Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Professor Pigworth

Four Big Takeaways From the Explosive John Bolton Revelations

Recommended Posts

I was all set to believe these latest incriminating allegations from John Bolton, but then I read Donald's tweet:

I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens.

Wow, those are really big capital letters in the word "Never," so now I'm thinking Donald absolutely must be telling the truth and that Bolton and all the other corroborating witnesses are the ones who are lying.

Donald fans, please won't you join me in jumping up and down in your big, beautiful MAGA hats like they do in those wonderful rallies that the president holds?

And remember: Donald loves every single one of you, now and forever!

 

Four Big Takeaways From the Explosive John Bolton Revelations

 

We have now learned precisely what John Bolton is prepared to tell us about President Trump’s Ukraine extortion scheme. This is terribly inconvenient for Republican senators who are frantically searching for ways to vote against hearing from Trump’s former national security adviser and any others who can shed fresh light on Trump’s corrupt conduct.

After all, new revelations might complicate their preordained vote for acquittal, and that must not happen before that vote is cast.

Bolton writes in an unpublished manuscript of his new book that Trump personally told him he was withholding nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine until officials there carried out the political dirty deeds he was demanding, the New York Times reports.

According to Bolton, he and Trump discussed the matter in August 2019, when Bolton and others were urging Trump to release the aid. Trump said he preferred not to until Ukrainian officials turned over materials related to two false theories — one involving invented Joe Biden corruption in Ukraine, the other concerning fabricated Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.

This directly undercuts one of Trump’s key defenses — that the aid wasn’t frozen to coerce Ukraine into doing his political bidding. Here are four key takeaways:

Trump’s new pushback is demonstrable nonsense.

Trump rage-tweeted that he “NEVER” told Bolton the aid was tied to those investigations, and reiterated that the transcript of his call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky exonerated him.

Nonsense. First, remember that Trump’s extortion demand was conveyed to Zelensky. This actually happened. Ambassador Gordon Sondland told a top Zelensky aide that the money was indeed conditioned on those investigations.

Trump’s propagandists claim Sondland freelanced this, based on his declaration that he merely “presumed” a link. That was always absurd: Sondland took direction from Trump throughout, and Sondland even testified that Trump told him to convey to Zelensky that he must do Trump’s bidding, even as Zelensky was desperate for the money.

 

But now we have Bolton prepared to testify that Trump himself directly confirmed this link to him, wrecking the “hearsay” defense. If Bolton were lying, you’d think Trump would want him to testify under oath, since Bolton’s account is set to appear in a book. Unless the game is to prevent his testimony to the Senate before the vote on Trump’s fate.

Separately, the transcript just does show Trump using the power of his office to pressure Zelensky. Trump cannot make this disappear through disinformation. And so, his actual claim is that there’s nothing wrong with having done this.

A key Trump legal defense now lies in ruins.

Bolton’s lawyer says he provided the manuscript to the White House on Dec. 30, 2019, for classification review — nearly a month ago.

Importantly, the Times reports that the manuscript might have given Trump’s lawyers a preview of what Bolton would testify. Note:

It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.

It appears Trump’s team wanted to block Bolton’s testimony for the express reason that Bolton would further incriminate Trump.

 

Trump’s lawyers have claimed at his trial that “not a single witness” has “testified” to “any connection” between the aid and the investigations. This weasel language is telling: If it’s true that no witness has testified to this, it’s precisely because Trump blocked witnesses who could testify to it, such as Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

We now know Bolton actually would testify to this, which illustrates that the only way to make that defense technically true is for Trump and GOP senators to prevent him from testifying. Thus, that defense has been reduced to smoldering wreckage.

 

 

Trump’s legal team likely previewed Bolton’s manuscript.

 

Ned Price, a National Security Council official from 2014 to 2017, told me that internal declassification processes in such cases suggest it’s likely Trump’s legal team did indeed access Bolton’s manuscript.

Bolton’s lawyer submitted it to the Records Management Directorate in the White House. Price pointed out that the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, is leading Trump’s impeachment defense, which likely means Cipollone did get his hands on it.

