White House Sends Blistering Response to Nadler: No, We Aren't Participating in Your Bogus Hearings

  
Via:  Heartland American  •  one week ago  •  95 comments

By:   Beth Baumann

White House Sends Blistering Response to Nadler: No, We Aren't Participating in Your Bogus Hearings
"As you know, this baseless and highly partisan inquiry violates all past historical precedent, basic due process rights, and fundamental fairness," White House Counsel Pat Cipollone wrote to Nadler. In his letter, he blasted Nadler for giving the White House little time to respond to the letter and for scheduling the hearings "during the time that you know the President will be out of the country attending the NATO Leaders Meeting in London."

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

Thank you President Trump and your legal team for standing up to the bullies in the House majority.  Thanks for exposing their star chamber for the illegitimate action that it is.  Schiff and Nadler deserve nothing but public ridicule and humiliation and our sheerest and most utter contempt.  


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


The White House on Sunday notified House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NJ) that they would not be participating in the Committee's impeachment hearings scheduled for Wednesday. 

"As you know, this baseless and highly partisan inquiry violates all past historical precedent, basic due process rights, and fundamental fairness," White House Counsel Pat Cipollone wrote to Nadler. 

In his letter, he blasted Nadler for giving the White House little time to respond to the letter and for scheduling the hearings "during the time that you know the President will be out of the country attending the NATO Leaders Meeting in London."

Cipollone also suggested the hearing is a waste of time because it will focus on the "historical and constitutional basis of impeachment," and will feature academics, not witnesses relating to Ukraine or the current impeachment inquiry.

Nadler sent another letter with a different deadline, something Cipollone said provides absolutely no details for the White House. 

"Again, your letter provided no information whatsoever as to what the schedule will be, what the procedures will be, or what rights, if any, the Committee intends to afford the President," he wrote. "In other words, you have given no information regarding your plans, set arbitrary deadlines, and then demand a response, all to create the false appearance of providing the President some rudimentary process."

Cipollone said the White House would respond further if Nadler provided any further information.

He did, however, blast Nadler for making it seem as though he was affording Trump and his legal team any sort of due process. According to Cipollone, Nadler isn't following past precedent, like during the Clinton impeachment saga. When the Clinton impeachment hearings took place, the president's legal team had two-and-a-half weeks to prepare and allowed the president to have a say in a hearing date. None of those things have been done in this case, Cipollone said.

The White House Counsel slammed the Democrats for the moves they've made thus far, specifically House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff's (D-CA) refusal to allow Trump to participate in closed-door hearings. 

"There, Chairman Schiff attempted to concoct a false narrative through selective citation of the testimony of witnesses of his choosing, after vetting them during closed-door depositions hidden from both the President and the American public," he wrote. "The President was not allowed to present evidence, to call witnesses, to cross examine witnesses, or to even see transcripts until weeks after testimony had been taken, and he was allowed absolutely no participation in the public hearings that followed. Further, witness requests made by Republicans were denied. In addition, certain questioning of the witnesses who did testify was censored by Democrats."

Cipollone pointed out the clear difference between the Nixon and Clinton impeachment proceedings and the Democrats' current impeachment push. In the past, both parties had subpoena powers. In the Trump impeachment inquiry, only Democrats have that power and any Republican requests have been stifled. He argued that this will cause "long term institutional harm."  The announcement comes  after Nadler sent  the White House a letter telling them they have until 5 p.m. EST on December 6th to let the Committee know whether or not Trump's legal counsel will participate in the hearings. The Committee Chairman sent a similar letter to Ranking Member Doug Collins (R-GA) letting him know he has the same deadline to send a list of witnesses to Committee Democrats to review. Although Republicans can issue subpoenas and interrogatories, Nadler has the final say in whether or not they can and will be issued.




Recommended from Townhall



Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Heartland American
1  seeder  Heartland American    one week ago

Nadler sent another letter with a different deadline, something Cipollone said provides absolutely no details for the White House. 

"Again, your letter provided no information whatsoever as to what the schedule will be, what the procedures will be, or what rights, if any, the Committee intends to afford the President," he wrote. "In other words, you have given no information regarding your plans, set arbitrary deadlines, and then demand a response, all to create the false appearance of providing the President some rudimentary process."

