Hill Testimony Validates Trump Election Tampering

a reply to: Gryphon66

The party systems needs to be dissolved. There are way too many uneducated people that vote strictly along party lines without knowing anything about the candidates just that they think they have the same beliefs because they have that letter next to their name.

The values for what each party used to stand for has been twisted and molded for decades now that someone that was a democrat in the early 30's wouldn't even recognize the party and the same can go for republicans. The amount of money tossed around by these big parties is hard to beat and is a lot of the problem. I am not too optimistic that major changes are going to happen within the next few voting cycles unfortunately. The whole thing is a cesspool just waiting to be pumped

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT
Did the Never Trumper who started the research know Fusion would hire a foreigner to do research? And is that illegal, using a research company as an intermediary?

And why does everyone ignore the genesis of the dossier. The DNC picked up the remains and here we are.

Fusion didn't hire Steele until after the original backers backed out, and the DNC took over.

a reply to: Charliebrowndog

Exactly.

But we have to figure out.something.

This will not go on much longer, the center will not hold.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Cheers, I'm not sure of precise timelines. But you agree it was Fusion that hired Steele/Orbis rather than the DNC?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Hang in there , someday you will be right about something .

a reply to: RexKramerPRT

Comey , Brennen , clapper , someone in the Obama administration would be my guess

a reply to: Gryphon66

Amen to that

originally posted by: Sillyolme
You guys have smeared and slammed every single witness.
Every one is flawed and somehow prejudice against trump.
Its really amazing how many never trumpers trump put on the payroll LOL.

So now this lady is somehow prejudiced because she knows Chris Steele and read the dossier.
Yeah I am sure somewhere that makes perfect sense but not on this planet.

They're being slammed because they don't have any evidence of wrongdoing after Schiff proclaimed these were the people that would stop Trump in his tracks. They wouldn't even be considered as witnesses in an actual court, the judge wouldn't allow it. So Schiff is manufacturing this so-called "evidence" that turns out to be nothing more than smoke and mirrors. He even got caught yesterday along with CNN fabricating a story for the news that turned out to be false.

I think this situation proves that Nancy is no longer in control of the House. She should never have allowed this to happen. I'm glad she did in a way, it proves what those of us on the right have been saying for years - it's a pathetic attempt to take down Trump by the Democrats because they're still pissed about losing in 2016.

a reply to: HalWesten

Oh come on. Of course they would be accepted as witnesses in court. Drop the party line for once.

Trump did what he did. It is not illegal. The Democrats have admitted they're impeaching Trump because they can't trust the Electorate.

Let them Impeach the Senate will acquit, and these bozos will be out in November.

Of course that only means the other bozos will take over which gives me no solace.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne

originally posted by: Sillyolme
You guys have smeared and slammed every single witness.
Every one is flawed and somehow prejudice against trump.
Its really amazing how many never trumpers trump put on the payroll LOL.

So now this lady is somehow prejudiced because she knows Chris Steele and read the dossier.
Yeah I am sure somewhere that makes perfect sense but not on this planet.

I knew you'd be along shortly...

You can't defend the merits and rather smear people for sharing their own perspectives and opinions that aren't yous, and have the hypocritical balls to talk about smearing?

You know what else isn't on this planet? A single person that told Sondland that there was a "this for that" or that aid was attached to anything.

~Namaste

If what you say is true, that “ ...You know what else isn't on this planet? A single person that told Sondland that there was a "this for that...”,

Then the first, and apparently, only time that a quid pro quo/“this-for-that” arrangement was mentioned, Was By President Trump, Himself

In his phone call to Ambassador Sondland the day After! the whistleblower complaint was made and the President likely became aware that the contents of the his call to the Ukrainian President were being scrutinized!

Just stop. Sondland said several times, under oath, that Trump NEVER said he wanted anything for the aid. Nothing. Zero. Nada. No QPQ. Did you listen to the testimony by Sondland? I did. Others here did too.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: HalWesten

Oh come on. Of course they would be accepted as witnesses in court. Drop the party line for once.

Trump did what he did. It is not illegal. The Democrats have admitted they're impeaching Trump because they can't trust the Electorate.

Let them Impeach the Senate will acquit, and these bozos will be out in November.

Of course that only means the other bozos will take over which gives me no solace.

This has nothing to do with party, they are hearsay witnesses and that is rarely, if ever allowed in a courtroom. In this case they would be laughed out of court. All of the ones we've heard from so far.

Just because I am a conservative doesn't mean I follow party lines. I want the guilty to pay and the innocent to be left alone. I don't care what party they're in. I'm not a lemming, I'm an independent thinker who knows how to find information on my own. I don't need any politician or media slug telling me what to think. I also have a very good BS detector and it has been going off a lot lately.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Collusion is not a crime.

*Ducks*

a reply to: Sillyolme

Big diff b/n oppo research and evidence used by gov to unseat elected prez.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It's like money laundering only laundering crime.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Charliebrowndog

Exactly.

But we have to figure out.something.

This will not go on much longer, the center will not hold.

It is not the center that caused this problem

Nice try tho
The center will DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM

a reply to: HalWesten

Your argument that all testimony is “hearsay” is inaccurate. I myself have personally watched maybe 5% of the entirety of witness testimony and I assure you it’s many first hand accounts of what happened. So, even though that is anecdotal, I don’t agree with you.

Further hearsay evidence is not always excluded even in criminal or civil court hearings. I can link you a list of over 30 exceptions to the general rule from the FRE manual if you’d like.

I accept that your politics are what you say they are. You may be reacting to my use of the phrase “party line” so allow me to be more specific. My issue with your argument is that you are merely rhetorically “waving your hands” at dozens if not hundreds of hours of direct testimony and discounting it without dealing with any specific challenges or critiques.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Charliebrowndog

Exactly.

But we have to figure out.something.

This will not go on much longer, the center will not hold.

It is not the center that caused this problem

Nice try tho
The center will DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM

ok bud
you go

a reply to: Gryphon66
Keep on justifying their garbage.
No worries

Nice to meet you!

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: proximo

People think that this is a republican versus democrat issue when it’s really a corrupt government versus us issue.

Yep.

If Obama and company abused the system, then they need to be brought to justice. IF Barr and Durham are playing politics with the same thing, they need to be brought to justice as well ...

.. and then we need to dispense with the whole damned mess of spying on American citizens in our own country. Enough is enough.

And now
Here it is
The patented "they are all bad" excuse...
Not this time pal

3 years of broken laws, partisanship, and BAMN.

Nope they are not all bad this time.

Hills testimony showed something else

She admitted she heard Ukrainian parliamentary member Leshchenko was a source for Steele’s dossier

She admits she now knows the dnc paid for the dossier

She admits the dossier was a rat hole and Steele was duped

She admits it would be improper for a political party to pay foreign officials for dirt in opponents

Given this, how can she claim there was no Ukrainian interference?