Donald Trump

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:31

chroniclard said:
Wasn't spying brought up by Trusty to deflect from corrupt Donalds impeachment?

nope, @Pottsey brought up spying but cannot prove it.

chroniclard · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:33

Remains to be seen if the corrupt GOP Senate will call witnesses and if Trump will try and suppress evidence again. If the senate do vote for witnesses then Trump will have a hard time trying obstructing that.

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:34

doodah said:
Is there an award for worst thread in GD? It's a complete **** show of plasmahal getting as much attention as possible.

There's no point to it because it's just countered by sticking their fingers in their ears and screming "la la la la la la la".

You cannot stand that people have the opportunity to debunk your MSM lies and CT's. You try hard to turn this into another ant-trump TDS echo-chamber like in SC but cannot cope with any form of resistance.

chroniclard · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:37

plasmahal said:
You cannot stand that people have the opportunity to debunk your MSM lies and CT's. You try hard to turn this into another ant-trump TDS echo-chamber like in SC but cannot cope with any form of resistance.

You dont have any resistance, just delusional ranting with no basis in fact. First person ever I blocked, complete nutcase. :rolleyes:

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:38

Jono8 said:
Wow, somebody clearly didn't take kindly to the Bolton news

If referring to me, I have only just caught up with this thread and what was posted was a far-left anti-trump source with no credible evidence. As pointed out by someone else, people's books etc have to be cleared prior to publication and that was all in confidence. Makes you wonder how a far-left anti-trump source has read john boltons book already.

doodah · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:39

Somebody is compensating for being left out of SC

. If GD is the only place you can post your Jacob Wohl levels of nonsense, so be it. At least it's not SC.

Jono8 · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:40

doodah said:
Somebody is compensating for being left out of SC .

He can't just keep posting lies in that thread, fortunately.

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:42

chroniclard said:
Remains to be seen if the corrupt GOP Senate will call witnesses and if Trump will try and suppress evidence again. If the senate do vote for witnesses then Trump will have a hard time trying obstructing that.

House should have called the witnesses then needed, but they didn't, get over it.

Senate should call further witnesses based who they think is needed.

When did Trump suppress evidence? you are making that up. The house gathered all the evidence they wanted. If they needed more, they should have taken the time to put a credible case together, that's what happens in real life.

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:44

chroniclard said:
just delusional ranting with no basis in fact.

sounds like yourself...

If Trump gets acquitted, we'll see who's right.

doodah · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:46

I do wonder if he has a script like telesales agents do.

Evidence > move the goalposts
Question > answer with a question, deflect
Everything else > Obama

Jono8 · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:47

plasmahal said:
House should have called the witnesses then needed, but they didn't, get over it.

This is just a brazen lie.

They did call loads of witnesses, but some( like Bolton) refused to, under White House orders.

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:49

doodah said:
Somebody is compensating for being left out of SC

Not been left out, posted there the other day.

you forced other posters out so it's just a completely one-sided echo chamber.

doodah said:
If GD is the only place you can post your Jacob Wohl levels of nonsense, so be it. At least it's not SC.

Don't know who that is, is it safe to google?

i'll leave the posting of lies and CT's in SC to you guys, your are far better at it than me. I look on occasions to see if there is any intelligent debate, and always get disappointed. That's why no-one other than anti-trumpers post there.

Bubo · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:49

plasmahal said:
nope, the jury will listen to the evidence and opposing arguments and will rule either not guilty or not guilty. That's as simple as i can put it for you on how it works.

FTFY, I made it even simpler.

doodah · 27 Jan 2020 at 13:51

plasmahal said:
Not been left out, posted there the other day.

you forced other posters out so it's just a completely one-sided echo chamber.

You keep saying this and seeing as you hate liars - where did I?

Pottsey · 27 Jan 2020 at 14:01

plasmahal said:
“you won't see it as @Pottsey made it up. It's total TDS BS.”
“Nope, @Pottsey brought up spying but cannot prove it.”

The spying is proven that’s already been released and shown. The Republican who did it said the spying was done by direct orders form Trump. He handed over the evidence to the house to go with his claims. Trumps defense was to lie and say he didn’t know the person. Which is now an established lie.

plasmahal said:
“LOL, a far-left anti-trump source.... silly trolls.”

The source is Bolton a long established hard-core far right Republican. He is more Republican then Trump. Your a complete fool, there is no other word for it.

deuse · 27 Jan 2020 at 14:13

VincentHanna said:
Trump: "I'm completely innocent - The transcripts and witnesses will vindicate me."
Democrats - "OK - Can we read the full transcripts"
Trump: "No"
Democrats "Well can we hear from the witnesses who will vindicate you?
Trump: No

Hmmm

doodah said:
Vindman was on the call. That's first hand. Sondland was instructed by Trump (including a call other witnesses heard). That's first hand.

So you started with saying it's hearsay/no one has evidence. Only address one of four presented to you and then revert back to saying 'most are 3rd/4th hand'....

Do you think all of these people are lying? The man who donated $1m to Trump and personal appointee and the career professionals or the president who is a pathological liar (>15,000 misleading statements in a little over 3 years). I won't hold my breath.

The transcript was read out in the trial on Saturday.
Trumps team even put in the remarks that the dems left out. You did watch it.....didn't you?

Or did you both go to cnn and hope for the best?

plasmahal · 27 Jan 2020 at 14:19

Jono8 said:
This is just a brazen lie.

They did call loads of witnesses, but some( like Bolton) refused to, under White House orders.

It's not a lie.

This thread has already established that only one person on your wish list was actually subpoenaed.

Provide evidence of the subpoenas for the other people? You won't because you can't, because the house didn't call them!!!!

Go on then, show us all here where Bolton was officially subpoenaed by the house?

If you can i'll backtrack my words , I know i won't need to.

Waiting with anticipation.

VincentHanna · 27 Jan 2020 at 14:20

deuse said:
The transcript was read out in the trial on Saturday.
Trumps team even put in the remarks that the dems left out. You did watch it.....didn't you?

Or did you both go to cnn and hope for the best?

I didn't watch any of it, I was enjoying my weekend.

The impeachment has little impact on any of my life, since I don't live in America.

But from what I read from multiple sources they simply read out parts of a "rough transcript"

This thread is mental. I've pretty much stayed out of it.

Jono8 · 27 Jan 2020 at 14:22

plasmahal said:
It's not a lie.

This thread has already established that only one person on your wish list was actually subpoenaed.

Provide evidence of the subpoenas for the other people? You won't because you can't, because the house din't call them!!!!

Go on then, show us all here where Bolton was officially subpoenaed by the house?

If you can i'll backtrack my words , I know i won't need to.

Waiting with anticipation.

You didn't say subpoena, you said "House should have called the witnesses then needed, but they didn't".

The house did call for a massive amount of people to testify. Unfortunately, many of them listened to the White House's instruction to not testify.

We have also already established why the Dems did not pursue subpeonas (due to the fact it would have tied the whole investigation up in litigation for months, if not years, whilst it made its way to the Supreme Court)