Cipollone said the White House would respond further if Nadler provided any further information.

He did, however, blast Nadler for making it seem as though he was affording Trump and his legal team any sort of due process. According to Cipollone, Nadler isn't following past precedent, like during the Clinton impeachment saga. When the Clinton impeachment hearings took place, the president's legal team had two-and-a-half weeks to prepare and allowed the president to have a say in a hearing date. None of those things have been done in this case, Cipollone said.

The White House Counsel slammed the Democrats for the moves they've made thus far, specifically House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff's (D-CA) refusal to allow Trump to participate in closed-door hearings. 

"There, Chairman Schiff attempted to concoct a false narrative through selective citation of the testimony of witnesses of his choosing, after vetting them during closed-door depositions hidden from both the President and the American public," he wrote. "The President was not allowed to present evidence, to call witnesses, to cross examine witnesses, or to even see transcripts until weeks after testimony had been taken, and he was allowed absolutely no participation in the public hearings that followed. Further, witness requests made by Republicans were denied. In addition, certain questioning of the witnesses who did testify was censored by Democrats."

Cipollone pointed out the clear difference between the Nixon and Clinton impeachment proceedings and the Democrats' current impeachment push. In the past, both parties had subpoena powers. In the Trump impeachment inquiry, only Democrats have that power and any Republican requests have been stifled. He argued that this will cause "long term institutional harm."    https://thenewstalkers.com/vic-eldred/group_discuss/7307/white-house-sends-blistering-response-to-nadler-no-we-arent-participating-in-your-bogus-hearings

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Heartland American @1    one week ago

Bogus hearings?

 
 
 
Heartland American
1.1.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @1.1    one week ago

Exactly.  That is what they are.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.1    one week ago

What would you call an inquiry in which the verdict has already been decided?

 
 
 
SteevieGee
1.1.3  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.2    one week ago

Come on Vic, you're smart enough to know that any verdict has to come from the Senate.  You think the Senate has already decided?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @1.1.3    one week ago

Steve, the US Senate didn't create the inquiry based on something the President said. You can't have a conviction without a consensus. Pelosi even told us that impeachment shouldn't go forward without a consensus. This "inquiry" hasn't convinced anyone that what the President said rises to the level of impeachment. The most damning part of it is what Iv'e already said - democrats wanted to go down this road before any witness was ever heard. The manner in which it was done is also damning. Don't believe me?   Just wait until November.

 
 
 
Snuffy
1.1.5  Snuffy  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.4    one week ago

Now Vic,  you know the democrats will just say we heard from the witnesses during the Intel Committee hearings and that should be all that's needed.  Now I'll admit I didn't get to listen to all of the hearings and I didn't read all of the released documents but I didn't see much of anything that leads me to believe that President Trump should be impeached. As an independent it sure seems to be as if this is a group hunting for a crime. I know there will be people on this site that will call me all sorts of names but I've got a thick skin. I'm just tired of this constant fight and wish that Washington would just get back to the business of governing the country.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Snuffy @1.1.5    one week ago
I'm just tired of this constant fight and wish that Washington would just get back to the business of governing the country.

So don't we all, but we have to ultimately confront the left or they will overturn the 2016 election.

 
 
 
JBB
2  JBB    one week ago

This surely seems guilty...

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago

No guilt whatsoever.  No sense in legitimizing the illegitimate by showing for the show trial.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.2  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago

You probably think someone invoking the 5th is guilty, too, right?

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.3  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago

Pretty sure he pled guilty to winning the election back in 2016.

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.3.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.3    one week ago

Guilty as charged.  Thank God.  I can’t imagine  how crappy the last three years would have been had the wicked witch won instead as most assumed she would. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago
This surely seems guilty.

No, this sounds like Nadler is trying to railroad the President.

Nadler is a hack.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.4.1  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4    one week ago

Railroad the 'president'?

LMFAO!

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.1    one week ago

For someone who proudly proclaims they don't read, how can you manage to quote my exact words?

It's a mystery!

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.5  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago

The whole administration is guilty or they would testify.  

