(01-16-2020 12:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote: Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Even if they had conversations about Biden, or a Biden investigation and then said publicly something contrary to it....it isn't a crime.
But it's impeachable to the point of removal from office if senate votes that. Oops.
You leftists are insane. And the next time the GOP will impeach when they control the House. Remember Dingy Harry Reid's Senate Nuclear Option.
Sure...okay. And I'm all for getting things back to a majority as that's they way it was always supposed to work IMO. I couldn't care less if it hurts any party not in power.
Morning Joe co-anchor Joe Scarborough said on Thursday that history "will be bleak" for the children and grandchildren of President Donald Trump's defenders.
"We do know how history writes this. We know that everyone who defends Donald Trump right now will be exposed. We know Mike Pence will be exposed for what he is. We know that [Attorney General Bill] Barr will be exposed for what he is. We know that all of these characters, Rudy Giuliani, will be exposed for what he is," Scarborough said. "History, it will be bleak, and their families, their children—their grandchildren—everyone who has their last name will carry that around with them."
"Loyalty only goes one way with Donald Trump, and that's what I find so remarkable here—that all of these people who are going to be called out, I promise you," he continued.
Scarborough said that Pence should follow the lead of Lev Parnas, the indicted Rudy Giuliani associate who is now speaking out about Trump's role in withholding military aid to Ukraine. Parnas appeared on The Rachel Maddow Show to accuse Trump of lying about his knowledge of his activity in Ukraine.
"You might as well do what Lev did and come clean," Scarborough said. "Maybe listen to your wife," co-anchor Mika Brzezinski said.
Scarborough called Attorney General Barr "corrupt to the core," saying there was no need to appeal to him to turn on Trump.
"Who are the Howard Bakers that history will remember as men and women of virtue?" Scarborough concluded. Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) asked a similar question during the initial stages of the impeachment inquiry.
(01-16-2020 03:33 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote: Trump couldn't point out Ukraine on a map let alone be concerned about corruption going on there...
There's a new book coming out saying that he had to have Pearl Harbor explained to him.
A true genius that one.
If you truly believe that you have no business questioning anyone else's intelligence.
That's the reporting...and seeing this fool in action for this long now, nothing would surprise me.
I'm not the biggest Trump fan out there although he is light years ahead of any democrat holding national office or running for president but I would be extremely dubious of that report.
(01-16-2020 10:21 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Wait a minute... you mean somebody gave their opinion about what Trump's intentions were? OMG. GET THAT MAN IN FRONT OF CONGRESS IMMEDIATELY!
Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Does not matter how they will go. Once the Biden’s are called and it is shown the president had a moral and legal reason for his actions none of the rest matters at all. Except for the Biden’s of course....
You're seriously still sticking with this nonsense that donald was only concerned about corruption?
(01-16-2020 10:21 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Wait a minute... you mean somebody gave their opinion about what Trump's intentions were? OMG. GET THAT MAN IN FRONT OF CONGRESS IMMEDIATELY!
Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Fine call them. They all deny what Parnas says and support Trump's version of events Either that is the truth or you can't prove what they say is false. In real life, it's extremely rare that someone just says "oh you got me!" And admits everything illegal they may have done. John Bolton is the only one out of that group that might say something that would help Dems. And he will be vulnerable to attack as a disgruntled fired employee.
Calling hostile witnesses without knowing what they are going to say (who haven't already provided sworn testimony) is not a recipe for prosecutorial success.
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2020 04:33 PM by Jugnaut.)
Morning Joe co-anchor Joe Scarborough said on Thursday that history "will be bleak" for the children and grandchildren of President Donald Trump's defenders.
"We do know how history writes this. We know that everyone who defends Donald Trump right now will be exposed. We know Mike Pence will be exposed for what he is. We know that [Attorney General Bill] Barr will be exposed for what he is. We know that all of these characters, Rudy Giuliani, will be exposed for what he is," Scarborough said. "History, it will be bleak, and their families, their children—their grandchildren—everyone who has their last name will carry that around with them."
