Well, according to Michale, he spent 25 years in law enforcement and only worked as an MP, which sounded impossible for both claims to be true until I realized what he’s been trying to tell us this whole time... He’s a crossing guard for a school on base!

*laughs*

Also, I feel bad for the poor printer tasked with making Chaz’s business cards!

Oh, I wouldn't worry about Chaz's business cards since the name you have been bestowed makes his look tiny in comparison:

Our Personal Aide-de-Camp the Lord of the Privy Council and Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter the Right and Honourable Royal Highness Russ

'Tis a mouthful, for sure. :)

Okay, my sides are hurting from laughter. Mike just informed our Lord High Treasurer His Grace the Right Honourable Charles Brown, Esquire that a "home invasion" is a burglary.

Well, according to Michale, he spent 25 years in law enforcement and only worked as an MP, which sounded impossible for both claims to be true until I realized what he’s been trying to tell us this whole time... He’s a crossing guard for a school on base!

Also, I feel bad for the poor printer tasked with making Chaz’s business cards!

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/470291-trump-claims-ivanka-created-14-million-jobs

It's like the GOP and BLOTUS -- Big Liar of the United States -- don't care one iota how stupid a whole bunch of them are making all of them appear to everyone else. *laughs*

Absolutely correct, all rifle ammo more potent than rimfire cartridges would always be FAR more deadly than shot shells.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit let stand an earlier ruling against Donald Trump that affirmed Congress’s investigative authority.

Winning!

You may be correct. Although I have fired both "Birdshot" and "Buckshot" many time i have never actually fired either through a wall. But the point I was trying to make is that no shotgun blast has the ability to penetrate walls and do collateral damage as a rifle bullet can. I have actually repaired a house that was shot up with an assault rifle (no one was home) and can attest to their ability to penetrate walls and do damage.

Here's a video demonstrating your point (00 buckshot goes through 17 layers of drywall):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6clay9pFaw

They've also scheduled a deposition for Mark Sandy, an official working in the Office of Management and Budget. Mulvaney will be so glad to hear this. *laughs*

You guys are contorting yourselves over something that amounts to nothing more than political theater, and Trump will unfortunately survive intact.

If you really understand the term "buckshot", you are totally wrong, but I'm guessing you are defining the term to mean all lead pellets.

Actually, shot pellets No. 2 and smaller should probably be referred to as 'birdshot', and the other term should be designated for the much larger pellets normally used by deer hunters (shooting 'bucks', as in 'male deer'). True "buckhot" would actually penetrate multiple sheetrock walls.

Of course you are correct it is possible for a shotgun blast to penetrate a wall but com paired to a high velocity rifle the energy to do damage is far less. Buck shot in a 3" shell penetrating a standard Sheetrock wall would probably not be lethal to someone on the other side. Whereas a bullet from a semi auto rifle could go through several such walls and easily kill someone two or three walls away.

Dunno what to tell you..

I blame your sheer mind-numbing and unabashed demonstrable ignorance.

Maybe my chrisweigant.com dashboard is config'ed differently than yours.. Maybe I have options that you do not... Maybe you have options that I do not..

So your claim is that Chris's website somehow displays the numbering totally different for you?

But the fact is, comment #123 is my comment to JL...

Because in your fantasy, Chris's website displays totally different numbers than it does for every single other person?

Once again, the queen bee of the nitpicks.. :D

You couldn't refute the facts I posted so you began whining like a toddler about the numbering... and that makes you both the nitpick and the lying dipshit. Congratulations.

p.s. A "home invasion" isn't necessarily a "burglary," and a burglary isn't necessarily a "home invasion."

I could explain it to you if I thought you were capable of grasping reality so I won't be doing that. Idiot!

I basically agree with you, but your firearms knowledge may be lacking something. Depending on the load, shotshell ammo can definitely penetrate walls.

You DO realize that a Home Invasion is a burglary, right??

A home invasion would seem to require that the burglary takes place in a home, and that the occupants are there to use the gun (assuming they have one).

Not every burglary is a burglary that takes place at a home.

