Watching Shiffy, Nadler, and the Motley Crew press conference this morning

[RaceBannon]

I am curious scotti, where in the following conversation did Trump go for Quid Pro Quo? When did he tell the President that he would withhold funds until he investigated Biden's son? Where, exactly is the corruption? Biden stopped an investigation into his son and his company by threatening to withhold funding and then bragged about it. That is corruption. In addition, there were Ukrainians who were interfering in our elections. Remember that behavior that you rats used to care so much about when you falsely claimed Trump colluded with the Russians in our elections but now seem to want to ignore when it is the Ukrainians and biden?

There was zero quid pro quo. The man is doing his job and protecting our tax dollars and not giving it to a corrupt country without making sure things are right. Your side is guilty and didn't like it so they ginned up the QPQ, then focus grouped it and called it bribing, then focus grouped it again and called it obstruction and some other thing that is as far away from the original QPQ as it can get. Get over it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-zelensky-summary-july-phone-call/2440399001/

"I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it," Trump began his reply.

He went on to ask Zelensky to look into details about a company that investigated hacking of the Democratic National Committee prior to the 2016 election that was linked back to Russia.

"We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine," Zelensky said in his response.

"I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and that he was shut down and that's really unfair," Trump said to Zelensky in the transcript summary.

"The other thing, there's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great," Trump adds. "Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

Zelensky said he is "knowledgeable about the situation." He also said the next prosecutor general would be backed by him.

LOL look at Atl the liar move the goalposts! At least you now have admitted you lied when you claimed Trump didn't ask for an investigation of Crowdstrike and Biden in the call. You should tell Race that he lied as well.

Sure scotty

pat pat pat

 

[Swaye]

I am curious scotti, where in the following conversation did Trump go for Quid Pro Quo? When did he tell the President that he would withhold funds until he investigated Biden's son? Where, exactly is the corruption? Biden stopped an investigation into his son and his company by threatening to withhold funding and then bragged about it. That is corruption. In addition, there were Ukrainians who were interfering in our elections. Remember that behavior that you rats used to care so much about when you falsely claimed Trump colluded with the Russians in our elections but now seem to want to ignore when it is the Ukrainians and biden?

There was zero quid pro quo. The man is doing his job and protecting our tax dollars and not giving it to a corrupt country without making sure things are right. Your side is guilty and didn't like it so they ginned up the QPQ, then focus grouped it and called it bribing, then focus grouped it again and called it obstruction and some other thing that is as far away from the original QPQ as it can get. Get over it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-zelensky-summary-july-phone-call/2440399001/

"I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it," Trump began his reply.

He went on to ask Zelensky to look into details about a company that investigated hacking of the Democratic National Committee prior to the 2016 election that was linked back to Russia.

"We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine," Zelensky said in his response.

"I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and that he was shut down and that's really unfair," Trump said to Zelensky in the transcript summary.

"The other thing, there's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great," Trump adds. "Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

Zelensky said he is "knowledgeable about the situation." He also said the next prosecutor general would be backed by him.

LOL look at Atl the liar move the goalposts! At least you now have admitted you lied when you claimed Trump didn't ask for an investigation of Crowdstrike and Biden in the call. You should tell Race that he lied as well.

Look here, and I cannot stress this enough, nobody gives a single solitary fuck what you are blathering on about. You are basically the unfunny Cabin Boy of the Tug. Dance monkey dance.

 

[pawz]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

@GDS does exactly 2 things, and 2 things only:
1. Parrots MSM Nonsense
2. Molests Children

Unfortunately, either one earns him a CDBros Club badge.

 

[GDS]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

 

[CirrhosisDawg]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

 

[CirrhosisDawg]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

 

[CirrhosisDawg]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

Good question! What do you think?

 

[TurdBomber]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

Good question! What do you think?

View attachment 15114

 

[RaceBannon]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?[/QUOTE]

Is your wife still your sister?[/QUOTE]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?[/QUOTE]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

 

[RaceBannon]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?[/QUOTE]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?[/QUOTE]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

[/QUOTE]

 

[RaceBannon]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?[/QUOTE]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

[/QUOTE]

[/QUOTE]

 

[RaceBannon]

Well!!!

 

[Pitchfork51]

Sad to see someones mental acuity decline in real time

 

[MikeDamone]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?[/QUOTE]

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?[/QUOTE]

If you read through the bullshit lies and opinions, yes, that is what article 1 is insinuating. Why not use the word Bribery? I mean it's right there in the constitution as something to impeach for. Why be so obtuse? Because they don't have the facts to prove it.

Some pretty rich shit in this.

Let's have a press conference. Oh wait, let's not take any questions.

No quid pro quo, no bribery in the charges. Isn't that what this was about?

Let's claim this is about defending the constitution. Your party has a great track record on that.

You really don't see the hallmark definition of bribery in article 1? Wow...

Read through article 1 and don't see a single lie. Can you post the lie from article 1 for me?

I'll try to help you understand:

Literally the first sentence. Disputed? Proven?
[/b]Using the powers of his high office, President Trump
Solicited the interference of a foreign government,
Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election.

Again. Proven? Intent Proven?
[/b]He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that
included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly
announce investigations that would benefit his reelection,
harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and
in?uence the 2020 United States Presidential election to
his advantage.

Opinion or Fact? Certainly not a fact. Just an opinion...
[/b]President Trump engaged in this scheme
or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of
personal political benefit.

Discredited by whom?[/b]
a discredited theory promoted by Rus-
sia alleging that Ukraine?rather than Rus-
sia?interfered in the 2016 United States Pres-
idential election.

I could go on and on. Literally you're looking at opinion, suspicions, and no proven facts. This is why this is so partisan. There's no fucking case here.

Can't wait to see Chelsea Clinton impeached in a partisan move in 2038.

None of the claims you produced are lies. The first sentence - that's a documented fact.[/i][/b] You can go down the list of the numerous witnesses and to the July 25th transcript itself all of which show that Trump and his underlings were soliciting for Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.

Second quote you claim is a lie - again proven fact that Trump and his minions were soliciting Ukraine for the an announcement of an investigation.

Third quote you claim to be a lie is not a lie and the facts we know thus far show a pattern that confirm this allegation.

Fourth quote you claim to be a lie has been discredited by our intelligence agencies as well as the Mueller investigation.

So when asked for the lies that you claim where in the article you can't produce any?

Speaking of documented facts, tell us more about Assad using gas on his own people. Allegedly.

Also, Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, stick to "documented facts".

It's sad that you and your alt Turd Burglar are still on tilt about inconvenient facts being posted about your dream girl Tulsi. I did find it funny today when she claimed she was bailing on the next debate even when it was clear she wasn't going to qualify anyway.

That's what I thought.

Baseless accusations.

Multiple quotes from Tulsi including posts from her website over a multi page thread months ago - or in your world baseless. hahaha. NYBE

...but never the Actual Words spoken straight from her mouth, as you swore you'd produce, but never did. Lying, Wormy Piece of Shit.

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers? Why won’t you answer the question you fucking retard?

Is your wife still your sister?

Does a sheriff in Montana have to enforce federal gun control laws and arrest non-compliant local gun and ammunition dealers?

[/QUOTE]

 

[Sledog]

Sad to see someones mental acuity decline in real time

It wasn't far to go.