"Loyalty only goes one way with Donald Trump, and that's what I find so remarkable here—that all of these people who are going to be called out, I promise you," he continued.
Scarborough said that Pence should follow the lead of Lev Parnas, the indicted Rudy Giuliani associate who is now speaking out about Trump's role in withholding military aid to Ukraine. Parnas appeared on The Rachel Maddow Show to accuse Trump of lying about his knowledge of his activity in Ukraine.
"You might as well do what Lev did and come clean," Scarborough said. "Maybe listen to your wife," co-anchor Mika Brzezinski said.
Scarborough called Attorney General Barr "corrupt to the core," saying there was no need to appeal to him to turn on Trump.
"Who are the Howard Bakers that history will remember as men and women of virtue?" Scarborough concluded. Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) asked a similar question during the initial stages of the impeachment inquiry.
(01-16-2020 10:21 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Wait a minute... you mean somebody gave their opinion about what Trump's intentions were? OMG. GET THAT MAN IN FRONT OF CONGRESS IMMEDIATELY!
Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Fine call them. They all deny what Parnas says and support Trump's version of events Either that is the truth or you can't prove what they say is false. In real life, it's extremely rare that someone just says "oh you got me!" And admits everything illegal they may have done. John Bolton is the only one out of that group that might say something that would help Dems. And he will be vulnerable to attack as a disgruntled fired employee.
And that is trump's only go to excuse. Funny how they are all great men until they leave the inner circle of corruption. Then they all become liars.
(01-16-2020 10:21 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Wait a minute... you mean somebody gave their opinion about what Trump's intentions were? OMG. GET THAT MAN IN FRONT OF CONGRESS IMMEDIATELY!
Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Fine call them. They all deny what Parnas says and support Trump's version of events Either that is the truth or you can't prove what they say is false. In real life, it's extremely rare that someone just says "oh you got me!" And admits everything illegal they may have done. John Bolton is the only one out of that group that might say something that would help Dems. And he will be vulnerable to attack as a disgruntled fired employee.
And that is trump's only go to excuse. Funny how they are all great men until they leave the inner circle of corruption. Then they all become liars.
Who ever said Lev Parnas was a "great man"? I'd never heard of the guy.
(01-16-2020 11:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote: The thread is about Parnas.
Not about the media nor Hunter Biden.
WTF, of course that includes the media and corrupt Biden.
Can you even imagine if a Trump child was a coke head knocking up strippers and getting million dollar jobs thanks to daddy being vice pres. These libs are such a bunch of fools.
Your personally endorsed president is a porn star ******* adulterer dude!
None of which happened while he was on the public payroll or as a result of a family member being on the public payroll.
And yes, if Ivanka had questionable moral character and financial issues and was given a huge paycheck by a foreign country for something she was only tertiarily qualified for while her father were President, you'd be 100% on the other side of this conversation.
(01-16-2020 12:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote: Yeah the cross examination of him would be brutal:
1) You never spoke to Trump directly about anything related to Ukraine?
Parnas: No
2) Therefore, you have no direct or personal knowledge of his mindset or intentions?
Parnas: No.
3) You didn't come forward with these allegations against Trump until after you were indicted for campaign finance violations?
Parnas: That's correct
Then you argue that Parnas is worthless because he doesn't know anything related to Trump and has a motive for dishonesty, i.e. he's basically a prison snitch and unreliable.
cor·rob·o·ra·tion
Next, the prosecution calls Rudy Giuliani
Next, the prosecution calls William Barr
Next, the prosecution calls Mike Pompeo
Next, the prosecution calls John Bolton
Oops, how would those examinations go?
Fine call them. They all deny what Parnas says and support Trump's version of events Either that is the truth or you can't prove what they say is false. In real life, it's extremely rare that someone just says "oh you got me!" And admits everything illegal they may have done. John Bolton is the only one out of that group that might say something that would help Dems. And he will be vulnerable to attack as a disgruntled fired employee.
And that is trump's only go to excuse. Funny how they are all great men until they leave the inner circle of corruption. Then they all become liars.
Who ever said Lev Parnas was a "great man"? I'd never heard of the guy.