Like John says below, if they're not guilty, tRump wouldn't prevent them from testifying.  

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.5.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @2.5    one week ago

Cipollone is a great American. 🇺🇸

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.5.2  Tessylo  replied to  Heartland American @2.5.1    one week ago

Who?

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.5.3  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.5.2    one week ago

Who?

The information you seek is in the article you didn't read.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.5.4  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @2.5.2    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.5.5  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @2.5    one week ago

That’s not the way presumption of innocence works in Red State America.  

 
 
 
cjcold
2.5.6  cjcold  replied to  Heartland American @2.5.1    one week ago

How is it that you find all far right wing criminals to be "great Americans"?

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.5.7  Ronin2  replied to  cjcold @2.5.6    one week ago

The same way the left finds all far wing left criminals to be "great Americans".

See how that works?

Anyone defending this shit show being put on by the Democrats had better buckle in for a rough ride when the next Democratic President takes over and the Republicans control the House.

Hell, the Democrats might even get their wish of a President being impeached before he takes the oath of office if Biden gets elected.

 
 
 
charger 383
3  charger 383    one week ago

I wish he had walked in, said "go pound sand...." and left 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4  JohnRussell    one week ago

They can't argue that Trump is innocent, so they try and make it about everything else. 

If Trump were innocent he wouldnt be preventing the key witnesses from testifying. 

His cult members dont care though. 

 
 
 
Heartland American
4.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago

We are proud to be the deplorables cult.  We know that no high crimes or misdemeanors or any other illegality took place so there’s no reason to show them in the house anything other than the contempt they so richly deserve.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.1.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Heartland American @4.1    one week ago
We are proud to be the deplorables cult.

That says it all right there. Sad.

We know that no high crimes or misdemeanors or any other illegality took place

If that were true the administration would be readily testifying and allowing all the primary witnesses to explain how innocent Trump supposedly is.

there’s no reason to show them in the house anything other than the contempt they so richly deserve.

Well, except for the law and the constitution, but I guess when you're a religious conservative who doesn't give a shit about either, you can twist your reasoning to approve of just about anything.

The hearing are not bogus. Anyone with more than half a brain, a smidgen of civics education and understands the meanings of English words would have watched those hearing's and concluded like the majority of Americans did, that Trump did in fact extort a foreign government for personal political gain. Whether you care or not is just a measure of your American patriotism, with those who don't care proving themselves better friends of Putin and fascism than upholding American laws and our constitution. Those who have decided their partisan opinions are more important than our nation and our constitution are excusing this obviously abhorrent joke of a President as he disrespects our intelligence agencies, gold star families, minorities and millions of liberal and progressive Americans who are no less American than any religious conservative and arguably far more American than those rabid swastika wearing, confederate flag waving Trump supporters we saw in Charlottesville with their tiki torches and MAGA hats chanting "Jews will not replace us!".

There is no question, based on the facts presented during the impeachment hearings, that Trump abused the office of the President for his own personal political gain, it's not really even in question anymore. The only thing left to decide is what to do about it which will set the precedent for future Presidents. With Republicans desperately trying to ignore Trumps obvious wrongdoing, they are setting the precedent for a Democrat President to just openly ask all our foreign allies to investigate any potential political opponent, so who ever is the incumbent will have carte blanche to use the power of the Presidency to intimidate, investigate, disparage and attempt to politically destroy any of their opponents, much like Putin has done in Russia's "democracy in name only" political system. Supporting Trump is supporting a Putin like fascist oligarchy, it's really that simple. If you want a white Christian police state where the white Christian leaders can use the FBI, CIA and Justice department as their own political arms like the KGB of old and the FSB of today, then you will no doubt defend dishonest Donald vociferously. If you want free and fair elections, if you want truth and justice, if you believe every American vote should count and that we are better when we embrace our diversity and strongest when we come together as one people behind a single cause, then you will condemn this criminal President. We saw a glimpse of it briefly after 9/11 when it didn't matter if you were Democrat, Republican, Independent, we were all Americans who were attacked that day. If that happened today I wonder if the Trump religious conservative supporters in rural America would feel the same kind of empathy for the New Yorkers they daily disparage and seem to despise simply because of where they live. I rather doubt we'd see the same kind of reaction, especially if it turned out Putin was behind the attack. Seeing the partisan rhetoric today I believe we'd see the white nationalist conservatives arguing Putin was just doing Gods work destroying the wickedness that New York represents to them. How times have changed.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
4.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago

I see you picked up on the latest bs talking points from the fake news media

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.3  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago

He has much more important things to do John...the business of the nation and the people.

