Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Itssoeasy

The whistleblower worked with joe Biden ?

aloyisious

F***ing hell, Fiona giving a lesson to Rep Conaway on how Vlad viewed US fracking after he raised the topic with her in relation to RT being used as a propaganda tool by Russia, cutting the ground from under him.

Itssoeasy

Here’s congressman maloney.

aloyisious

Jim Jordan making a speech under the guise of asking Dr Hill a question. A big red X. I had the sky box on pause so I'm watching the hearing after the fact.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/nickconfessore/status/1197599033503756288?s=19


Bulk order, eh? No wonder it shot up the charts..

Itssoeasy

Very good point here by Fiona hill. If you give putin an inch he’ll take a mile.

Itssoeasy

Alex Jones and roger stone went after Fiona hill ? Well they’ve never been accused of being Rhodes scholars.

Headshot

Dr Hill is a very impressive woman. It's no wonder the likes of Stone and Jones are scared of her

Overheal

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Alex Jones and roger stone went after Fiona hill ? Well they’ve never been accused of being Rhodes scholars.

https://www.mediamatters.org/roger-stone/former-nsc-staffer-fiona-hill-testified-about-receiving-death-threats-after-being

Itssoeasy

Here’s how to not have whistleblower report you is to not do stuff that isn’t on the level congressman.

aloyisious

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/nickconfessore/status/1197599033503756288?s=19


Bulk order, eh? No wonder it shot up the charts..

The link didn't work for me so I googled the story for info...

https://halfwaypost.com/2019/11/08/a-russian-copper-company-bought-70000-copies-of-donald-trump-jr-s-new-book/

Snippet from the link:
The company, Russian Copper, is led by one of the top oligarchs in Moscow, Niko Deripaskov, a close friend and confidant to “President” Vladimir Putin, and the vast majority of the book’s total sales were billed to Russian Copper. Edit, the apostrophes either side of President are from the article, not something I added to its content. Russian Copper has a section which donates to charities.

Overheal

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Here’s how to not have whistleblower report you is to not do stuff that isn’t on the level congressman.

Itssoeasy

Overheal wrote: »

Nunes going after the whistleblower by saying it was all a plot to get at the president. He’s talking rubbish again.

OMM 0000

What's most interesting about this impeachment hearing is how it shows people believe whatever they want to believe.

For example, the EU ambassador said Trump literally told him no quid pro quo, yet the BBC, etc., are spinning this as Trump asked for quid pro quo.

It really proves feelings override facts.

Itssoeasy

OMM 0000 wrote: »

What's most interesting about this impeachment hearing is how it shows people believe whatever they want to believe.

For example, the EU ambassador said Trump literally told him no quid pro quo, yet the BBC, etc., are spinning this as Trump asked for quid pro quo.

It really proves feelings override facts.

The EU ambassador yesterday LITERALLY said that there was a quid pro quo.

OMM 0000

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The EU ambassador yesterday LITERALLY said that there was a quid pro quo.

Amazing.

Here's him saying there was no quid pro quo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_c17vxrPWQ

It's only 1 minute, watch it.

kowloon

OMM 0000 wrote: »

What's most interesting about this impeachment hearing is how it shows people believe whatever they want to believe.

For example, the EU ambassador said Trump literally told him no quid pro quo, yet the BBC, etc., are spinning this as Trump asked for quid pro quo.

It really proves feelings override facts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBh0oJFtV_c

circadian

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Amazing.

Here's him saying there was no quid pro quo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_c17vxrPWQ

It's only 1 minute, watch it.

Just because Trump said he didn't want quid pro quo doesn't mean his actions can't result in it anyway.

listermint

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Amazing.

Here's him saying there was no quid pro quo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_c17vxrPWQ

It's only 1 minute, watch it.

Oh Jesus.


Will you watch the entire hearings yourself..



Enough said.

Leroy42

OMM 0000 wrote: »

What's most interesting about this impeachment hearing is how it shows people believe whatever they want to believe.

For example, the EU ambassador said Trump literally told him no quid pro quo, yet the BBC, etc., are spinning this as Trump asked for quid pro quo.

It really proves feelings override facts.

It only proves you are not paying attention.

When did Trump say that, and when did the whistleblower complaint become known?

OMM 0000

circadian wrote: »

Just because Trump said he didn't want quid pro quo doesn't mean his actions can't result in it anyway.

This is the problem.

You want to believe Trump is guilty, so you're choosing to interpret things as quid pro quo.

Trump literally says no quid pro quo but you are trying to read between the lines to find the opposite meaning.

It's really quite disturbing and is teaching me reality doesn't really matter.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

circadian

OMM 0000 wrote: »

This is the problem.

You want to believe Trump is guilty, so you're choosing to interpret things as quid pro quo.

Trump literally says no quid pro quo but you are trying to read between the lines to find the opposite meaning.

It's really quite disturbing and is teaching me reality doesn't really matter.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

I'm not interpreting anything. I don't want to believe anything.

I'm looking at the facts. The actual facts that are in front of me.

It does not look good for the Trump Administration.

OMM 0000

Btw my point is you guys (some of you) have made up your mind.

It doesn't matter what evidence is presented, you have made up your mind and you're going to see everything in that light.

I'm not trying to force you to change your mind.

I just find it fascinating how emotions override facts.

Leroy42

OMM 0000 wrote: »

This is the problem.

You want to believe Trump is guilty, so you're choosing to interpret things as quid pro quo.

Trump literally says no quid pro quo but you are trying to read between the lines to find the opposite meaning.

It's really quite disturbing and is teaching me reality doesn't really matter.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

Mulvaney his CoS, already said there was a QPQ.

Why wasn't he immediately fired for such a slur? Why is Trump so ineffectual as POTUS that the entire government, even those that paid to be appointed, are working completely against him.

And yet he somehow doesn't want to take part in the investigation which would show all these people up for the liars you believe them to be.

kowloon

OMM 0000 wrote: »

This is the problem.

You want to believe Trump is guilty, so you're choosing to interpret things as quid pro quo.

Trump literally says no quid pro quo but you are trying to read between the lines to find the opposite meaning.

It's really quite disturbing and is teaching me reality doesn't really matter.

I'm not a Trump supporter.

Watch the video above. Facts over feelings.

aloyisious

OMM 0000 wrote: »

What's most interesting about this impeachment hearing is how it shows people believe whatever they want to believe.

For example, the EU ambassador said Trump literally told him no quid pro quo, yet the BBC, etc., are spinning this as Trump asked for quid pro quo.

It really proves feelings override facts.

Unfortunately its overshadowed by Don talking to President Zelensky about US assistance to Ukraine in its hour of need, and Don asking for a favour [in the next breath and in the same conversation with President Zelensky on the 25th July] from President Zelensky. The requested favour, for an investigation into the Bidens and the Ukraine Co, is in the transcripts released by Don. I can imagine how both presidents had emotional feelings about their requests. Pardon me for thinking the requests were irrevocably tied together.

Itssoeasy

Adam schiff getting more animated then I've ever seen him.

Call me Al

Schiff quite emotional there at the end, and I don't blame him.
Fiona Hill was outstanding. Clear, concise, direct and amazingly informed.

Call me Al

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Adam schiff getting more animated then I've ever seen him.

He was close to tears. A mix of sadness and anger I think.

OMM 0000

kowloon wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBh0oJFtV_c

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

He heard someone else say Trump wants quid pro quo. Does he provide any actual evidence (e-mails, video, etc.)? Nope.

In fact, when pressed on his first hand experience on the matter, he states Trump said no quid pro quo.

Same as everyone else in this hearing. "I heard someone else talk about it and it sounds bad".