Not every burglary that takes place at a home involves a confrontation between the burglar(s) and the occupant(s) of the home.

So just stating the total number of burglaries that occur in a year does not support your statistic as regards home invasions; anymore than noting that there were 1,247,321 violent crimes in 2017 does (although obviously a home invasion is a violent crime).

As I said, you people nit pick the periphery and believe that THAT somehow negates the entire point..

Well, to your point, I think you are overstating the actual occurrence by about two orders of magnitude (i.e., by a factor of 100). That seems at least relevant to your argument.

But more importantly, I'm just noting that as usual, you are still just pulling numbers out of thin air and claiming they are "facts".

Do not miss the fake cop's statement at 160:

You DO realize that a Home Invasion is a burglary, right?? ~ Mike the Fake Cop

Okay, my sides are hurting from laughter. Mike just informed our Lord High Treasurer His Grace the Right Honourable Charles Brown, Esquire that a "home invasion" is a burglary.

It just doesn't get any stupider than that! :D

Looking forward to reading CW's assessment in the morning..

Hope it's long on factual accuracy and reality (Democrats got stomped by Senile Mueller Part II) and very VERY short on HHPTDS (TRUMP IS TOAST PREDICTION #4,943,916)...

Here's hoping.. :D

You DO realize that a Home Invasion is a burglary, right??

Heh! Because no one ever entered a residence with anything other than the intent to burglarize it?

Are you seriously this stupid, Mike?

Kind of obvious to anyone with reading comprehension skills, and lying to prove a lie only proves you're an inveterate liar.

Dunno what to tell you..

Maybe my chrisweigant.com dashboard is config'ed differently than yours.. Maybe I have options that you do not... Maybe you have options that I do not..

But the fact is, comment #123 is my comment to JL...

Once again, the queen bee of the nitpicks.. :D

You DO realize that a Home Invasion is a burglary, right??

I understand how a NON-LEO such as yourself might be confused..

How does that in any way support the statistic "there are 1.3 million home invasions per year"?

Yer right.. I DID make a decimal point error..

The correct stat is 1.03 million per year..

Suppose you know 50 people, living in distinct households. That means that each and every year, the odds of at least one person you know having endured a "home invasion" in that year should be roughly 50/50. That's not what I experience. Is that what you experience?

And does ANY of that address my point of why Democrats want to disarm law abiding Americans if the chance to defend themselves???

No, it does not..

As I said, you people nit pick the periphery and believe that THAT somehow negates the entire point..

Let me know when you want to address the point and not play semantical games..

The stat is valid.. You disputing the fact is not relevant to the FACT you have nothing to refute the point that the fact supports..

You gave as source for your "fact" a link to a web page that doesn't contain the words "home invasion". How does that in any way support the statistic "there are 1.3 million home invasions per year"?

Furthermore, just as a reality check, there are about 130 million households in the US. So you are suggesting that 1 in 100 homes gets a "home invasion" each year.

Suppose you know 50 people, living in distinct households. That means that each and every year, the odds of at least one person you know having endured a "home invasion" in that year should be roughly 50/50. That's not what I experience. Is that what you experience?

Actually I quoted #123...

Actually, you quoted [125] and claimed it was [123]:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/11/12/impeachment-curveball-in-the-senate/#comment-149200

[123] Michale wrote:

"Blaa blaaa blaaa, whine, whine, whine, waa, waa, waa..."
-Victoria

NO FACTS to support any quid pro quo..

All Democrats have is opinions and hearsay..

It's THAT simple...

[Wednesday, November 13th, 2019 at 12:30 UTC]

*

[125] Michale wrote:

No Quid = Ukraine received the military aid....

No Quo = Ukraine did not open any Biden investigation..

Sorry, JL..

You can't have Quid Pro Quo if there is no Quid and no Quo...

[Permalink] [Wednesday, November 13th, 2019 at 12:33 UTC]

Kind of obvious to anyone with reading comprehension skills, and lying to prove a lie only proves you're an inveterate liar.

Taylor is obvious disgruntled that he got pushed out of power in Ukraine..