Trump is upholding the Constitution and the law, and the Dems continue to undermine both.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @4.3    one week ago
He has much more important things to do John...the business of the nation and the people.

If Trump were innocent he wouldnt be preventing the key witnesses from testifying. 

You mean he something to do more important than producing any possible evidence of his innocence?  Is there a pole dancer's convention at one of his golf courses this week? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.3.1    one week ago

Really, exactly what is he doing?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4.3.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @4.3.1    one week ago
You mean he something to do more important than producing any possible evidence of his innocence?

Who would he give it to, so far, that would pay any attention? And he doesn't have to prove innocence in the US system. The system has to prove guilt..........beyond a reasonable doubt..................unless something changed over the weekend.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.3.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.3.3    one week ago
Who would he give it to, so far, that would pay any attention?

I don't know, the public?   The Republican members of the impeachment committee? 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.3.5  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Greg Jones @4.3    one week ago
He has much more important things to do John...

The hearings exposed the fact that what's "important" to dishonest Donald is getting re-elected. That's why he was apparently unconcerned with helping Ukraine or getting them to crack down on corruption. All Trump wanted was a public announcement of investigations into Biden and the 2016 debunked Ukraine election meddling (an FSB invented talking point often repeated by our own President) that he could use in his own upcoming election. Either Putin is a Jedi master using a mind trick on Trump, Trump is just really stupid, or Trump is a true Kremlin Manchurian candidate, or perhaps a bit of all three. Mueller wasn't able to prove criminal conspiracy, and everyone who knows Trump says he's simply too stupid to collude, I guess we have to go with Jedi mind trick. "Russia didn't hack your election, it was Ukraine...!".... "Yes, Russia didn't hack our election, Ukraine did it...", "These aren't the IP addresses and mountains of other evidence gathered by US intelligence agencies proving it was Russia that you're looking for, Russia is your friend...", "This isn't the evidence we're looking for, Russia is out friend...". I really hope it isn't a pee tape that Putin has on Trump, I don't think anyone actually wants to see that, but I guess it's existence is far more probably than Putin having Jedi powers.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.3.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @4.3.1    one week ago
Is there a pole dancer's convention at one of his golf courses this week? 

In case you don't know the President of the United States will be in Europe for NATO, a trip which was scheduled over a year ago.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.3.7  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @4.3.1    one week ago

Right now he is talking trash at the NATO summit in England.  He said Macron made a nasty comment about NATO, the same NATO he called obsolete.  Considering how nasty he has been at rally's and on twitter, he has no right to call out someone for one remark.  He is the epitome of kettle/pot.  I bet most of the attendees must be thinking "Doesn't this ahole ever shut up?"

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.3.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.3.7    one week ago

I know one thing - the NATO members are finally starting to pay their fair share. 

It's called a win!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.3.9  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.3.8    one week ago

I never disputed the fact that they should pay more.  My point of contention is him using every opportunity to talk trash.  Remember when he was doing it in France with the graves of the dead as a backdrop?  The man is as uncouth as  it gets.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.3.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.3.9    one week ago
  My point of contention is him using every opportunity to talk trash. 

Are you saying that NATO is immune from criticism?

NATO was created when Joe Stalin and the Soviet Union had been granted a generous sphere of influence in eastern Europe at a time when Europe was still recovering from the devastation of World War II. Over the decades NATO has served the western alliance well, but much has changed over the decades:

Europe was rebuilt via the Marshall Plan.

The Soviet Union has fallen and Germany has been re-united, eastern Europe is free again.

Most of the European nations are part of a common economy which is greater than the economy of Russia.

Most of the European nations have socialist economies with little money set aside for national defense while dependent on the US military & NATO for their security.


