Random Politics & Religion #38: The 38th One

We are gonna need you to list our wars in proper sequential order.

We are probably over due for another Civil War


Liberals vs Republicans

He doesn't make it up. He is quoting the party line.

Wouldn't the normal response be to show said evidence? I understand that is very difficult to do as there hasn't been any.



And any guesses on how long before Hillary joins the race so that she can say any criminal investigations into her and the Clinton Foundation are politically motivated because Trump is out to get her?

Eboneezer, please quote correctly.

Also:

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Trump’s call with Ukraine president manifests criminal and impeachable behavior
Fox

Elsewhere on their web site you can read the party line. Or on the web site of Dems who the white house CCed the party line to. I linked it some pages back.

Don't deflect. Still waiting on...

What evidence are you looking for exactly? Saevel making ***up?

I'd impeach Trump... I'd impeach Trump so hard !

Evidence of anything illegal being claimed by the left in the fake Impeachment circus show would be a good start.

Thats what the impeachment inquiry is for. Next?

The truth will out: Texts from the State Department contradict Trump’s Ukraine cover story

Good enough?

No, I was asking for evidence. Not an opinion piece of a text of someone else's opinion. We have transcripts of phone calls. We have secret witnesses. There were numerous people that were actually on the phone call that never found the need to start an inquiry. I'm interested in actual evidence that Trump withheld foreign aid to force the Ukraine into opening an investigation into corruption.

I'm also interested in this "pressure" everyone keeps claiming that Trump exerted onto Ukraine to do anything.

And lastly, dying to see any evidence that he asked for the investigation in order to get dirt on his political opponent as opposed to an investigation of possible corruption that a US government official is on video bragging about. Now I know, you all claim he wasn't withholding money to force a prosecutor to be fired, he was just trying to end his perceived corruption. Yet here we are, listening to you tell us that the transcript of Trump saying he wanted possible corruption to be investigated, wasn't really about corruption and only about getting dirt on his political opponent. TLDNR: No one can investigate Democrats.

No they don’t. They don't mention anything of the sort. The only way you arrive there is via inference and innuendo, which the last texts totally annihilate. Because they say the president is not looking for a quid pro quo he’s trying to gauge how seriously the newly elected president is going to pursue his campaign promises.

And besides, to reiterate again. Biden is on tape bragging about his corruption.

Post evidence please, not innuendo.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

So just as I thought, there is no evidence to any of the claims.

Omg the insight here is off the charts.
You mean strong-arming a country into firing the prosecutor that happens to be looking into the company your son sits on the oard of is not corrupt?



Please explain how that is not a criminal level conflict of interest

What they’re worried about is Trump uncovering Bidens own crimes.

Thats literally all lefties have though. Their social construct.

-Hey. Whats the evidence something happened.
-Well look at all the people who think something happened.

This is just you defending your own interpretations and innuendo which as has been stated numerous times is not actual evidence.

This latest”INPEACH” cry is done.
Blumpfs approval has risen.
Schiff has been outed as an incompetent liar.
Pelosi has lost control of her mob.
The radical communists officially run the democrats.

Democrats have painted themselves into a blackhole of electoral prospects.

Life is good.

This is not an official inquiry because there has been no official vote, and there never will be. There will be requests for information which most exec position will willfully ignore because this isn't an official inquiry.

This will be spun bu the media as “obstruction” when it is executive privilege.

lol, we have a transcript of Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, and offering US resources to do it, repeatedly. Then we have Trump asking China in the WH lawn to investigate the Bidens. He is specifically saying the Bidens, his political opponent. Then we have text messages specifically setting up a direct meeting with Trump in exchange for starting an investigation into the Bidens. There is plenty of evidence to justify an impeachment inquiry.

Meanwhile, we have no evidence of any of the conspiracies nausi and Saevel have put out there. There is no evidence the Dems helped the WB write the complaint, zero. There is no evidence Joe Biden walked away with millions from China, zero. There is no evidence of any Biden crimes, zero. Yet I don't see you asking for them to post any sources? Hmm.

None from the alt-right, thats for sure.

I have posted evidence.

We have the transcript, all innuendo means *** all.

My god the left is dumb. They had this whole game plan for when blumpf didn't release the transcript, and they’re so stupid that they’re walking it forward anyway even though Trump released the transcript.

I almost feel bad for you useful idiots. You deserve better overlords.

NYT:Free speech is bad.

(Desperation)

Ignoring nausis lies, the NYT is reporting a second whistleblower preparing to come forward to corroborate the first complaint.

Then people should quit posting them as facts.

And yes, in a few months, this partisan farce will be exposed for exactly what it is...just like all of the others before it.

Hopefully, one day, the right will actually fight back or this will just keep happening over and over.

"Hi NYT, second whistleblower here. Im just sending you this email because i just wanted to let you know that i was considering being a whistleblower."