RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
Can we have a moment of silence please for poor Devin Nunes who will have to walk (or likely take an elevator) to the basement and work until who knows when tonight?
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
none of which matters in scope other than he has others do his due....
that's what high level folks depend on more than any....
that's the beauty of #henceDJT.....there isn't a micro bone in his skeleton or closet.....
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:30 PM)stinkfist Wrote: today's dippo mantra....they don't deserve this song....however, I don't write the tunes...
Great Show. Saw them at UNO Lakefront in '98 or so. Had the big blow-up Rosie at that show. The stage was at one end of the arena and the wife and I were at the other end (behind about where the bball goals are placed) and Angus came out about 8 seats to our left on one of the small round camera stands and began playing and spinning on the ground in a circle with his feet like he was running. One of the best shows ever.
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
Have you ever fired anyone in an at-will state? If you think you're going to be sued/challenged, you build a case... even if you absolutely don't need one.
The better question for you would be, since you asked the question... can you give me an even remotely plausible reason why it matters? YOu ask the question as if the lack of knowledge on your part (meaning the collective left) implies impropriety.... and the inability to give a VALID reason for something totally unnecessary implies culpability.
Why do you wear a belt AND suspenders? Your excuse that you want to make sure your pants don't fall down holds no water, so you MUST be covering up a crime?
That's essentially what you're saying.
MAYBE he did it simply because he's arrogant and wanted to create the impression of 'volume' of reasons to let her go because he lacked 'weight' of reasons. That seems the most logical to me, and is absolutely not remotely a problem in any way.
What maybe do YOU have? You say it begs a question, but only because you're convinced there is something nefarious here. A hammer in search of a nail. Why would it matter if he had a reason if he didn't need one?
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
Have you ever fired anyone in an at-will state? If you think you're going to be sued/challenged, you build a case... even if you absolutely don't need one.
The better question for you would be, since you asked the question... can you give me an even remotely plausible reason why it matters? YOu ask the question as if the lack of knowledge on your part (meaning the collective left) implies impropriety.... and the inability to give a VALID reason for something totally unnecessary implies culpability.
Why do you wear a belt AND suspenders? Your excuse that you want to make sure your pants don't fall down holds no water, so you MUST be covering up a crime?
That's essentially what you're saying.
MAYBE he did it simply because he's arrogant and wanted to create the impression of 'volume' of reasons to let her go because he lacked 'weight' of reasons. That seems the most logical to me, and is absolutely not remotely a problem in any way.
What maybe do YOU have? You say it begs a question, but only because you're convinced there is something nefarious here. A hammer in search of a nail. Why would it matter if he had a reason if he didn't need one?
Maybe Trump was hearing negative things about her and wanted an investigation into her actions so he could remove her for cause. Sometimes the best explanation is the simplest.
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 03:59 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
Debunked by whom exactly and with what evidence?
Everyone with a pulse.
Quote:The U.S. Department of State has stated that the words of Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yury Lutsenko that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch supposedly gave him the list of people, who should not be prosecuted are not true and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch, as Interfax-Ukraine reported.
“Ambassador Yovanovitch presents the U.S. President here, in Ukraine and America supports the ambassador after his statement. The statements of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine do not correspond to the reality and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch. Such accusations are an advantage only for the corrupt figures,” the U.S. State Department said.
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 04:01 PM)TripleA Wrote: DOW just closed above 28,000. First time in history.
Must be all of that Russian money moving into the US market to get in on the Jubilee.
For those of you that don't live near/on the Gulf and don't know what a Jubilee is.
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 04:07 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:
(11-15-2019 04:01 PM)TripleA Wrote: DOW just closed above 28,000. First time in history.
Must be all of that Russian money moving into the US market to get in on the Jubilee.
For those of you that don't live near/on the Gulf and don't know what a Jubilee is.
a guy from Mobile that once worked for me told me about it....it's impressive....almost 'biblical'....
(This post was last modified: 11-15-2019 04:10 PM by stinkfist.)
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 04:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:59 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
Debunked by whom exactly and with what evidence?
Everyone with a pulse.
Quote:The U.S. Department of State has stated that the words of Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yury Lutsenko that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch supposedly gave him the list of people, who should not be prosecuted are not true and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch, as Interfax-Ukraine reported.
“Ambassador Yovanovitch presents the U.S. President here, in Ukraine and America supports the ambassador after his statement. The statements of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine do not correspond to the reality and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch. Such accusations are an advantage only for the corrupt figures,” the U.S. State Department said.
So unnamed State Dept representatives made a denial and that's all you need? I mean, cause they would NEVER lie to protect one of their own or try to hide interfering in another country's internal matters.
RE: "The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
(11-15-2019 04:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:59 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:
(11-15-2019 03:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:
(11-15-2019 02:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:
(11-15-2019 10:23 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: So todays BS is about how unfair it was to remove Obama's ambassador.
Again, they have nothing.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Pretty much...despite her own admission that she served at the pleasure of the POTUS and he had the right to remove her any time without explanation. This seems to be all about her her feelings and reputation being hurt...despite by her own admission her peers still consider her an accomplished public servant and despite her landing a cushy job at Georgetown after her dismissal. So...Yes...this is another big nothingburger and a fishing expedition by the Democrats. She really give no testimony that is noteworthy.
But doesn't that beg the question, why he just didn't do that, but rather had rudy deliver this trove of debunked nonsense to get her removed? And why the two Russian Shreks paid Pete Sessions who then lobbied to have her removed?
Debunked by whom exactly and with what evidence?
Everyone with a pulse.
Quote:The U.S. Department of State has stated that the words of Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yury Lutsenko that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch supposedly gave him the list of people, who should not be prosecuted are not true and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch, as Interfax-Ukraine reported.
“Ambassador Yovanovitch presents the U.S. President here, in Ukraine and America supports the ambassador after his statement. The statements of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine do not correspond to the reality and aims to tarnish the reputation of Ambassador Yovanovitch. Such accusations are an advantage only for the corrupt figures,” the U.S. State Department said.
/
"The clown show known as an “impeachment inquiry” is getting more comical"