It is time for a reevaluation of how the alliance should work. That is not "trash talk."

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.3.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.3.10    one week ago

Not at all.  NATO's house is far from clean.  Again,  my complaint is that it is disgusting that Trump uses these meetings to make it about him and trash talk others.  I just saw a sound byte where he is bitching about Schiff and called him a liar which is laughable considering the vast amount of lies he has told.

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.3.12  Ronin2  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.3.11    one week ago

Don't like the way Trump talks, then don't vote for him. 

As for Trump bitching about Schiff calling him a liar; sometimes the truth slips out of even Trump's mouth. Schiff is a piece of shit. The amount of giant whoppers Schiff has told he has no room to call anyone else a liar. Maybe you can force him to finally release that damning evidence he said he has on Trump for the last two years.

The way Trump talks is not an impeachable offense. If Trump is so hated it should be easy for the Dems to defeat him in a fair and open election. So why are they all scared shitless?

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.3.13  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @4.3.12    one week ago
'As for Trump bitching about Schiff calling him a liar; sometimes the truth slips out of even Trump's mouth.'

That's called projection.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.3.14  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @4.3.13    one week ago

Prove me wrong about Schiff's massive whoppers. All you need to do is get Schiff to release this damning evidence he has been supposedly sitting on for over two years.

Till then Schiff is a lying piece of shit; that is abusing the system to get the results he desires.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.3.15  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @4.3.14    one week ago

No, tRump is the lying sack of shit.

Projection is all you got.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4.3.16  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.3.15    one week ago

Hard to tell from here..........pot? Kettle?jrSmiley_12_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Heartland American
4.3.17  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Ronin2 @4.3.12    one week ago

They are scared because democrats can’t win fair and open elections anymore.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.3.18  Tessylo  replied to  Heartland American @4.3.17    one week ago
'They are scared because democrats can’t win fair and open elections anymore.'

Speaking of projection . . . 

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.4  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago
His cult members dont care though.

Just like the leftist cult members don't care about due process, precedents, or anything else else when it comes to Trump. They have been calling for his impeachment since before he took office. They have broken every rule to try and achieve their objective.

Sorry, but Trump defeating Hillary is not an impeachable offense.

 
 
 
Heartland American
4.4.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Ronin2 @4.4    one week ago

but to them it is....the crime of the century!  

 
 
 
cjcold
4.4.2  cjcold  replied to  Heartland American @4.4.1    one week ago
the crime of the century!

Actually it was/is. 

 
 
 
lib50
5  lib50    one week ago

Impeachment is a constitutional process and the rules are being followed to the letter.  There is nothing illegal, unfair or unconstitutional about this process, including the rules put in place by republicans.  They complained they couldn't call witnesses (not the time in the process during investigations) and now they refuse to.  They won't let witnesses testify.  Trump has committed bribery and extortion and has abused the power of office.  He has used the power and assets of the USA for his own personal political purposes.  If there were ANYTHING to prove his innocence he would be doing it.  He can't because he is guilty.  Everything he is doing is detrimental to the USA.  From the Syria withdrawal to trying to corrupt Ukraine.  And all has benefited Putin. 

Not by accident Trump loves the poorly educated.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1  Tessylo  replied to  lib50 @5    one week ago

Someone on another seed claimed tRump said he liked the 'low information' voters, trying to make up a new narrative.

The 'president' never said 'low information', he said he loved the 'poorly educated'.

 
 
 
Heartland American
5.1.1  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @5.1    one week ago

Then he must really love secular progressives an awful lot...

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.2  lib50  replied to  Heartland American @5.1.1    one week ago

Look up 'poorly' and the context he used it.   Perhaps they are so dense they don't even know when they are being insulted and used.  Information is our friend.  Blind loyalty is not.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.2    one week ago

Just curious--do Democrats NOT love the poorly educated?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.3    one week ago

Perfect. Let's hide and wait for the answer shall we?

jrSmiley_26_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.5  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.3    one week ago

Dems want everybody educated and have the policies to prove it.   Conservatives want to blow up the Dept of Education and cut everything about schools.  Cons love the poorly educated because they are easy to manipulate.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.4    one week ago

It would be rather weird for Democrats NOT to love the poorly educated, seeing as how they make up a sizable part of the Democratic base.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.5    one week ago

Was the question too hard, thus your refusal to answer?