Taylor didn't get "pushed out of power." Taylor is a Trump administration appointee and career foreign service official who was made the interim chargé d’affaires to Kiev in May when the previous ambassador was forced out of that position under pressure from Giuliani and Donald Trump, Jr. in a campaign to smear her by the President of the United States so he could install his own person... Taylor.

Taylor is a West Point graduate and a decorated Vietnam War veteran. He has served under every president since Ronald Reagan and has held several nonpartisan diplomatic posts including in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Jerusalem.

WOW I really have space in your head!! :D

You're posting; I'm responding. Try not to get your knickers in a twist over it or your head will explode to discover the fact that you troll this forum damn near every day obsessing over your hatred of Democrats and whining about anyone who isn't worshiping at the alter of the cult to which you obviously belong.

Poor Mike, nobody else will suck at the alter he clearly worships. *laughs*

Yer even talking about me to others... :D

Obviously pointing and laughing at your incessant whining, moaning, and your ever-present frantic sucking... guilty as charged.

Keep posting your shit; you will likely get some responses. This ain't rocket science, dipshit.

Do you talk to your BF (when it has batteries) about me too??

When did you stop beating your wife?

Democrats got their asses handed to them today..

Not a SINGLE fact to support **ANY** Impeachable conduct...

Anyone who says different either didn't watch the hearing or is nothing but a Party slave...

ACK!!!!

Let that read:

Why are Democrats so hysterically desperate to NOT call the Democrat Plant/Stooge AKA WhistleBlower??

I mean, everyone already knows that the Democrat Stooge/Plant is Eric Ciaramella...

What are Democrats so afraid of???

Actually I quoted #123...

But I know you have a problem with facts.. :D

Yea???

Fact... yes, definitely, exactly what I said, and then I quoted 123 wherein JL is not mentioned but I am mentioned.

[123] Michale wrote:
No Quid = Ukraine received the military aid....

No Quo = Ukraine did not open any Biden investigation..

Sorry, ***JL***.

You can't have Quid Pro Quo if there is no Quid and no Quo...

You quoted [125] there, Mike, and called it [123].

Thank you so much for that demonstration of lying GOP useful idiot tricks. If the GOP and their useful idiots had any facts in their favor, they'd have no need to lie and make shit up and obstruct justice by telling career diplomats to ignore Congressional subpoenas. *laughs*

During questioning by GOP counsel Steve Castor at the first public hearing of the House impeachment inquiry, Kent was asked about the Ukrainian investigation into Burisma Holdings and why it was closed.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/impeachment-witness-urges-burisma-probe-testifies-to-concern-of-hunter-biden-conflict

Even the Democrat's own witness says that Burisma and Hunter Biden should be investigated...

WOW I really have space in your head!! :D

BBBWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yer even talking about me to others... :D

Do you talk to your BF (when it has batteries) about me too??

BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I thought it was quid pro quo?? ~ Moron Mike

Bribery involves "something for something" so Mike's argument over semantics is dead on arrival.

If it's JUST the phone call that is at issue here (Despite Victoria denying that) then why don't Democrats vote on Articles Of Impeachment right now?? ~ Flailing Mike

Mike is apparently ignorant of "due process." You know "due process"... what the useful idiots whined like toddlers about and now they've been granted... and yet, they're still whining about process. Pounding the table because they've got no defense of Trump... kind of obvious too.

Mike has bought "all in" to the right-wingnut dipshit theory that the entire impeachment is about one phone call that was made by Trump to Zelensky.

I see the obvious problem here, and I would wager you and everyone else here on the forum sees it too.

Mike's head is obviously so far up Trump's ass that he ran into Sean Hannity. *laughs*

As opposed to Schiff-head's imaginary President Trump phone call???

Of course you don't.. :D

just verifying that when you give a surprising statistic, as you did in this case, it's safe to assume that you just made it up out of thin air.

You know what happens when you make an assumption??

You make an ass out of U.. and umption.. :D

The stat is valid.. You disputing the fact is not relevant to the FACT you have nothing to refute the point that the fact supports..

Just what Dumbocrats need!!

ANOTHER Dumbocrat candidate!!!

BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Do you have a question on the main point of the discussion??

Nope; just verifying that when you give a surprising statistic, as you did in this case, it's safe to assume that you just made it up out of thin air.

Yet nowhere is his name on it while mine demonstrably is.

Yea???

[123] Michale wrote:
No Quid = Ukraine received the military aid....

You can't have Quid Pro Quo if there is no Quid and no Quo...

emphasis mine...

Once again, you PROVE how wrong you always are... :D

BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Russ says that the phone call is ALL that is needed to "prove" President Trump guilty...

Victoria says that the phone call is not even important to find President Trump guilty..

You people can't even get yer own stories straight!!!

I find that very VERY funny.. :D

"Blaa blaaa blaaa, whine, whine, whine, waa, waa, waa..."
-Victoria

NO FACTS to support any quid pro quo..

All Democrats have is opinions and hearsay..

It's THAT simple...

#123 was a comment to Joshua...

Yet nowhere is his name on it while mine demonstrably is.

It's obvious why you can't speak intelligently about anything..

And yet, look where your "legal expertise" landed you. That's priceless... and public record. :)

I thought it was quid pro quo??

Taylor wasn’t part of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky, but that doesn’t matter because all that is needed is Trump’s own words to impeach him.

Yea??? Then you don't NEED these hearing, right??

If it's JUST the phone call that is at issue here (Despite Victoria denying that) then why don't Democrats vote on Articles Of Impeachment right now??

If it's so cut and dried, why even bother with hearings??

Because you know that nothing in the call is impeachable..

It's THAT simple..

What Taylor does provide us with is a first person account of how Trump used Giuliani and Sondland to send the message to the Ukrainians that without Zelensky going on CNN and saying that Biden and Clinton’s campaign were being investigated, Ukraine would not get their aid nor a meeting at the White House. He spent his entire career in the service of our country, and he is able to explain why Trump’s actions are so damaging to our national security.

Republicans desperation is so obvious that it is almost comedic how outlandish their attacks are. Jordan doesn’t think Trump did anything wrong, but then again he thought it was OK for his wrestlers to be sexually assaulted by their team doctor. He did nothing to protect his wrestlers, so it’s not that surprising that he won’t do anything to protect our Constitution.

If Trump did nothing wrong, then he would have no reason to block this investigation at every turn — he’d hand over the complete transcript of the phone call with Zelensky instead of offering the transcript of a completely unrelated phone call that isn’t the subject of this hearing.

Seriously, Trump’s offer for that unrelated transcript is like a person accused of filming themselves committing a crime offering to allow the police see home movies that they had shot months earlier, but refusing to turn over the tape of them committing the crime.

Taylor is obviously a Trump/America hater..

Mr Kent seems to be an honorable man and a patriotic American...

I can't see how ANYONE can say that this hearing was a plus for Dumbocrats...

They are flailing.. Pathetically flailing..

BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No wonder he is such a weak candidate for POTUS... :D

#123 was a comment to Joshua...

You can't even get the facts HERE straight..

It's obvious why you can't speak intelligently about anything..

Thank you for your concession. You can't refute the facts.

It's THAT simple...

Your pathetic spin is definitely infinitely SIMPLE.

The impeachment was announced before the transcript of the phone call was released and is based on the ICIG's findings through questioning of people identified by the whistleblower, and your pathetic attempts to spin the events of several years into a single phone call are nonsensical, asinine, and laughable.

No wonder he crashed and burned as a presidential candidate.. :D

He doesn't appear to be the senile ignorant moron that Taylor is..

Of course, ya'all don't really care about Ukraine security..

No Quo = Ukraine did not open any Biden investigation..

Sorry, JL..

You can't have Quid Pro Quo if there is no Quid and no Quo...

You can't have any Quid Pro Quo if there is no Quid or Quo..

It's really that simple..

NO FACTS to support any quid pro quo..

All Democrats have is opinions and hearsay..

It's THAT simple...

You can call me any names you wish..

No shit, dipshit.

It's par for the course dealing with you..

Said the forum troll who spams this board full of majority Democrats near daily while hurling insult after insult constantly and without abatement. Pot meet kettle.

