Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Liz

John Bolton Exclusive Interview: Trump Does Not Represent The Republican Cause That I Want To Back

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

JerryL
3 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

No they should not have. It would take at least 6 months, take impeachment process straight into election, and for what?

Even among 8 Republicans that admitted Trump is guilty exactly as Article I described only 1 considered Trump's abuse of office necessitating removal by Congress.

You keep saying that.  One Republican voted "yes" on one of the charges.  That is one vote of guilty out of a total of 106 Republican votes.  

The other 7 of your 8 voted No.  Their vote shows that, no matter whether they thought he acted improperly, it was not an impeachable offense.  That is something that Republicans in the House, and 5 Democrats, said with their votes or abstentions on the BS articles to begin with.

As for your bold, I understand your pain.  People being attacked or used by Democrats shouldn't have a right to the courts.  And, since they would have invoked that right and slowed down the Democrat impeachment machine, the machine should get a pass for the shoddy job they did.  Sucks to be wrong.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
8 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

BS. Trump did not explicitly say it to Sondland, but Guliani made damn clear to Sondland what the President wants.

Hey Anton, you didn't listen to the clip did you?  Sondland says in the clip that Giuliani never told him anything.  Nothing.  He says it was his "presumption."  He had talked to Giuliani on Burisma in 2016 and Sondland did the mental linkage all on his own.  He says that "the problem" was that no one ever told him about linking the aid to the investigation.  Maybe because they weren't linked?  Hmmmm?

Still, it sure didn't stop Sondland from spreading that linkage to anyone who would listen to him.

 

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
3 hours ago, zurg said:

:clap: This is the first time ever I've seen you spell the word correctly.

It was a typo.

  • Haha (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JerryL said:

Hey Anton, you didn't listen to the clip did you?  Sondland says in the clip that Giuliani never told him anything.  Nothing.  He says it was his "presumption."  He had talked to Giuliani on Burisma in 2016 and Sondland did the mental linkage all on his own.  He says that "the problem" was that no one ever told him about linking the aid to the investigation.  Maybe because they weren't linked?  Hmmmm?

Still, it sure didn't stop Sondland from spreading that linkage to anyone who would listen to him.

Sondland - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump made everything contigent on public announcement of investigation into Bidens.

Mulvaney - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump held up aid to press Ukraine for Investigation

GAO - Trump illegally held up aid.

Bolton quid-pro-quo is true and I wanted nothing to do with that drug deal.

8 Senate Republicans - quid-pro-quo is obviously true.

 

JerryL - nuuh man Trump was just umm, well he was, nicely asking Ukrainians to work with his personal lawyer Guiliani to publicly announce investigation into Bidens. His administration illegal hold on millitary aid during this time was completely unrelated and held because well, uhhh because corruption in Ukraine, which umm ended the moment Congress opened investigations.

 

RW06BjM.jpg

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
10 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

Sondland - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump made everything contigent on public announcement of investigation into Bidens.  Presumption, by his own words.  What is so hard to understand here.  He says NO ONE TOLD HIM about any quid pro quo. NO ONE.

Mulvaney - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump held up aid to press Ukraine for Investigation  Testified to where?

GAO - Trump illegally held up aid.  Nice for them.  Aid gets held up all the time...or threatened to be held up like Joe did.  Aid was released before it expired.  So what?

Bolton quid-pro-quo is true and I wanted nothing to do with that drug deal.  Disgruntled fired employee who writes a tell all but refuses to testify under oath.

8 Senate Republicans - quid-pro-quo is obviously true. Please show where anyone said this.  I'll wait.

 

JerryL - nuuh man Trump was just umm, well he was, nicely asking Ukrainians to work with his personal lawyer Guiliani to publicly announce investigation into Bidens. His administration illegal hold on millitary aid during this time was completely unrelated and held because well, uhhh because corruption in Ukraine, which umm ended the moment Congress opened investigations.

I never said any of this BS.  I just pointed out that what you say he said publicly, he never said.  You lied and the NYT lied.  

BTW, Gordon would have had your apron years ago.  He can't stand idiots.

RW06BjM.jpg

 

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup
2 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Sondland - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump made everything contigent on public announcement of investigation into Bidens.

Mulvaney - quid-pro-quo is true. Trump held up aid to press Ukraine for Investigation

GAO - Trump illegally held up aid.