It was also widely known publicly that Bolton was shopping the manuscript around and that he’d indicated a willingness to testify at Trump’s trial — three weeks ago.

“The White House counsel has tremendous reach inside any White House, especially this one,” Price told me. “It’s within the purview of the White House counsel to review records in the possession of the executive office of the president. It’s almost certain he would have sought the manuscript.”

Jack Goldsmith, a White House lawyer under former president George W. Bush, adds that such manuscripts generally are internally circulated “widely.”

So it’s very likely the White House knows exactly how Bolton would further incriminate Trump — and that this is exactly why Trump doesn’t want him to testify.

 

GOP senators have no arguments left.

GOP senators may seize on Trump’s latest tweets to claim that, since he denies Bolton’s account, there’s no reason to hear from Bolton, reports CNN’s Manu Raju:

 

Many Senate Rs will very likely point to this tweet to say they don’t need to hear from Bolton since Trump denies it 
 

This would be insane. The very fact that there is a dispute over something so absolutely central to Trump’s conduct should make GOP senators want to hear from Bolton, since they themselves think of him as credible, and this would allow them to judge his testimony for themselves.

Taking the contrary position would be tantamount to saying we don’t need to hear from witnesses who contradict Trump’s protestations of innocence for the sole reason that the truth is what Trump says it is.

At this point, of course, this really is the position of many Trump defenders. But there is no longer any denying that any GOP senator who goes along with this is willfully and knowingly carrying Trump’s coverup to completion.

When it comes to hearing new witnesses and evidence, GOP senators have no arguments left. And no one is obliged to pretend there’s a shred of legitimacy to whatever excuses they do offer.

 
Donald, when he thinks of his devoted followers who, through thick and thin, have never given up believing in him:
Image result for donald trump laughing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

LOL. Leaked right on cue and tomorrow there will be another salacious but not really verified revelation. It doesn't change the facts that:

No quid pro quo in the transcript.

Zelensky says he was not intimidated.

No investigation was announced by Ukraine.

Ukraine got the money.

image0.png


Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh goodness, more people say something with zero proof, whatever will the courts do?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DC2007 said:

Oh goodness, more people say something with zero proof, whatever will the courts do?

Bolton has an axe to grind.  He strikes me as kind of douchey.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thebowflexbody said:

Bolton has an axe to grind.  He strikes me as kind of douchey.

He has a buck to make, release that book now and 40M copies sell to douchebags who desperately want to claim they now have "proof" of Trump doing something.  Again, Biden used the threat of withold funds until an investigator was fired. He did it in a public forum, that is the definition of Quid Pro Quo and he admitted to it.  I don't need the lefts version of the story that it wasn't about his son, it doesn't matter, if that's Impeachable as apparently it is, then he should immediately be removed from any office and withdraw from the Presidential race.  So BFD somebody is publishing a book about Trump, Trump Tweeted he didn't do it, same thing. Until there is PROOF, nothing matters.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Professor Pigworth said:

I was all set to believe these latest incriminating allegations from John Bolton, but then I read Donald's tweet:

I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens.

Wow, those are really big capital letters in the word "Never," so now I'm thinking Donald absolutely must be telling the truth and that Bolton and all the other corroborating witnesses are the ones who are lying.

Donald fans, please won't you join me in jumping up and down in your big, beautiful MAGA hats like they do in those wonderful rallies that the president holds?

And remember: Donald loves every single one of you, now and forever!

Four Big Takeaways From the Explosive John Bolton Revelations

We have now learned precisely what John Bolton is prepared to tell us about President Trump’s Ukraine extortion scheme. This is terribly inconvenient for Republican senators who are frantically searching for ways to vote against hearing from Trump’s former national security adviser and any others who can shed fresh light on Trump’s corrupt conduct.

After all, new revelations might complicate their preordained vote for acquittal, and that must not happen before that vote is cast.

Bolton writes in an unpublished manuscript of his new book that Trump personally told him he was withholding nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine until officials there carried out the political dirty deeds he was demanding, the New York Times reports.