But the simple FACT is neither Kent nor Taylor has ANY first hand knowledge of the phone call that started this whole faux impeachment coup..

The simple FACT is that only in the simple minds of the seriously ignorant spoon-fed rubes should this issue that involves multiple months of face-to-face meetings and direct communication via multiple phone calls and emails that involve multiple people in the Trump administration and multiple others not in the Trump administration be characterized as a single phone call impeachment.

It's just pure uladulterated dumbfucking demonstrable ignorance to keep whining that this impeachment is limited to a single phone call. The phone call didn't happen in a vacuum, moron, and withholding funds in order to bribe a foreign nation to announce an investigation into your political rival is an infinitely impeachable offense.

You begged for impeachment. It's here.

THIS one phone call is the BASIS for the Democrats' actions..

Incorrect. The whistleblower's complaint and its subsequent coverup by the Trump administration and all the information contained therein was the catalyst for the impeachment. Pelosi announced the impeachment after Trump acknowledged that he urged the Ukrainian president to investigate former vice president Biden, his political opponent.

The actions of the Trump presidency have revealed the dishonorable fact of the president’s betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections. Therefore, today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. ~ Nancy Pelosi, September 24, 2019

Nancy Pelosi announced the impeachment before the so-called "transcript" was ever released by Trump and the administration and their useful idiots began flailing miserably in their attempts to spin the entire issue into a single phone call.

How far up your ass does your head have to be? Rhetorical question.

Taylor and Kent have NO first hand knowledge of that phone call...

Who gives a shit. They have firsthand knowledge of all kinds of other stuff despite your ridiculous nonsensical lying false claims to the contrary. The lies are all yours and the dipshits who keep insisting this entire issue is about one phone call when it obviously isn't. That's just the GOP spin invented for rubes and morons, and you're obviously "all in" on the reeking stupidity.

Democrats are going home tonight shaking their heads and asking how they could be so stoopid!!! :D

BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Democrats go on and on about how bad it was that the military aid was delayed.. On how Ukraine TOTALLY SUFFERS from that aid delayed..

If Dumbocrats REALLY believe that, then why haven't they condemned to Odumbo Administration for NOT GIVING ANY OFFENSIVE AID TO UKRAINE AT ALL!???

So, Odumbo refuses ALL military aid to Ukraine and Democrats are FINE with that...

But President Trump allegedly holds up a single shipment and Democrats lose their frakin' minds!

Ahhhh The hypocrisy!!!

That's the message from Schiff-head's first public hearing.. :D

ANYONE who thinks this is working out GOOD for the Democrats either is not watching the hearing or is definitely a Party slave... :D

I am gonna have a FIELD DAY!!!!! :D

This is basically the worst of the Kavanaugh hearings and the WORST of the Mueller hearing combined!! :D

President Trump is gonna win re-election in a landslide!!! :D

Of course, Schiff-head has NO FACTS to support the accusation..

Par for the course for Schiff-head and the Dumbocrats..

He CAN'T admit he was wrong...

Which is kinda funny since this who faux impeachment coup is ABOUT the President Of The United States..

There ya go.. No quid pro quo....

NO IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE in the phone call.....

It's that simple...

You gave a link purporting to support your assertion that there were 1.3 million home invasions per year, but there's no instance of the words "home invasion" on that page.

Do you have a question on the main point of the discussion??

No??

Of course you don't...

:D

"Mr Taylor, were you on the call with President Trump and President Zelensky!?"

"No"

Hearsay.. Opinions That's all Taylor and Kent have... Not a SINGLE FIRST PERSON connection to the phone call that is the ENTIRE basis for Democrats faux impeachment coup...

You gave a link purporting to support your assertion that there were 1.3 million home invasions per year, but there's no instance of the words "home invasion" on that page.

Nunes made a huge mistake when he quoted Andrey Artemenko since the Trump administration met with Artemenko in 2017 to negotiate the dropping of sanctions on Russia.

So the Ignorant Tool Devin Nunes just opened that door. I do hope there is followup on that. :)

Someone shut this down.. Jordan is DECIMATING Taylor!