Just curious--do Democrats NOT love the poorly educated?

Please take note--I did NOT ask about Democratic policies or Republican policies. I didn't ask what Democrats want.

The Dept. of Education has been so successful through the years as it has presided over the lowering of our test scores and world rankings in education. /s

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.4    one week ago
Perfect. Let's hide and wait for the answer shall we?

Well, we did get one rather feeble attempt. It was, of course, unresponsive to what was actually asked, though.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  lib50 @5.1.5    one week ago

Look no further than Betsy Devos - who wants to destroy the agency that she was placed to head (she paid for her position).   

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/betsy-devos-christian-schools-vouchers-charter-education-secretary/

Betsy DeVos Wants to Use America’s Schools to Build “God’s Kingdom”

Trump’s education secretary pick has spent a lifetime working to end public education as we know it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.9    one week ago

Do Democrats NOT love the poorly educated?

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.1.4    one week ago
Perfect. Let's hide and wait for the answer shall we?

Apparently the question is harder than we could have imagined!

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.9    one week ago
Look no further than Betsy Devos - who wants to destroy the agency that she was placed to head (she paid for her position). 

How much did she pay, and who received that payment?

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.13  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.12    one week ago

I'm not a democrat and have no idea why you ask me questions are meaningless.  I think their policies show they do care for all the population, not perfectly, not everyone, but overall their policies show they do care about educating everybody.  Now how the hell does that change one thing I said? 

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.14  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.12    one week ago
How much did she pay, and who received that payment?

WTF happened to your freaking bootstraps? 

http://mcfn.org/node/6043/devos-family-made-14-million-in-political-contributions-in-the-last-2-years-alone

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/betsy-devos-just-bought-herself-a-trump-cabinet-position-193072/

$115,000 in personal donations to sitting Republican senators; $950,000 more has flowed in from the DeVos family over the last three-and-a-half decades. And another $8.3 million from the DeVoses has gone to Republican super PACs in the last two election cycles alone. Not cheap! But it got the job done.

She really pays for the republican party to push her into position. Its all easy enough for your to find out much all these people pay for power. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-betsy-devos-donations-republican-senators-confirmation-education-secretary-a7571941.html

Donald Trump's new Education Secretary reportedly donated nearly $900,000 over the years to the Senators who confirmed her into the job. 

Betsy DeVos was a controversial choice for the role and was criticised for her performance before the Senate confirmation committee.

She has previously spoken of her desire to “advance God's kingdom” though the education system. She also candidly admitted that  s he “expects something in return” for her money when it came to political donations. 

Over the years, the Education Secretary has donated almost $ 4 million (£3.2 million) to Mr Trump's Republican Party. 
The vast majority was given in the 2016 election cycle, according to the  Centre for American Progress , although Ms DeVos has contributed to party since 1980.
 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.13    one week ago
I'm not a democrat and have no idea why you ask me questions are meaningless.  I think their policies show they do care for all the population, not perfectly, not everyone, but overall their policies show they do care about educating everybody.  Now how the hell does that change one thing I said?  

Well, for starters, that post was directed at someone else, not you.

If I want to ask you a question, I will do so directly, not through other people.

I didn't claim you were a Democrat, nor did I say that your answer changed anything, so I have no fucking idea what you are going on about.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.14    one week ago
WTF happened to your freaking bootstraps?  

What ever happened to letting the people who were actually ASKED the freaking question to answer for themselves?

I mean, you bitched that I dared ask (because for some lame reason you seemed to think the question was to you) and then you answer it? WTF?

It seems like your links would have featured Trump more prominently, seeing as how he was the one who got to pick the Secretary.

As Secretary, what exactly has De Vos done to get your panties in such a wad? 

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.17  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.16    one week ago

Bootstraps

 
 
 
Heartland American
5.1.18  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.16    one week ago

She supports charter schools and school choice in poor urban neighborhoods. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.17    one week ago

Idiocy.