According to Bolton, he and Trump discussed the matter in August 2019, when Bolton and others were urging Trump to release the aid. Trump said he preferred not to until Ukrainian officials turned over materials related to two false theories — one involving invented Joe Biden corruption in Ukraine, the other concerning fabricated Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.

This directly undercuts one of Trump’s key defenses — that the aid wasn’t frozen to coerce Ukraine into doing his political bidding. Here are four key takeaways:

Trump’s new pushback is demonstrable nonsense.

Trump rage-tweeted that he “NEVER” told Bolton the aid was tied to those investigations, and reiterated that the transcript of his call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky exonerated him.

Nonsense. First, remember that Trump’s extortion demand was conveyed to Zelensky. This actually happened. Ambassador Gordon Sondland told a top Zelensky aide that the money was indeed conditioned on those investigations.

Trump’s propagandists claim Sondland freelanced this, based on his declaration that he merely “presumed” a link. That was always absurd: Sondland took direction from Trump throughout, and Sondland even testified that Trump told him to convey to Zelensky that he must do Trump’s bidding, even as Zelensky was desperate for the money.

But now we have Bolton prepared to testify that Trump himself directly confirmed this link to him, wrecking the “hearsay” defense. If Bolton were lying, you’d think Trump would want him to testify under oath, since Bolton’s account is set to appear in a book. Unless the game is to prevent his testimony to the Senate before the vote on Trump’s fate.

Separately, the transcript just does show Trump using the power of his office to pressure Zelensky. Trump cannot make this disappear through disinformation. And so, his actual claim is that there’s nothing wrong with having done this.

A key Trump legal defense now lies in ruins.

Bolton’s lawyer says he provided the manuscript to the White House on Dec. 30, 2019, for classification review — nearly a month ago.

Importantly, the Times reports that the manuscript might have given Trump’s lawyers a preview of what Bolton would testify. Note:

It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.

It appears Trump’s team wanted to block Bolton’s testimony for the express reason that Bolton would further incriminate Trump.

 

Trump’s lawyers have claimed at his trial that “not a single witness” has “testified” to “any connection” between the aid and the investigations. This weasel language is telling: If it’s true that no witness has testified to this, it’s precisely because Trump blocked witnesses who could testify to it, such as Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

We now know Bolton actually would testify to this, which illustrates that the only way to make that defense technically true is for Trump and GOP senators to prevent him from testifying. Thus, that defense has been reduced to smoldering wreckage.

Trump’s legal team likely previewed Bolton’s manuscript.

 

Ned Price, a National Security Council official from 2014 to 2017, told me that internal declassification processes in such cases suggest it’s likely Trump’s legal team did indeed access Bolton’s manuscript.

Bolton’s lawyer submitted it to the Records Management Directorate in the White House. Price pointed out that the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, is leading Trump’s impeachment defense, which likely means Cipollone did get his hands on it.

It was also widely known publicly that Bolton was shopping the manuscript around and that he’d indicated a willingness to testify at Trump’s trial — three weeks ago.

“The White House counsel has tremendous reach inside any White House, especially this one,” Price told me. “It’s within the purview of the White House counsel to review records in the possession of the executive office of the president. It’s almost certain he would have sought the manuscript.”

Jack Goldsmith, a White House lawyer under former president George W. Bush, adds that such manuscripts generally are internally circulated “widely.”

So it’s very likely the White House knows exactly how Bolton would further incriminate Trump — and that this is exactly why Trump doesn’t want him to testify.

GOP senators have no arguments left.

GOP senators may seize on Trump’s latest tweets to claim that, since he denies Bolton’s account, there’s no reason to hear from Bolton, reports CNN’s Manu Raju:

Many Senate Rs will very likely point to this tweet to say they don’t need to hear from Bolton since Trump denies it 
 

This would be insane. The very fact that there is a dispute over something so absolutely central to Trump’s conduct should make GOP senators want to hear from Bolton, since they themselves think of him as credible, and this would allow them to judge his testimony for themselves.

