on? Yet the left denies there is a Deep State.

What's even better is that a certain Lt. Colonel Vindmans brother just happens to still work at the White House in a capacity to review that book.  Of course he claims he was not involved with it and has not even seen the books excerpts.

Nothing to see here....  keep on walking, nothing to see.

 
 
 
Ronin2
5.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  r.t..b... @5.1.1    2 months ago

They can post the picture right next to the one of the Democrats after they voted no on Bill's impeachment in the Senate.

Maybe a few of the Democrats that were around for that one like Schumer and Nadler would like to join the Republicans for nostalgia's sake?

Then there can be Red and Blue garden gnomes.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5.1.4  r.t..b...  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.3    2 months ago
Then there can be Red and Blue garden gnomes.

For all to see in the House and Senate, in every Governor seat, in every state legislature, on every cable opinion outlet and every 'news' publication. Poseurs all, except perhaps our president, who has no fealty to anything...only self-adulation and self-preservation, colour him green.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    2 months ago
Yet the left denies there is a Deep State.

the wons losing the 'Deep' Stated

arguments are too shallow to comprehend anything deeper than the made from scratched surfacing from a sub

par for the discoarse taken till ground is the marine so    fine are the  finds not found,   torpedoed buy

the twisted not wound,

by a catcher bred to seed rye from a loaf on our mound that is a  rock 

pitched the wrong way

that won't gravitate the role, a model

to not emulate,  the pole opposite the Southern one drawn, attracted

to lure a

phished from a Russian dealt Trumped rotten Clam Casi-no evil, than that of the layer of crust under where

that which has been trimmed from the Rock & Seedy Rye

our Role Models Tease with a toast, 

to that which they  feel they could 

fool

the most.   The Deep Thinkers

that State how little they would know,

of that which a Deep State

actually would be,   or not,

as deeply stated by those drowning in evaporated puddles that muddle the  puzzling   thought process 

not thought         of

,  by all

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    2 months ago
'Yet the left denies there is a Deep State'

Yes, rational and logical people deny nonsense.  

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.7  Ender  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    2 months ago

So this so called deep sate includes the head of the NSA that trump put in the position...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1.8  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ender @5.1.7    2 months ago

So this so called deep sate includes the head of the NSA that trump put in the position...

of course, like a Bolton Mustache , butt

right under Trumpps nose...as Trumpp don't nose how to cut off, or 

face the facts he forms from abbey norms, machining fax that must be customized to fit the bed, and every where else, 

Trumpp Lies

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.9  Ender  replied to  igknorantzrulz @5.1.8    2 months ago

I swear. Their justifications and defence of trump just gets more nonsensical and comical everyday.

They have gotten to where they approve of even his staff attacking the press and excluding them from process.

They get pissed off when someone on the left calls someone a name yet revel in trump doing it himself.

The one I had to laugh at today (I can only laugh or else it is sickening) is I remember when they kept up with the meme that people thought they would get Obama cash if he was elected yet that is exactly what trump supporters are doing...

Allies of Donald Trump have begun holding events in black communities where organizers lavish praise on the president as they hand out tens of thousands of dollars to lucky attendees.

One couldn't make this stuff up.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1.10  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ender @5.1.9    2 months ago

amazing

and Trump and his clump of off spring need to be approved to again run a charity, no ?

me neither, but i know his was closed and he was fined 2 million or so.

What a class act...

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.2  Greg Jones  replied to  r.t..b... @5    2 months ago

If they voters agree, they will vote for Biden, Bernie....whoever.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6  Tacos!    2 months ago
Republicans no longer think it matters whether the president is guilty.

Nobody thinks that because he's not guilty of anything except having a devastatingly handsome haircut. /s

President Donald Trump may have leveraged US military aid to Ukraine in exchange for an announcement of investigations

Yeah, well, there's nothing wrong with that. Note the word "investigations" plural. We aren't just talking about investigating Joe Biden or his son. That's because the White House was concerned about Ukrainian corruption beyond just the Bidens. There is ample evidence of this. They were concerned about the general problem of corruption in Ukraine and they wanted Ukraine to deal with it before they released the aid. That is, in fact, what was communicated to President Zelensky. That is 100% legitimate.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
6.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Tacos! @6    2 months ago

buull ship

How come no investigation was ever implemented back when it happened ?

When it was looked into by the 'Proper Agencies' of the United States, AND the Ukraine, no violations of laws were found.

Y was corruption NEVER even mentioned in the calls ?

What ELSE and other Corruption examples were investigated ?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6    2 months ago
They were concerned about the general problem of corruption in Ukraine and they wanted Ukraine to deal with it before they released the aid. That is, in fact, what was communicated to President Zelensky. That is 100% legitimate.

Prove it.   The phone call only mentions Joe Biden and Burisma. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2    2 months ago
Prove it.

