Rudy Pal Lev Parnas Releases Audio of Trump Calling for Ukraine Ambassador’s Firing

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I don’t think that meme answered my question though?

You know better than that...

[Dashinka 24,862]

1 hour ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Who says your question is worth answering?

Apparently not you as that would skew the narrative.

[90DayFinancier 910]

43 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Apparently not you as that would skew the narrative.

Getting derailed by some unrelated  side show is not my gig.

 

If you want to post how many times a Democrat "broke bread" the Jeffrey Epstein, look it up yourself and post it on another thread because it has nothing to do with the Presidents involvement with accused felons, the judgement of Guliani in association with them, and the President's use of Guliani as his personal lawyer.

 

If you want to hire me for research, my rates start at 125 an hour, 8 hour minimum. 

[Dashinka 24,862]

58 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Getting derailed by some unrelated  side show is not my gig.

 

If you want to post how many times a Democrat "broke bread" the Jeffrey Epstein, look it up yourself and post it on another thread because it has nothing to do with the Presidents involvement with accused felons, the judgement of Guliani in association with them, and the President's use of Guliani as his personal lawyer.

 

If you want to hire me for research, my rates start at 125 an hour, 8 hour minimum. 

I thought the theme of this thread was a recording taken in 2018 about an ambassador that was serving at the will of the President and making some very questionable statements who was eventually fired almost a year later?  Seems appropriate to ask that question, or the deeper question regarding whether this is even a current event?

 

Another theme of this thread was that Trump and Parnas are supposedly close.  The Epstein analogy was certainly appropriate as politicians have dinner with many people who they are not close to.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Bill & Katya

[90DayFinancier 910]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I thought the theme of this thread was a recording taken in 2018 about an ambassador that was serving at the will of the President and making some very questionable statements who was eventually fired almost a year later?  Seems appropriate to ask that question, or the deeper question regarding whether this is even a current event?

 

Another theme of this thread was that Trump and Parnas are supposedly close.  The Epstein analogy was certainly appropriate as politicians have dinner with many people who they are not close to.

To me the theme of the thread is yet another supporting pillar in the arguments that 1. Trump is a chronic liar 2. Trump does not care what norm , ethic, law or boundary he crosses if it will save his skin, enhance his power or put money in his pocket.

Why true conservatives put up with this nonsense us a mystery to me.

[Dashinka 24,862]

24 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

To me the theme of the thread is yet another supporting pillar in the arguments that 1. Trump is a chronic liar 2. Trump does not care what norm , ethic, law or boundary he crosses if it will save his skin, enhance his power or put money in his pocket.

Why true conservatives put up with this nonsense us a mystery to me.

What law has he crossed?  Btw, all politicians lie, politics in general are full of quid pro quo’s.  Regardless, let’s remove President Trump because we hate him.  Sounds like a plan.  Additionally, who said it was just conservatives that support President Trump?  If it is just conservatives, he will certainly lose in November.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Bill & Katya

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I thought the theme of this thread was a recording taken in 2018 about an ambassador that was serving at the will of the President and making some very questionable statements who was eventually fired almost a year later?  Seems appropriate to ask that question, or the deeper question regarding whether this is even a current event?

 

Another theme of this thread was that Trump and Parnas are supposedly close.  The Epstein analogy was certainly appropriate as politicians have dinner with many people who they are not close to.

 

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

What law has he crossed?  Btw, all politicians lie, politics in general are full of quid pro quo’s.  Regardless, let’s remove President Trump because we hate him.  Sounds like a plan.  Additionally, who said it was just conservatives that support President Trump?  If it is just conservatives, he will certainly lose in November.

Any agreement is technically a quid pro quo (and pretty much any agreement a President makes can be broadly assumed to benefit the President, as an American, and as a President seeking re-election, as doing anything positive for the US would be beneficial for him personally), unless the US is giving things away with absolutely nothing in return, which would be dumb, thus no President has ever done it. 

 

The gaslighting here is trying to make people question (what we know is common sense..) whether or not its reasonable for the President to be formulating foreign policy rather than unelected bureaucrats that work for the President who makes foreign policy. It's also a distraction effort to try and direct eyes away from the corruption behind investigating Trump, interference in the 2016 election, etc. 

 

I think it's amusing how the left, the media, and the corrupt government elements, all try and tailor this to their own specific agenda, under the single "orange man bad" premise. 

Edited January 26, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

3 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Getting derailed by some unrelated  side show is not my gig.

 

If you want to post how many times a Democrat "broke bread" the Jeffrey Epstein, look it up yourself and post it on another thread because it has nothing to do with the Presidents involvement with accused felons, the judgement of Guliani in association with them, and the President's use of Guliani as his personal lawyer.

 

If you want to hire me for research, my rates start at 125 an hour, 8 hour minimum. 

based on all the poorly researched items you post about Trump, I will have to pass on that offer

[90DayFinancier 910]

49 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

based on all the poorly researched items you post about Trump, I will have to pass on that offer

You got what you paid for my friend.

[TBoneTX 46,273]

0bummer fired all the ambassadors, and criticism thereof was not allowed.

Ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the President.

Edited January 27, 2020 by TBoneTX

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

Just now, TBoneTX said:

0bummer fired all the ambassadors, and criticism thereof was not allowed.

Ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the President.

its really that simple isnt it. 

[Dashinka 24,862]

13 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

its really that simple isnt it. 

But Trump lies, and regularly exaggerates with hyperbole therefore he must be removed from office.

 

[Crazy Cat 42,535]

19 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

But Trump lies, and regularly exaggerates with hyperbole therefore he must be removed from office.

 

The Dems are grasping at straws.   The founders never meant "Abuse of Power" without a high crime or (high) misdemeanor) to be justification for removing a President.

1.  "Abuse of power"  is much too broad.  Every President in history could be accused based on a broad definition of that term.  There is no crime here.  There isn't even any 1st hand evidence of the so-called abuse of power.

2.  "Obstruction of Congress" is laughable and pathetic. The Legislative and Executive branches of government are equal.  That means that President Trump has every right (and responsibility) to deny their demands.  That leaves the Supreme Court as the referee, as it was intended.

 

The Democrats in the House of Representatives are attempting to create a parliamentary relationship between Congress and the office of President where the President serves at the pleasure of the House........It doesn't work that way here in the US.  The founders meant for the President to serve at the pleasure of the voters....every 4 years.....not at the pleasure of every majority House. 

 

Let's face it.  This impeachment game stated long before Trump even took office.......just because he was elected.....

Edited January 27, 2020 by missileman

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 hour ago, TBoneTX said:

0bummer fired all the ambassadors, and criticism thereof was not allowed.

Ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the President.

You got it. Fresh orange man bad narrative, ignore history, ignore reason, ignore constitution, rinse, repeat. And so long as someone provides confirmation bias (which is easy given the MSM circulation of confirmation bias rather than challenging), get a new dose every day. This has been the transparent process the left have boringly used over and over and over for the last 3 years, whether Trump, or Kavanaugh, or anyone else.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[TBoneTX 46,273]

Self-correction:  It was all the U.S. attorneys whom 0bummer fired.