Jordan is ripping the SHIT out of Taylor!!! :D

LOVE IT!!!!

You can call me any names you wish.. It's par for the course dealing with you..

But the simple FACT is neither Kent nor Taylor has ANY first hand knowledge of the phone call that started this whole faux impeachment coup..

THIS one phone call is the BASIS for the Democrats' actions..

Taylor and Kent have NO first hand knowledge of that phone call...

This is fact that all your name-calling will not erase...

The republican prosecutor has a sleazy quality.

He's the living embodiment of how the rubes describe Schiff. How pathetic is that?

The gist I got from the morning session is that this Kent and Taylor guys had potato chips up their asses because President Trump wasn't doing things the way that THESE guys felt things should be done..

But you're an idiot who keeps claiming there is nothing but hearsay when the fact is that testimony regarding face-to-face meetings/communication and communication between two individuals from one to another are "hearsay" so you've proven over and over that you have no idea what you're talking about.

This is nothing but a policy dispute..

Opinions are like assholes. Also: Testimony wherein POTUS will withhold funds unless an announcement is made by a foreign nation that your political rivals are being investigated isn't "nothing but a policy dispute" because bribery isn't "a policy dispute."

So, these two clowns weave a story based on nothing but hearsay and opinions..

Face-to-face meetings, direct telephone conversations, and emails aren't "hearsay," dumpfuck.

The indisputable FACT of the matter is that neither Taylor NOR Kent have ANY First Hand knowledge of the Trump/Zelensky phone call that prompted this faux impeachment coup..

Moron Mike keeps insisting that this issue involves only one phone call. Meanwhile, even the GOP questioner is asking questions about other relevant issues while Mike prattles on and on about his phone call of unspecified date like a flailing moron.

NOT A SINGLE FIRST HAND account of this call..

It takes a special kind of stupid to keep insisting this issue that occurred over the course of multiple months involves a single phone call. Carry on in your flailing, dipshit.

So far, ALL we have is hearsay and opinions..

So far, you keep lying about hearsay, and your opinion that the events of several months should be limited to questioning about one phone call are laughable. The GOP lawyer is asking questions not limited to your fantasy... try to keep up, dumbfuck.

SPIT IT OUT.. Jeezus!!

"Ta Ta Ta Ta TODAY, JUNIOR!!!"
-Adam Sandler, BILLY MADISON

This is nothing but jealousy..

Yea.. You said the same thing about Rachel Mitchell..

Your bias is well documented... :D

It's their defining characteristic :D

It's almost sad to watch..

This is nothing but a policy dispute..

So, these two clowns weave a story based on nothing but hearsay and opinions..

The indisputable FACT of the matter is that neither Taylor NOR Kent have ANY First Hand knowledge of the Trump/Zelensky phone call that prompted this faux impeachment coup..

NOT A SINGLE FIRST HAND account of this call..

So far, ALL we have is hearsay and opinions..

NO relevant facts at all..

Mike
86

But hay.. I'll play your immature game, Victoria.

The idea that this is an impeachment over a single phone call is the right-wingnut "immature game," ignorant rube.

What other phone call do Democrats want to impeach President Trump over..

This isn't just about phone calls, you dumbfucking idiot, but it's obvious you've bought "all in" to the right-wingnut conspiracy theory. The GOP is going with the "Russia didn't interfere in our election because it was Ukraine." Trump is Putin's bitch... always has been and always will be.

You claim there are other phone calls that are impeachable..

I claimed it wasn't about one phone call; the other shit is your typical invented bullshit wherein you lie and mischaracterize a poster's words... same shit, different day... same old circular bullshit from a flailing lying ignorant gullible right-wingnut marching in lockstep dipshit. *laughs*

But hay.. I'll play your immature game, Victoria.

The idea that this is an impeachment over a single phone call is the right-wingnut "immature game," ignorant rube.

What other phone call do Democrats want to impeach President Trump over..

This isn't just about phone calls, you dumbfucking idiot, but it's obvious you've bought "all in" to the right-wingnut conspiracy theory. The GOP is going with the "Russia didn't interfere in our election because it was Ukraine." Trump is Putin's bitch... always has been and always will be.