There is ample testimony in the House proceedings about how the White House and everyone associated with all-things-Ukraine was concerned about corruption generally in Ukraine. Zelensky ran on reforming the corruption and our VP told Zelensky that his aid was being held up because we wanted him to do more about the corruption. When you hear talk about trying to get Ukraine to launch investigations, that's what everyone was talking about. The Biden case is just one of many. Not that that matters anyway. If you are engaged in corruption, you don't get to escape investigation by running for office.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6.2.1    2 months ago

Prove that many cases of corruption were mentioned by Trump.

My understanding, which I think is correct, is that Trump never used the word corruption in either of his phone calls to Zelensky. 

Your just saying something happened doesnt make it so. 

The talking points given to trump before his phone call to Zelensky did suggest that he bring up corruption in the phone call,  but never mentioned Biden in the talking points. 

Trump brought up Biden, but not the corruption which he was encouraged to do by the NCS staff. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.2    2 months ago
Prove that many cases of corruption were mentioned by Trump.

1) Who cares? 2) Prove they weren't

Trump never used the word corruption in either of his phone calls to Zelensky

Even if true, so what?

Your just saying something happened doesnt make it so. 

Your just saying something happened doesnt make it so. 

which he was encouraged to do by the NCS staff

The NCS staff isn't the president. Their opinion doesn't mean anything relevant to impeachment. The president has full constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy and engage with foreign leaders.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6.2.3    2 months ago

So you have nothing. Got it. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2.5  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.4    2 months ago
So you have nothing. Got it.

So you have nothing. Got it.

 
 
 
DRHunk
6.3  DRHunk  replied to  Tacos! @6    2 months ago

Yet that argument never came up during the impeachment hearings?  Funny how people like to spin and re write history when it suits them. Kind of reminds me of Christian apologetics that twist and contort the bible until it makes sense today,  instead of just reading it how it was written in the context it was written for the time period it was written in.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  DRHunk @6.3    2 months ago
Yet that argument never came up during the impeachment hearings?

It did. As I mention above, there is quite a bit of testimony about concern from Trump, White House staff, and diplomats about the general problem of corruption in Ukraine.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.3.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.1    2 months ago
there is quite a bit of testimony about concern from Trump, White House staff, and diplomats about the general problem of corruption in Ukraine.

Where?

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.2    2 months ago

Marie Yovanovitch, Timothy Morrison, Ambassador Volker, and Fiona Hill all testified in the House that Trump or the people he was talking to in Washington were very concerned with the general problem of corruption in Ukraine. Yovanovitch acknowledged that Trump remarked on it as long ago as June 2017.

 
 
 
DRHunk
6.3.4  DRHunk  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.3    2 months ago

So they testified Trump was refusing aid until the corruption was fixed, because he was so concerned with it?  Last I heard the term corruption was never mentioned in the conversation with the Ukraine at all.

Were they in on the phone conversation? or in the meetings he talked about how he was so concerned about the corruption?  

Remarking about something can mean absolutely ANYTHING

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.5  Tacos!  replied to  DRHunk @6.3.4    2 months ago
Remarking about something can mean absolutely ANYTHING

One thing it definitely means is that someone is interested in the topic. Democratic House managers have been claiming that Trump had no interest in Ukrainian corruption at all and cared only about digging up dirt on Joe Biden. That much, at least, is clearly false.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
6.3.6  igknorantzrulz  replied to  DRHunk @6.3.4    2 months ago

Remarking about something can mean absolutely ANYTHING

Not remarking on something can mean something as well, as you stated, Trump NEVER mentioned Corruption in the calls.

It's rather interesting, the most corrupt Pol most have eve seen, going after corruption in another country, but only on his possible political opponent, too funny people actually attempting to defend the Corrutaraitor in chief

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.3.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.3    2 months ago

There is no question about the career diplomats who worked with Ukraine being concerned with corruption.  The question is what was Trumps concern. There is zero evidence that Trump was concerned with corruption in Ukraine. It doesnt matter if he mentioned it one time in 2017. 

He was advised to mention corruption to Zelensky and instead he mentioned the Bidens. 

If he mentioned corruption like he was supposed to do he wouldnt be in this trouble now. 

But the phone call with Zelensky was the day after Mueller had flopped in Congress. Trump thought he was in the clear and he got cocky.  Back to cheating. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
6.3.8  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.7    2 months ago

Doesn’t matter what Trump is concerned unless you are going to prosecute thought crimes now.  Oh that’s right the Dems are already doing that.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.9  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.7    2 months ago
There is zero evidence that Trump was concerned with corruption in Ukraine. It doesnt matter if he mentioned it one time in 2017.

Do even you not see the contradiction in those two sentences? It can't be zero evidence if he mentioned it at least once. And that isn't even the only example I gave you.

You just want so badly for it to be true that all Trump ever cared about was getting Joe Biden. You would think that you should want to be wrong.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Dean Moriarty
lady in black
JBB


76 visitors