That’s a bit of a rude question. If you want a non rude reply, you must ask respectfully. Just thought you should know. 
The Senate is vindicating him…forever. 
1 Like
Standard Operating Procedure
If you say so.
I know so. The proof is in the posting history
I’m such a baaad man. Y’all must be appalled. 
I never said anything of the kind nor do I think so. Ive just noticed a very distinct pattern of going personal in one thread while at the same time playing the victim in another
1 Like
Not really.
But I embrace my cynicism.
I can never be disappointed…only pleasantly surprised.
What would he say that we don’t already know?
We already know with 100% certainty that Ukraine aid has been released. We also know that there has been no public announcement by Ukraine of any investigation. We have the transcript from the call and we know exactly what was said.
Thus there has been nothing to this story whatsoever. Even if there had been a real quid pro quo, that is something prior administrations have done with no repercussion. But of course this is Trump and suddenly it is now a problem.
We are also almost certain that there were discussions amongst administration officials about some sort of quid pro quo. Trump was probably involved in those type of discussion. Bolton will likely bolster those revelations. But once again we know with certainty that there was no follow-up.
So where does that leave us?
For good reason, throwing ideas around in the executive branch should remain privileged. With all prior administrations that was the case. But once again, with Trump nothing is sacred. Everything is fair game.
DEMs planned to impeach Trump from the get go. For what? No reason in particular, just pure hatred of the man. There really is that much hatred and animosity from DEMs. They continue to try and undo the 2016 election.
The Senate refused to participate in the circus freak show DEMs are putting on, as they should.
2 Likes
What we all know now is that the Republicans did have witnesses in the House of Reps impeachment inquiry/hearing.
It is interesting that there are reports an attempt to undo a Senatorial election purely on the basis that the Senator in question voted for a witness to appear at the Senate impeachment trial of D Trump. Making it more interesting is there doesn’t appear to be the same backlash against the other Republican Senator who voted in favour of a witness to appear at Trump’s trial.
Republicans were not allowed to call witnesses of their choosing. No matter how many times you claim otherwise won’t change that simple fact.
Romney has a real visceral hatred of Trump. Susan Collins doesn’t. Two different animals altogether.
I’m not sure, but from what he’s already said, I can’t wait to find out!
Think about it. We know that a quid pro quo didn’t occur. That is a fact.
So what else could he possibly say that we don’t already know or suspect? Let’s assume he confirms what we already suspect. Quid pro quo was discussed and Trump participated. So what??
Administration officials have every right to discuss anything and everything in private. That’s called executive privilege. Only in a LIB bizzaro world does a President get impeached for invoking executive privilege.
If Bolton is harmless, then why won’t the President let him testify? Because that would be breaking historical precedent. Its as simple is that.
1 Like
It all boils down to this, the Democrats have assumed what they think Trump’s motives were, when he asked Zelensky to “look into” Biden’s braggadocios use of $1 billion in US aid to fire of Shokin. The Democrats refused to take into account Trump’s stated motivations.
They have assumed there must have been one or more prerequisites placed on Ukraine before they could get the aid, even though every other nation had it’s foreign aid on hold as well, and there has never been any documented proof to back up their assumptions.
And they impeached him with their presumptions.
Witnesses that the Republicans wanted did appear during the House of Reps impeachment inquiry/hearing. That is the irrefutable fact.
From what I have read it won’t save Collins.
Seems your wrong in trying to compare the two. It is the actual voters in Utah that are trying to impeach Romney. Not the national GOP party.
As for the difference between Romney and Collins maybe you need to get better informed about what the difference is between the two and the people who voted them into office.
Where in my post did I say that it was the “national GOP party”?
Do you contend that Collins is not in trouble winning in November, 2020?
The actual voters who elected Romney are trying to recall him. Not people that did not vote for him. Big difference between actual voters and elected members from all states.
I said you need to learn why there is a difference between Romney and Collins. Their voters. The actual people who voted them into office have vastly different views.
I did not say who was trying to undo Romney’s election; I merely said that there was an attempt to do so. I observed that there was a difference in reaction between Romney and Collins voting for Bolton to appear as a witness.
Well said. Well said indeed. No need to give the House freak show any semblance of legitimacy.
1 Like