Taking the contrary position would be tantamount to saying we don’t need to hear from witnesses who contradict Trump’s protestations of innocence for the sole reason that the truth is what Trump says it is.

At this point, of course, this really is the position of many Trump defenders. But there is no longer any denying that any GOP senator who goes along with this is willfully and knowingly carrying Trump’s coverup to completion.

When it comes to hearing new witnesses and evidence, GOP senators have no arguments left. And no one is obliged to pretend there’s a shred of legitimacy to whatever excuses they do offer.

 
Donald, when he thinks of his devoted followers who, through thick and thin, have never given up believing in him:
Image result for donald trump laughing

Another big YAWN, Just another democrat last minute distraction. Just like Kavanaugh, all turned out to be lies. TRUMP 2020 KAG!!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thebowflexbody said:

Bolton has an axe to grind.  He strikes me as kind of douchey.

I remember when he was an evil hawkish war-mongerer to the left that would say anything to get us involved in conflict. Now he’s credible?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jc856 said:

I remember when he was an evil hawkish war-mongerer to the left that would say anything to get us involved in conflict. Now he’s credible?

Nope, just a pissed off Neo-Con trying to get revenge.

  • Like 1

Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DC2007 said:

Oh goodness, more people say something with zero proof, whatever will the courts do?

must be a gag line cuz a serious one couldnt be this absurd

youve got shit buckles own voice admissions. you have him giving you his own illegal narrative - he literally gives them an admission. he also releases the transcript. and it really does contain at least one clear and present bribe for political gain. thats like the mark of his covenant, the no turning back moment. and then he provides the transcript!

we got whats-his-name, sonnet? the bald guy. he was fucking direct as hell. testimony

im sure we got more that hip would fill in if he wasnt doing meth and masturbating all the time now

now we are getting the most damning corroboration possible from one of the highest positions in his cabinet

would be nice if the sc could come through with a ruling requiring those called to testify. it will be a nice litmus test for the sc, too. bc of course they should testify, so if this court votes again testifying then we know its balance is lost for good. my idealistic self thinks they will eventually compel the testimony, or find a reason to punt it back down for another cycle. dont crush my dreams, sc

including others, there are several nice candidates to provide the fecal ones 'october surprise' in the middle of the trial. hes a clown so why not expect a circus. moustache man is the foil right now. thats ironic since i considered him a neo-con and dont like his approach. but that has nothing to do with directly hearing a crime being committed

its called testimony and its been critical in becoming the most likely factor to convict someone because physical evidence is often unavailable. direct testimony is key and could change the whole direction of the trial

plus if bolton says whats expected, more testimony will emerge. people too scared before now get the courage bc they sure as shit never got as high in the admin as bolton did. their little stories of hearing the president or other misdeeds would come forward. whistleblowers across the spectrum. his paperboy says hes three months behind

the ultimate would be releasing his tax returns and all the crimes therein. but that probably wont come in time so it would probably be a bunch of smaller revelations to form the minimum you need to turn this into a conviction. all depends on public sentiment. then again, handlebarman could be transformative

im not saying he will. we are on a very bad path right now, so i expect that will translate into our politics and our lower self rule-making, meaning the gop will slither away the crime

another pathetic stake in the ground we will have to relabel later. two steps forward and AT LEAST one step back. sometimes three


One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Meathead said:

must be a gag line cuz a serious one couldnt be this absurd

youve got shit buckles own voice admissions. you have him giving you his own illegal narrative - he literally gives them an admission. he also releases the transcript. and it really does contain at least one clear and present bribe for political gain. thats like the mark of his covenant, the no turning back moment. and then he provides the transcript!