 
 
 
Heartland American
5.1.21  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.3    one week ago

I wonder how much they really do love themselves?

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  lib50 @5.1.14    one week ago

Her brother is Erik Prince, head of Blackwater, killers for hire.

What a scummy family.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1.23  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.16    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Heartland American
5.1.24  seeder  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.22    one week ago

Ah, guilt by biological association.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.2  Greg Jones  replied to  lib50 @5    one week ago

Nothing you say can be considered to be the truth or relevant. You state as facts what can only be considered as allegations...false ones at that.

 
 
 
katrix
5.2.1  katrix  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago

Speaking of truth - where's that damning IG report you and others kept swearing was going to throw all these Democrats in jail?

You state as facts what can only be considered as allegations...false ones at that. While projecting your bad habit onto others.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.2.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  katrix @5.2.1    one week ago
where's that damning IG report you and others kept swearing was going to throw all these Democrats in jail?

Due out December 9th. Patience weed hopper.......................

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.2    one week ago

Yeah we've been waiting for those indictments for a long long long long long long long long long long long long time, at least three years now.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.2.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @5.2.3    one week ago
Yeah we've been waiting for those indictments for a long long long long long long long long long long long long time, at least three years now.

No, no you haven't. Are you afraid it's going to do just the opposite as the Mueller report which was nothing you waited two plus years for? Patience..................

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.4    one week ago

Yes, yes I have.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.2.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @5.2.5    one week ago

When was the IG investigation started?

 
 
 
lib50
5.2.7  lib50  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago

[DELETE]   I haven't lied about anything and you are just projecting.  You believe Trump or at least push his bullshit, so don't try to pretend you can even tell the difference.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.2.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  katrix @5.2.1    one week ago

So far, the only ones going to jail are R's.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.2.9  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.6    one week ago

Well I won't hold my breath for those indictments either.  

 
 
 
bbl-1
6  bbl-1    one week ago

Trump can't answer questions or define his reasoning.  He doesn't know how.

Besides, Trump is 'the Russian puppet'.

 
 
 
It Is ME
7  It Is ME    one week ago

Trump doesn't have to do anything !

These hearings are nothing about "Facts", they are just about "Feelings".

As Representative (Kentucky Fried Chicken guy) just noted in this latest "WHITE Democrat Lynching", It "APPEARS" that President Trump did something wrong. 

That's been the entirety of this "Liberal" hearing. If it "Appears to be", it "Must Be" !

Even Schifty Schiff in his "Media" announcement before the Nadler Circus reconvenes said.... He's not sure ….. still !

 
 
 
It Is ME
7.1  It Is ME  replied to  It Is ME @7    one week ago

Democrats and their fucking "Feelings".

Now.… Representative Tim Deutch (douche) is announcing his dads grandfather fought in WWII (The Ardennes) and shed Blood for this country, as to why he thinks Trump should be impeached ! He's doing a great job "Leading" the "Academic 3", on what they should speak on.....but asked NO question of the "Academic 3". Democrats "Avoid" Professor Turley when "Crying" to the other "3".

 
 
 
Tessylo
8  Tessylo    one week ago

They are about facts, not feelings.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @8    one week ago
They are about facts, not feelings.  

Show us ! jrSmiley_36_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  It Is ME @8.1    one week ago

It's liberalism by definition..........

"Liberalism - Feelings over intellect disguised as the latter".

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.2  It Is ME  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.1    one week ago
"Liberalism - Feelings over intellect disguised as the latter".

ADD:

"I FEEL What's yours....MUST be mine too !"

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
9  Paula Bartholomew    one week ago

Fine, don't cooperate.  But when you throw away the chance to present any testimony or proof and get busted, don't come crying to us.

 
 
 
It Is ME
9.1  It Is ME  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @9    one week ago
Fine, don't cooperate.  But when you throw away the chance to present any testimony or proof and get busted, don't come crying to us.

When did this country "Change" to "Guilty until Proven innocent" ?jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online




Sunshine
lady in black
Nerm_L
JohnRussell
Dismayed Patriot
jungkonservativ111
Old Hermit
Krishna
lib50


26 visitors