We know the one..

You claim there are other phone calls that are impeachable..

What are those.

Put up or shut up, Victoria.. :D

BBBWWAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Oh really?? SO, it's YER claim now that the Trump/Zelensky phone call is not the issue here??

No, dumbfuck. It's my claim now that the phone call isn't the only thing at issue like you seem to keep suggesting with your incessant whining about a phone call of unspecified date on your part.

But he **WASN'T** on the ONE SINGLE CALL that prompted this entire faux impeachment coup..

Thank you for that admission that you've bought "all in" to the ridiculous idea that this issue is limited to a single phone call; that makes you an admitted rube. Your Orange Worship has stated he is going to release a "transcript" regarding another phone call.

Trump's own appointed Acting Ambassador to Ukraine's testimony is relevant no matter how many times you whine and stamp your feet that it isn't. Full stop.

You really are this stupid every single day. Trump has admitted to doing this and said he'd do it again. Can't wait to hear the dipshits like you in their infinite ignorance explaining away those multiple admissions.

The physics is simple. The higher the building, the wider the foundation. There is no higher constitutional structure than the impeachment of a sitting president and, for that reason, an impeachment must have a wide foundation in order to be successful. The Ukraine controversy is not such a foundation, and Democrats are building a structurally unsound case that will be lucky to make it to the Senate before collapsing.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/470217-are-democrats-building-a-collapsible-impeachment

These faux impeachment coup is going to collapse..

Sooner rather than later..

The *ONLY* relevant fact that has been established is that neither of these 2 yahoos have ANY first hand knowledge of the Trump/Zelenski call...

What other phone call do Democrats want to impeach President Trump over..

We know the one..

You claim there are other phone calls that are impeachable..

What are those.

Put up or shut up, Victoria.. :D

BBBWWAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Also of note, one does not have to commit a crime in order to be impeached so that's just superfluous nonsensical posturing on Mike's part.

For a guy who prolifically spams this forum on a regular basis with nothing but post upon post containing right-wingnut conspiracy theory bullshit, it's comical to watch him flailing and whining about the time and all the "talk talk talk." *laughs*

At the 2 hr mark..

NOTHING but opinions and hearsay and not a single relevant fact that indicates a crime was committed..

Two things:

* Liar
* Liar

There were multiple phone calls, idiot. This issue isn't just about your one phone call of unspecified date that you keep whining about.

Oh really?? SO, it's YER claim now that the Trump/Zelensky phone call is not the issue here??

BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH

Taylor was on multiple phone calls and in multiple meetings with witnesses.

But he **WASN'T** on the ONE SINGLE CALL that prompted this entire faux impeachment coup..

Is that not factually accurate??

You are REALLY slacking this morning, Victoria.. Yer brain, sluggish at best, is now vapor locked.. :D

Yer really not THIS stoopid normally..

Probably you should take a break.. Maybe roll around outside or something...

Justice Ginsburg Misses Supreme Court Arguments With Stomach Bug
https://news.yahoo.com/justice-ginsburg-misses-supreme-court-151618343.html

Looks like President Trump better ready his 3rd SCOTUS pick.. :D

NONE of which means that Taylor has FIRST HAND knowledge of the Trump/Zelensky phone call..

There were multiple phone calls, idiot. This issue isn't just about your one phone call of unspecified date that you keep whining about.

Taylor was NOT on the call.. Therefore he has NO FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE of the call..

Which call, dipshit? This issue is about more than one phone call of unspecified date. Pay attention.

You feeling OK, Victoria?? Yer usually not THIS stupid and moronic..

I'm fine, asshole. Of note, you are stupid enough to claim that this issue is only about a single phone call that you won't specify the date and ignorant enough to claim that Taylor's testimony and emails directly with Sondland are hearsay. Face-to-face meetings and direct emails aren't hearsay. Taylor was on multiple phone calls and in multiple meetings with witnesses. Try to keep up.

NOTHING but opinions and hearsay and not a single relevant fact that indicates a crime was committed..