Bolton quid-pro-quo is true and I wanted nothing to do with that drug deal.

8 Senate Republicans - quid-pro-quo is obviously true.

 

JerryL - nuuh man Trump was just umm, well he was, nicely asking Ukrainians to work with his personal lawyer Guiliani to publicly announce investigation into Bidens. His administration illegal hold on millitary aid during this time was completely unrelated and held because well, uhhh because corruption in Ukraine, which umm ended the moment Congress opened investigations.

 

RW06BjM.jpg

How I feel when I read your posts....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup
8 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Ridiculous, you don’t know what flexibility they talked about. You take one phrase with absolutely no understanding of the context and just run with it.

US, EU, IMF and corruption watch groups wanted Ukrainian prosecutor removed for lining his pockets while refusing to prosecute the rich and powerful in Ukraine.

United States exerting pressure on Ukrainian government to remove this guy was GOOD FOREIGN POLICY and a necessary move to get Ukraine to start to clean up it’s corrupt act. 


Read up: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/trump-endorses-ukraines-swamp-monster-prosecutor-viktor-shokin

 

:yawn:

7 hours ago, zurg said:

:clap: This is the first time ever I've seen you spell the word correctly.

:biglaugh:

6 hours ago, AntonToo said:

...well thats because Republicans blocked testimony by Mulvaney (who publicly admitted the hold up of millitary aid was to pressure Ukraine for investigation) and Bolton, who directly tells in his book that he first hand heard Trump refusing to release aid untill Ukraine announced investigation of Bidens.

Sondland testified that everyone involved understood that Trump was pressing for this corrupt quid-pro-quo.

 

5 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Bolton ignored House subpoena, but was willing to testify in the Senate. Senate Republicans blocked him from testifying. There was only a handful of Republicans required for Bolton to testify and you know why those Republicans blocked it? Because they admitted that no further testimony is required, that it was obvious that Trump behaved exactly as Article I, and Bolton's book said he did. That Trump pretty much confessed to it on the White House lawn, when he publicly asked Ukraine and China to investigate Bidens.

....to them I say - have you ever met the people in Trump's base? 🤦‍♂️

 

5 hours ago, AntonToo said:

A bag full of wrong wrong and wrong again.

Sondland was the only person who direcctly dealt with Trump on UIkraine that testified as the law requires and he in no uncertain terms said that quid-pro-quo was true, that everything was conditioned by Trump on announcement of investigations into Bidens and that everyone directly involved knew it.

Bolton knew it (as Bolton confirms).

Pompeo knew it.

Mulvaney knew it (and admitted publicly).

Guliani knew it.

All of these people were subpoened, all these people were being blocked from testifying by the administration, none of these people Republicans had any interest in hearing from.

 

Democrats thought they had what they needed to make their case without tying up the subpoena disputes in courts for a year. They were right, as a number of Republicans admitted that Article I accusations were already proven and require no further witness testimony.

 

 

4 hours ago, AntonToo said:

No they should not have. It would take at least 6 months, take impeachment process straight into the Covid-19 mess and election, and for what?

Even among 8 Republicans that admitted Trump is guilty exactly as Article I described only 1 considered Trump's abuse of office necessitating removal by Congress.

 

4 hours ago, AntonToo said:

BS. Trump did not explicitly say it to Sondland, but Guliani made damn clear to Sondland what the President wants.

:biglaugh:keep trying to sound like an adult, little boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, AntonToo said:

No they should not have. It would take at least 6 months, take impeachment process straight into the Covid-19 mess and election, and for what?

 

Was Covid 19 a thing in Summer of 2019?   Are you admitting first hand knowledge t that Covid 19 was an election year event staged by the democrats and CHINA?!?!?!

 

Chinese collusion with the democrats to rig the 2020 election!!!!!!!

Edited by Dutch13
  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Dutch13 said:

Was Covid 19 a thing in Summer of 2019?   Are you admitting first hand knowledge t that Covid 19 was an election year event staged by the democrats and CHINA?!?!?!

Chinese collusion with the democrats to rig the 2020 election!!!!!!!

Thats alot of ??!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!  Calm down.

House taking this to courts would push schedule down at least  6 months, and then getting delayed by Covid-19 response, so instead of this getting wrapped up by Feb impeachment would probably still going on now among everything else.