we got whats-his-name, sonnet? the bald guy. he was fucking direct as hell. testimony

im sure we got more that hip would fill in if he wasnt doing meth and masturbating all the time now

now we are getting the most damning corroboration possible from one of the highest positions in his cabinet

would be nice if the sc could come through with a ruling requiring those called to testify. it will be a nice litmus test for the sc, too. bc of course they should testify, so if this court votes again testifying then we know its balance is lost for good. my idealistic self thinks they will eventually compel the testimony, or find a reason to punt it back down for another cycle. dont crush my dreams, sc

including others, there are several nice candidates to provide the fecal ones 'october surprise' in the middle of the trial. hes a clown so why not expect a circus. moustache man is the foil right now. thats ironic since i considered him a neo-con and dont like his approach. but that has nothing to do with directly hearing a crime being committed

its called testimony and its been critical in becoming the most likely factor to convict someone because physical evidence is often unavailable. direct testimony is key and could change the whole direction of the trial

plus if bolton says whats expected, more testimony will emerge. people too scared before now get the courage bc they sure as shit never got as high in the admin as bolton did. their little stories of hearing the president or other misdeeds would come forward. whistleblowers across the spectrum. his paperboy says hes three months behind

the ultimate would be releasing his tax returns and all the crimes therein. but that probably wont come in time so it would probably be a bunch of smaller revelations to form the minimum you need to turn this into a conviction. all depends on public sentiment. then again, handlebarman could be transformative

im not saying he will. we are on a very bad path right now, so i expect that will translate into our politics and our lower self rule-making, meaning the gop will slither away the crime

another pathetic stake in the ground we will have to relabel later. two steps forward and AT LEAST one step back. sometimes three

Drugs are a terrible thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Meathead said:

must be a gag line cuz a serious one couldnt be this absurd

youve got shit buckles own voice admissions. you have him giving you his own illegal narrative - he literally gives them an admission. he also releases the transcript. and it really does contain at least one clear and present bribe for political gain. thats like the mark of his covenant, the no turning back moment. and then he provides the transcript!

we got whats-his-name, sonnet? the bald guy. he was fucking direct as hell. testimony

im sure we got more that hip would fill in if he wasnt doing meth and masturbating all the time now

now we are getting the most damning corroboration possible from one of the highest positions in his cabinet

would be nice if the sc could come through with a ruling requiring those called to testify. it will be a nice litmus test for the sc, too. bc of course they should testify, so if this court votes again testifying then we know its balance is lost for good. my idealistic self thinks they will eventually compel the testimony, or find a reason to punt it back down for another cycle. dont crush my dreams, sc

including others, there are several nice candidates to provide the fecal ones 'october surprise' in the middle of the trial. hes a clown so why not expect a circus. moustache man is the foil right now. thats ironic since i considered him a neo-con and dont like his approach. but that has nothing to do with directly hearing a crime being committed

its called testimony and its been critical in becoming the most likely factor to convict someone because physical evidence is often unavailable. direct testimony is key and could change the whole direction of the trial

plus if bolton says whats expected, more testimony will emerge. people too scared before now get the courage bc they sure as shit never got as high in the admin as bolton did. their little stories of hearing the president or other misdeeds would come forward. whistleblowers across the spectrum. his paperboy says hes three months behind

the ultimate would be releasing his tax returns and all the crimes therein. but that probably wont come in time so it would probably be a bunch of smaller revelations to form the minimum you need to turn this into a conviction. all depends on public sentiment. then again, handlebarman could be transformative

im not saying he will. we are on a very bad path right now, so i expect that will translate into our politics and our lower self rule-making, meaning the gop will slither away the crime

another pathetic stake in the ground we will have to relabel later. two steps forward and AT LEAST one step back. sometimes three

"would be nice if the sc could come through with a ruling requiring those called to testify. it will be a nice litmus test for the sc, too. bc of course they should testify, so if this court votes again testifying then we know its balance is lost for good. my idealistic self thinks they will eventually compel the testimony, or find a reason to punt it back down for another cycle. dont crush my dreams, sc"

You obviously do not understand the process or the system of checks and balances.  The discovery and facts are to be obtained by Congress, the Senate is to deliverate those facts presented.  They are not charged with adding evidence to a case, that was the House's job and they failed to do so because they couldn't wait to try to use it as a political tool in the election. The SC has no authority to force witnesses as that would be dorectly violating the written process.  So if you really want to watch the system we are founded upon crumble, then yes, you want to see the wrong things done by the wrong parties.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

congratulations

that post was so dumb you just made my list of ppl i dont bother conversing with

holy cow

  • Like 1

One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2020 at 6:21 PM, Very Wide Right said:

Drugs are a terrible thing

one more reference to an ill person in a mocking manner will get you a months time-out

you cant get much more dickish than that. i can take it but im not allowing that kind of gross insensitivity toward other posters on this board

go ahead. do it

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Meathead said:

one more reference to an ill person in a mocking manner will get you a months time-out

you cant get much more dickish than that. i can take it but im not allowing that kind of gross insensitivity toward other posters on this board

go ahead. do it

You are truly a clown, laying on a couch all day jacked up and threatening to ban people on a message board .You are pathetic.Go ahead and ban me loser.

  • Barf 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooops!

 

 

  • Thanks 2

Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Very Wide Right said:

You are truly a clown, laying on a couch all day jacked up and threatening to ban people on a message board .You are pathetic.Go ahead and ban me loser.

Calm down VWR, no reason to get personal. You don’t know anything about the guy, and You are being a bit of a dick. I know you don’t care, but you can at least leave it alone if you’re not going to apologize.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Angry Byrds said:

Calm down VWR, no reason to get personal. You don’t know anything about the guy, and You are being a bit of a dick. I know you don’t care, but you can at least leave it alone if you’re not going to apologize.

All I know about the guy is that he's been a mouthy prick since I showed up 6 years ago.Then he gets back surgery and talks about all of the awesome painkillers he was taking and finally some clown here shows up here and discusses purchasing them from him.I mentioned to him that it wouldn't be a great idea to continue dialogue regarding selling prescription drugs on this board and he finally shut up about it. He's the typical dish it out but can't take it type of whiner. Call me what you like AB but the day will never come that Ill be threatened and be silent about it.He can ban me if he likes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Very Wide Right said:

All I know about the guy is that he's been a mouthy prick since I showed up 6 years ago.Then he gets back surgery and talks about all of the awesome painkillers he was taking and finally some clown here shows up here and discusses purchasing them from him.I mentioned to him that it wouldn't be a great idea to continue dialogue regarding selling prescription drugs on this board and he finally shut up about it. He's the typical dish it out but can't take it type whiner. Call me what you like AB but the day will never come that Ill be threatened and be silent about it.He can ban me if he likes.

I’m not a mod so say what you want, but don’t get a ban because you disagree with his politics. We need our right wing crew here.

  • Thanks 1

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2020 at 1:36 PM, DC2007 said:

He has a buck to make, release that book now and 40M copies sell to douchebags who desperately want to claim they now have "proof" of Trump doing something.  Again, Biden used the threat of withold funds until an investigator was fired. He did it in a public forum, that is the definition of Quid Pro Quo and he admitted to it.  I don't need the lefts version of the story that it wasn't about his son, it doesn't matter, if that's Impeachable as apparently it is, then he should immediately be removed from any office and withdraw from the Presidential race.  So BFD somebody is publishing a book about Trump, Trump Tweeted he didn't do it, same thing. Until there is PROOF, nothing matters.

It’s not lost on me the irony of how every single time anybody says anything negative about Donald Trump, it’s because they’re lying or they have an ulterior motive. In the meantime it’s Donald Trump who continues to be proven to lie constantly, continue to keep trying to keep people in this country divided and change your story about things he’s done and people he knows in order to protect his ass. Right, that makes perfect sense.

 

Reason number three why I say Trump supporters are fucking idiots

  • Thanks 1

“There he goes. One of God's own prototypes.

A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production.

Too weird to live, and too rare to die.”

 

Twitter: @HKTheResistance

 

HipKat, on *** other h***, is genuine, unapoli***tically nasty, and w**** his hea** on his ******. jc856

I’ll just forward them to Bridgett. comssvet11

Seek help. soflabillsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

idk wtf you guys are talking about. he would get banned for mocking a person with serious health issues that has to take medication(s). to me thats a dick move and we arent allowing personal dick moves

  • Like 1

One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...