The "Whistleblower"

[Rightguide]

I admit, the likelihood of you ever getting hired by an established law firm was most likely negligible.

You strike me as the type who was forced to hang his own shingle outside out of necessity.

Judging strictly from your rhetorical skillz here, I doubt you spent much time in a courtroom itself and even less time on the winning side of a verdict.

Yet you can't even figure out the bribery statute.

 

[Conager]

At some point, they're going to have to either draw up articles of impeachment and vote on them or get off the pot. I can't see them baling at this point because they have thrown around the word impeachment far too often, even though at this point nothing that they've done has anything to do directly with an actual impeachment proceeding. These are just hearings with even more restrictive one-sided rules than usual designed to get sound bites out in front of the American public hoping to push those favorability numbers down and pro impeachment numbers up. So far it's not working.

But let's say that they actually do have the numbers for people in pro-trump districts to vote for some article of impeachment to be made up at a later time they vote on them they impeach him it goes over the Senate where, without a doubt, he will not be removed from office. What are they going to do if Trump is then re-elected. For 4-almost-5 years they're going to have a hell of a hard time having yet another impeachment inquiry because they're going to look even more like the buffoons that they are in doing so. At that point Trump really could shoot somebody.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yet you can't even figure out the bribery statute.

This is a bribery attempt, no matter how you and Shyster Timmeh try to spin it...
https://i.imgflip.com/3boxd7.jpg

 

[RobDownSouth]

At some point, they're going to have to either draw up articles of impeachment and vote on them or get off the pot. I can't see them baling at this point because they have thrown around the word impeachment far too often, even though at this point nothing that they've done has anything to do directly with an actual impeachment proceeding. These are just hearings with even more restrictive one-sided rules than usual designed to get sound bites out in front of the American public hoping to push those favorability numbers down and pro impeachment numbers up. So far it's not working.

Still two days of public testimony to go, little fella.
Four more witnesses.

 

[domroger]

At least I have them. Unlike some...

But you missing at least one ,modesty .

 

[bellisarius]

his brother, the lawyer...The RUSSIAN!

Ahh, taking the path to early retirement then.

 

[bigsly]

Williams, Vindman, Morrison, and Vockler were each directly asked today if they observed or heard any hint of "bribery" during the now infamous call or any other actions related to this impeachment process, and each one unhesitatingly and certainly testified, "No." So much for the repugnant partisan Dems latest focus group's pimp point.

Next?

https://i.gifer.com/3Bgy.gif

 

[heathergives]

Williams, Vindman, Morrison, and Vockler were each directly asked today if they observed or heard any hint of "bribery" during the now infamous call or any other actions related to this impeachment process, and each one unhesitatingly and certainly testified, "No." So much for the repugnant partisan Dems latest focus group's pimp point.

Next?

https://i.gifer.com/3Bgy.gif

You know, I listened to the same hearing on the radio (WBAL AM) while at work, and i could have sworn that i heard the same thing.

Who woulda thunk it?

 

[Adre]

“Mark I. Thompson, a self-described whistleblower in the Benghazi hearings, will testify on Wednesday that then-secretary of State Hillary Clinton intentionally cut out the counterterrorism bureau from communication on the attack. Thompson, deputy coordinator for operations in the bureau, leaked the scoop to Fox News, claiming he was threatened by unnamed State Department officials about coming clean in public.”


Remember when the hypocrites absolutely looooved whistleblowers?

 

[bellisarius]

Vindman has his 20 in now. So he can retire with 50% pay, full medical, write a "tell all" book, and go on speaking tours. UC Berkley, Harvard, Yale, UCLA, the usual itinerary. Those frequent flyer miles are going to pile up.

 

[HisArpy]

But you missing at least one ,modesty .

We are all flawed in one way or another. I at least don't have to resort to lying about it. Unlike some...

 

[HisArpy]

Which lawyer?