 

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, JerryL said:

I never said any of this

What DID you say? What is your working theory of wtf happened in this Ukranian misadventure that accounts for everything learned since this began?

1. Trump on tape venting his grievances with Ukraine not recieprocating generous American aid and asking Ukranian president do him a favor in working with his 2 lackeys (one of whom is his personal lawyer) to investigate Biden and his son. 

2. Holding up millitary aid to Ukraine, as Mulvaney publicly said they did and GAO determined illegal.

3. All these Trump administration members, to their own detriment, testifying to Trump pushing for corrupt quid-pro-quo.

4. Republlicans fighting tooth and nail to prevent directly relavant administration members from testifying and exonorating him by simply stating the truth if he did nothing wrong.

 

How does all that co-exist in your head if not for wilful shut-down of critical thought process:noevil:? I really want to know

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, JerryL said:

Disgruntled fired employee

Bolton was working for administration when he called what Trump was cooking up in Ukraine a drug deal he wants nothing to do with.

His subordinates, whom he directed to report their concerns to DNI lawyers, testified that before congress.

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

He's on the rag....again

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
1 hour ago, AntonToo said:

Thats alot of ??!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!  Calm down.

House taking this to courts would push schedule down at least  6 months, and then getting delayed by Covid-19 response, so instead of this getting wrapped up by Feb impeachment would probably still going on now among everything else.

 

Dutch13's point flew right over your head.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
8 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Trump made everything contigent on public announcement of investigation into Bidens.

A single public announcement about an investigation? What good does that do Trump? An announcement about an investigation doesn't say anything about innocence or guilt. It's just an investigation. Biden could come out and call it a "security review" like Hillary Clinton called the FBI investigation into her private server. :lol:

Nobody bought that democrat narrative then and nobody is buying it now. Biden is guilty as sin and everybody knows it. You people can say whatever you want. The jury will be voting at the ballot box.

  • Best Post (+1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Natural Selection said:

A single public announcement about an investigation? What good does that do Trump? An announcement about an investigation doesn't say anything about innocence or guilt. It's just an investigation. Biden could come out and call it a "security review" like Hillary Clinton called the FBI investigation into her private server. :lol:

Nobody bought that democrat narrative then and nobody is buying it now. Biden is guilty as sin and everybody knows it. You people can say whatever you want. The jury will be voting at the ballot box.

You may want to review 2016 and the damage Comey’s announcements of investigation of Clinton did to her campaign.

Trump is an old dog, going back to whatever tricks got him the bone last time.

Thats why he is again soliciting foreign help in this election and trying to throw criminal shade on Biden.

 

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
6 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

You may want to review 2016 and the damage Comey’s announcements of investigation of Clinton did to her campaign.

Trump is an old dog, going back to whatever tricks got him the bone last time.

Thats why he is again soliciting foreign help in this election and trying to throw criminal shade on Biden.

 

There was no need to "throw shade" on Quid Pro Joe. At the time he was close to last place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
22 minutes ago, Natural Selection said:

There was no need to "throw shade" on Quid Pro Joe. At the time he was close to last place.

Joe was the front runner throughout Trump’s failed attempts in Ukraine.

  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup
37 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

You may want to review 2016 and the damage Comey’s announcements of investigation of Clinton did to her campaign.

Trump is an old dog, going back to whatever tricks got him the bone last time.

Thats why he is again soliciting foreign help in this election and trying to throw criminal shade on Biden.

 

:biglaugh:

Leftard projection at its finest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
11 hours ago, AntonToo said:

What DID you say? What is your working theory of wtf happened in this Ukranian misadventure that accounts for everything learned since this began?

1. Trump on tape venting his grievances with Ukraine not recieprocating generous American aid and asking Ukranian president do him a favor in working with his 2 lackeys (one of whom is his personal lawyer) to investigate Biden and his son. 

2. Holding up millitary aid to Ukraine, as Mulvaney publicly said they did and GAO determined illegal.

3. All these Trump administration members, to their own detriment, testifying to Trump pushing for corrupt quid-pro-quo.

4. Republlicans fighting tooth and nail to prevent directly relavant administration members from testifying and exonorating him by simply stating the truth if he did nothing wrong.

 

How does all that co-exist in your head if not for wilful shut-down of critical thought process:noevil:? I really want to know

Talk about your facepalm moments.  

