|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 22, 2019 14:20:49 GMT -5
We all know about the impeachment investigation. It's all happening behind closed doors and
the only parts of it that are being made public are the hand-picked parts that Adam Schiff chooses
to be made public. The prohibition of GOP participation and the prohibition of any representation
by the administration are also in full force.
Of course, we know how the investigation "leaks" are being handled by the media... with great
zeal, for lack of a better characterization. But, what about OTHER information that's fully public?
Well, this morning, I saw a perfect example of that.
My local news mentioned the now-famous text from Ukraine diplomat, Bill Taylor. It reads:
"I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign"
Turning to the ABC news good morning america broadcast, they headlined with the same Bill
Taylor communique. Clearly, it's damning for the president. CBS news came out with the same
thing... almost like it was coordinated.
So then, I turned to Fox News. Fox displayed the same quote, but they ALSO displayed the
reply from John Sondland, the diplomat that Bill Taylor sent that text to. Sondland's reply read:
"Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has
been crystal clear; no quid quo pro of any kind".
What is absolutely amazing to me, given this magnitude of coordination being practiced between
Adam Schiff's star-chamber investigation and the very selective news reporting by the media, is
WHY are the president's poll ratings holding up as well as they are? Is the president so popular
that he can actually withstand a full-on assault of media negativity of this magnitude and still pack
NBA basketball arenas and get re-elected.
Clearly, these are political times the likes of which we've never, ever seen before in America.
But it points up one, very important thing:
Be Very, Very Careful where you get your information and Triple-check EVERYTHING you hear....
... it's the reality of these extraordinary times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Oct 23, 2019 6:58:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 23, 2019 21:39:04 GMT -5
Yeah, you have to take everything with a grain of salt and go to multiple sources for anything anymore. I'm guessing the Omar piece wasn't on the "mainstream" media, however. |
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Oct 23, 2019 21:47:21 GMT -5
Correct on Omar. It was just an example of checking your sources no matter where they come from or how much you want it to be true.
Fact check...
|
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 24, 2019 11:56:42 GMT -5
Very little coverage of the GOP revolt against the dem's "star-chamber" interrogations and
anti-trump leaks to a media foaming at the mouth to trumpet it yesterday.
In the end, this all boils down to the call transcript. All around that central element are
a bunch of democrat operatives screaming that there was quid-pro-quo and a bunch of Republican
operatives screaming that there wasn't.
We also know that the "whistleblower" is a democrat that conspired with Adam Schiff prior to
releasing his statement, and we know that Ukraine didn't know anything about the $400 million in
funding being held up until well after the phone call happened.
In the end, what Schiff's star-chamber is all about is that it's a continuation of his 3 year
hunt for dirt on the President. What they have now is a nothing-burger in the eyes of the Senators
who would try any impeachment, so they're digging and hunting for another thing to pin on the
President...
... like maybe an open microphone where Trump is caught promising the Russians more cooperation
after his re-election.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccogburn on Oct 24, 2019 12:24:17 GMT -5
So if we are to believe Donald Trump we assume that Bill Taylor is a complete liar. 72 years old graduate of West Point served his country in Vietnam and has been a diplomat for both Democrat & Republican Administrations in Ukraine off and on 30 years.
Sure doesn't seem like the kind of individual that would be a complete liar and make stuff up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Oct 25, 2019 13:56:10 GMT -5
You have to ask yourself why this stuff is being done behind closed doors? The reason is you have to let the Dems interpret it.
It’s like the phrase, ‘No don’t stop’ ... its meaning changes depending on tone and where the punctuation is.
It could mean... No, don’t stop.
It could mean ... No, don’t, stop!
|
|
|
|
Post by ccogburn on Oct 25, 2019 15:12:54 GMT -5
Well was there not both Democrats and Republicans both in the meeting behind closed doors? They both had the opportunity to ask questions to the witness correct? They portray it as the Republicans stormed the door because they weren't allowed in meeting? Correct me if I'm wrong but both parties were there during the testimony of Bill Taylor.
Hence the problem Trump has, if he would of admitted it thinking he was doing nothing wrong then I don't think the grounds for impeachment are there. But if proof comes out that Trump has lied about it and tried to cover it up then there's a problem. Would you not agree Blitz?
|
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 25, 2019 15:28:49 GMT -5
Reports are that GOP intel committee members are limited with their questions and, even though
each star-chamber interrogation begins with the prelude that there's "no classified info" in
the event, GOP members are strictly barred from sharing anything outside of the star-chamber
itself. Leaks are only allowed coming from Schiff, and they are always uber-partisan.
As Graham stated, the intent is to drive the narrative and destroy Trump's poll ratings.
The left has stated that special counsel investigations with Clinton and Nixon were similarly
closed-door, but the difference is that those were conducted by an "independent" counsel, not
a leftist like Schiff with a history of lying and those counsels, like Mueller, didn't leak
information.