Note; under his obligation to not discuss National Security with those not holding similar levels of clearance, EVEN TALKING TO HIS LAWYER about it violates that prohibition.


Oopsies.

 

[Conager]

LMAO.

Adam Schiff is now back to talking about obstruction as a reason to impeach President Trump.

They have NOTHING.

Obstructing the prosecution of what?

 

[RichardBentwood]

At some point, they're going to have to either draw up articles of impeachment and vote on them or get off the pot. I can't see them baling at this point because they have thrown around the word impeachment far too often, even though at this point nothing that they've done has anything to do directly with an actual impeachment proceeding. These are just hearings with even more restrictive one-sided rules than usual designed to get sound bites out in front of the American public hoping to push those favorability numbers down and pro impeachment numbers up. So far it's not working.

But let's say that they actually do have the numbers for people in pro-trump districts to vote for some article of impeachment to be made up at a later time they vote on them they impeach him it goes over the Senate where, without a doubt, he will not be removed from office. What are they going to do if Trump is then re-elected. For 4-almost-5 years they're going to have a hell of a hard time having yet another impeachment inquiry because they're going to look even more like the buffoons that they are in doing so. At that point Trump really could shoot somebody.

I'm going to laugh my ass off when they present this turd to the Senate

 

[Kantarii]

LMAO.

Adam Schiff is now back to talking about obstruction as a reason to impeach President Trump.

They have NOTHING.

I said from the very beginning, “ This whistleblower fiasco was going to blow up in the Democrats’ faces. Today is a great day where things begin to fall apart.

Will the hearings change anyone’s opinions? Doubtful. This country is deeply divided and will stay that way, not because of Trump but because the Democrats want it that way.

 

[Conager]

Gordon Sondland was clear: "I've never heard from President Trump that the aid (to Ukraine) was conditioned on the investigations."

So what did @realDonaldTrump say when Sondland DID talk to him?

Sondland, quoting POTUS: "I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

. . .but, but...everyone "knew" he wanted something different than what he actually said. Something he never linked was linked by his sly refusal to link the two things.

https://media.giphy.com/media/d5t6bqFD3c5nG/giphy.gif

 

[Adre]

Gordon Sondland was clear: "I've never heard from President Trump that the aid (to Ukraine) was conditioned on the investigations."

So what did @realDonaldTrump say when Sondland DID talk to him?

Sondland, quoting POTUS: "I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

A complete lie, well after the meaningful events occurred.

 

[Conager]

A complete lie, well after the meaningful events occurred.

. . .but Vindman's version of events is spot on because his impressions of a call after spitballing with fellow pro-Ukrainian-oligarch cranks who were not cleared to listen to the call are much more accurate than a contemporaneously drafted memorandum put together by several other people who were on the call.

Sounds legit.

 

[RobDownSouth]

A complete lie, well after the meaningful events occurred.

Donald Trump actions are often the exact opposite of what he does. It's like he thinks "if I say something, I'm covered". See also: "I will release my tax returns" and "I'm considering testifying under oath".

 

[Conager]

Donald Trump actions are often the exact opposite of what he does. It's like he thinks "if I say something, I'm covered". See also: "I will release my tax returns" and "I'm considering testifying under oath".

How are "his actions" any different than (much less "the exact opposite" of) "what he does?"

 

[jomar]

How are "his actions" any different than (much less "the exact opposite" of) "what he does?"

Probably meant “says.”

Like when meeting with Cohen and being taped, Trump would say no while vigorously nodding yes.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Obstructing the Congressional Impeachment inquiry.

Same Article levied on Nixon, for the same reasons

Obstructing the prosecution of what?

 

[bellisarius]

Back to "obstruction" huh?

Make up your mind.

 

[jomar]

Back to "obstruction" huh?

Make up your mind.

So much to choose from it’s hard to decide!

 

[bellisarius]

So much to choose from it’s hard to decide!

It's like "Wheel of Fortune" everyday.