Why don't you please point to one person who has testified, under oath, to having first hand knowledge of the Ukrainian aid being tied to the investigation of the Bidens.  Just one.  A lot of bloviating up to this point, but so far no substance.  One person who had first hand knowledge who has testified under oath.  

BTW, critical thinking requires more than the capacity to see the surface.  Mirror, meet Anton.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
11 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Bolton was working for administration when he called what Trump was cooking up in Ukraine a drug deal he wants nothing to do with.

His subordinates, whom he directed to report their concerns to DNI lawyers, testified that before congress.

Hearsay.  No first hand testimony.  And, of course, Mr. Bolton has NEVER, himself, testified under oath.  All he has done is take his butthurt to the publisher to line his pockets.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
7 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Joe was the front runner throughout Trump’s failed attempts in Ukraine.

Donald Trump takes a son who doesn't work for him all over the world on official US travel as a "family member."  That family gets lucrative contracts with foreign companies, often aligned with corrupt governments, for work/industries in which he has ZERO experience and expertise.  Let's all say that Donald's son is a class A censored up and coke addict who spends thousands upon thousands in strip clubs and also knocks up a stripper, who couldn't keep his nose clean enough to not get kicked out of the Navy WHILE his Dad is the sitting VP.  Now, let's say that a certain country's prosecutor is looking into dealings that touch on Donald's son's company.  Now, let's say that Donald flat out conditions releasing a billion $ in loan guarantees to the firing of that prosecutor.  Let's further pretend that Donald has been in "public service" for nearly 4 decades and not only has he become rich but numerous members of his family have also become rich through his connections to power.

Now, let's say for the sake of argument, that Joe Biden is president and he tells the president of that country that he should look into this.  Would you give even a slim benefit of the doubt to Joe Biden that he was acting in the interests of the US to investigate possible corruption at the highest levels or would you be crucifying Biden for playing politics?

If all of the above were true, I would be cheering on Joe Biden no matter what his political affiliation because that would be his job, as President.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Best Post (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
23 hours ago, AntonToo said:

Thats alot of ??!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!  Calm down.

House taking this to courts would push schedule down at least  6 months, and then getting delayed by Covid-19 response, so instead of this getting wrapped up by Feb impeachment would probably still going on now among everything else.

 

Covid 19 didn't exist last summer, so the only way for that to have played into their thinking was for the democrats have been in on China's plan to release covid.  All these deaths are on the hands of democrats!!!!!!!

 

China / Democrat Collusion  to steal  the 2020 elections......sounds like a completely legit reason to spy on all the democrat campaigns.  #RICO

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dutch13 said:

Covid 19 didn't exist last summer, so the only way for that to have played into their thinking was for the democrats have been in on China's plan to release covid.  All these deaths are on the hands of democrats!!!!!!!

 

China / Democrat Collusion  to steal  the 2020 elections......sounds like a completely legit reason to spy on all the democrat campaigns.  #RICO

I didn't say it played into their thinking.

I'm making a judgement about their descision to not spend months and months in courts trying to enforce their supoenas, from today's point of view

Looking back on it, they have made a good descision. Republicans would still vote against removal and having impeachment going on now would certainly not be helpful to dealing with the pandemic.

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AntonToo
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Dutch13 said:

China / Democrat Collusion  to steal  the 2020 elections......sounds like a completely legit reason to spy on all the democrat campaigns.  #RICO

Oh sure, spy INVESTIGATE away, so long as you get apropriate predication and have FISA warrants in hand.

Russian interference investigation had all of that.

Edited by AntonToo
  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
32 minutes ago, AntonToo said:

I didn't say it played into their thinking.

I'm making a judgement about their descision to not spend months and months in courts trying to enforce their supoenas, from today's point of view

Looking back on it, they have made a good descision. Republicans would still vote against removal and having impeachment going on during pandemic would certainly not be helpful to dealing with the pandemic at the same time.

They made a good decision?  To ignore the Constitution and impeach for purely political reasons.....nothing to do with facts or the law......just politics focused on the the 2020 election.  President Trump was doing such a good job for America that the only way they could win was to try and impeach him, collude with China to crash our economy, and now foment riots and destruction.  

As bad as I think Trump handled much of early 2020.........the rest of his time has been positive.   I may think he is the biggest a-hole in the world, but I will take him over Aunt Bethany (am I the only person that is reminded of Aunt Bethany when Joe Biden is on camera these days?) any day of the week.  

 

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...