Think of it this way: What if there were to be a presidential debate between Elizabeth Warren
and Donald Trump. Would it be fair if Rush Limbaugh was responsible for asking 70% of the
questions and Trump was the only one allowed to answer them as Warren stood silent? Then
Fox News was the only news outlet that was allowed to report on the debate?...
... that's essentially what's happening with Adam Schiff's star-chamber.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccogburn on Oct 25, 2019 15:35:05 GMT -5
Interesting, not sure why they would not just have the witness in front of everyone in congress. So what happens if and when the house votes for impeachment? Let's say the house impeaches him, then does the Senate do the same thing and interview the same witness's in there own private room?
|
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 26, 2019 20:04:09 GMT -5
Got the explanation for why Schiff states at the beginning of every star-chamber session that the
contents are "non-classified". The reason, is so that Schiff can leak anything in the session that
is adverse to Trump, but the "rules" prohibit the GOP members from saying anything.
Bottom Line: Taylor made for maximum anti-trump impact and coordinated with the mainstream media.
And, it's working. Schiff is succeeding in driving down Trump's favorable ratings in the polls.
That's the idea behind this political coup (for lack of a more appropriate term) , and it's succeeding, so far.
Meanwhile, the more crazy and historically deviant it gets, the more the republicans in the senate are saying
that it'll be dead-on-arrival once it gets there...
... but that's not Pelosi's and Schiff's objective... they KNOW Trump won't be convicted in the Senate.
The WHOLE IDEA behind all of this is to drive down Trump's popularity with negative press. That's it...
... and right now... it's working.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccogburn on Oct 27, 2019 19:24:05 GMT -5
Well if they can prove that Trump withheld funding & refused to meet with Ukraine's president until an investigation of the Bidens took place then lied about it and tried to cover it up then it would be an impeachable offense correct?
Trump has denied these allegations & has denied these converations took place just like Bill Clinton denied having sexual relations with Monica. Clinton deserved to be impeached because he lied about it. Does Trump not deserve the same fate if he has lied about this? Its one thing to make a mistake, its another to lie about it and try to cover it up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2019 20:50:14 GMT -5
There is NO evidence, of any kind, of anything Impeachable.
Everything is hearsay, fake news, he said she said, alleged allegation, and lots of made up stories and lying by the Dems.
All it is, is the Dems trying to destroy Trump, his popularity and to remove him from office and it actually started before he became president.
Adam Schiff actually proved the Dems are full of it when he kept saying he had proof of collusion and when he made up a story about the transcript trump submitted that was totally different then the actual transcript submitted.
Trump is right, Adam Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi and some others should be sued for fraud that way, lets use Schiff as an example, Schiff would have to present his evidence which he has showed in the past No evidence exists.
At this pint either you vote for Trump (and capitalism), or possibly another Republican, or you vote for the Dems & Socialism and the end of American and the American dream.
If you vote for the Dems and Socialism you probably need a lobotomy because somethings very wrong with you IMO.
As for Nadler, physically he does not look good, and is probably very ill, to me he doesn't look like he will make it to the election.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Oct 28, 2019 6:37:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ccogburn on Oct 28, 2019 11:36:43 GMT -5
So Bill Taylor's testimony was just a made up lie? I don't really get how that is fake news. He testified Trump was withholding funds & refused to meet with Ukraine's president unless he investigated the Biden's. All that is "fake news?"
Are you guys discrediting his testimony or just not considering it because the Republican party was not properly represented in the "lockdown room?" I'm not voting for socialism I'm just looking at the facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by flyinggoos on Oct 28, 2019 12:36:23 GMT -5
Cc:: with all due respect, nothing is factual n politics imho!!
Gltu
goos
|
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Oct 28, 2019 13:10:18 GMT -5
It's all he-said, she-said, except the transcript, which was prepared as verbatim as possible before any of this even started. What we're hearing about the star-chamber testimonials is only what Adam Schiff wants us to hear. There's another, entire side of the story that hasn't seen the light of day. Given what we know so far, the significance of which is debatable, it's only the left half of the story. Meanwhile, the Ukranians were adamant that they didn't know anything about the aid being held up and have stated that they were never pressured about anything. According to them, the alleged quid-pro-quo had no quo. We also know what Sondland Told Taylor when Taylor suggested the idea of a quid-pro-quo... his reply was hard-coded into a text. In the end, Biden proudly boasted on camera that he held up the billion unless Ukraine refrained from investigating his Son's Ukranian company. That's quite a contrast from the somewhat vain attempts of trying to piece together anything fishy from the transcript of Trump's phone call. It's good to keep the various instances of corruption in perspective, IMO... some are replete with a torrent of conflicting, he-said, she-saids, and some are blurted right out there on camera for all the world to see. www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/27/flashback_2018_joe_biden_brags_at_cfr_meeting_about_withholding_aid_to_ukraine_to_force_firing_of_prosecutor.html?src=ilaw |
|
