Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
you wisely say “potentially” because you know nothing has been proven. You say it was worth looking into because you support Trump and the Dems say it wasn’t proper because both the DNC server and the Biden situations have been looked into and nothing was found. So unless Trump can explain why he used his office to go after his political opponents in such an unorthodox way then he is in trouble.Yes. If it was reasonable to suggest looking into the Biden's their entire case is in shambles. And most certainly it was reasonable to view the Biden Extortion and Bribery scheme as worth looking into. Potentially they have violated both US and Ukraine law.The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
i stepped in shit in Frisco.dude, you’re ranting... nobody cares about this obvious political smear tactic. Trumps games are not sly or well thought out. If the repeat game has you fooled then you’re more gullible than you think.Oh yeah -
This too -
By early 2016 the Ukrainian investigation had advanced enough that then-Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin authorized a court-ordered seizure of Zlochevsky’s home and other valuables, including a luxury car. That seizure occurred on Feb. 2, 2016, according to published reports in Ukraine.
The same day that the Zlochevsky seizure was announced in Ukraine, Hunter Biden used his Twitter account to start following Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden who was promoted to the No. 2 job at State under Secretary John Kerry.
The Feb. 4, 2016 Twitter notification from Hunter Biden to Blinken was captured by State email servers and turned over to me as part of the FOIA release.
Within a few weeks of Tramontano’s overture to Novelli and of Archer’s overture to Kerry, Vice President Joe Biden took a stunning action, one that has enveloped his 2020 campaign for president in controversy.
By his own admission in a 2018 speech, Joe Biden used the threat of withholding $1 billion in U.S. aid to strong-arm Ukraine into firing Shokin, a prosecutor that he and his office knew was investigating Burisma.
Never wear your Gucci loafers on the Streets of San Francisco. in recent years people have taken Otis Redding's tune about shitting on the Dock of the Bay very literally.
i agree... I don’t support Trump at all and would love to see him voted out of office next election... but I wouldn’t vote for him to be impeached. It was a bad move for the Dems to go that route.you wisely say “potentially” because you know nothing has been proven. You say it was worth looking into because you support Trump and the Dems say it wasn’t proper because both the DNC server and the Biden situations have been looked into and nothing was found. So unless Trump can explain why he used his office to go after his political opponents in such an unorthodox way then he is in trouble.Yes. If it was reasonable to suggest looking into the Biden's their entire case is in shambles. And most certainly it was reasonable to view the Biden Extortion and Bribery scheme as worth looking into. Potentially they have violated both US and Ukraine law.The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
IMHO, I think its almost a point of certitude that President Trump is going to be exonerated in the trial.
The only question is when.
It appears that Trump even has the support of sworn enemies like Pierre Delecto in the Senate- it looks like he is ready to run the board and have every single Republican as well as some fair thinking Dems voting for his exoneration.
Okay. We'll take your word for this because you are such an outstanding MENSA member and not at all full of crap!I guess you Trump Humpers think if you keep repeating a lie it will become the truth. Hate to tell you this, but it's still a lie, no matter how many times you repeat it.
We'll see, Mittens seems to want to be the new McCain.you wisely say “potentially” because you know nothing has been proven. You say it was worth looking into because you support Trump and the Dems say it wasn’t proper because both the DNC server and the Biden situations have been looked into and nothing was found. So unless Trump can explain why he used his office to go after his political opponents in such an unorthodox way then he is in trouble.Yes. If it was reasonable to suggest looking into the Biden's their entire case is in shambles. And most certainly it was reasonable to view the Biden Extortion and Bribery scheme as worth looking into. Potentially they have violated both US and Ukraine law.The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
IMHO, I think its almost a point of certitude that President Trump is going to be exonerated in the trial.
The only question is when.
It appears that Trump even has the support of sworn enemies like Pierre Delecto in the Senate- it looks like he is ready to run the board and have every single Republican as well as some fair thinking Dems voting for his exoneration.
I just don't see how Schiff and Nadler made their case and proved Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
And Saturday's argument's by the President's Tremendous Legal Staff even created MORE reasonable doubt.
I think they should move directly to a vote and a verdict.
Well, after the Defense finishes their 40 hours and they have 16 hours of questions, if 51 Senators think they need more evidence, they will ask for it.I just don't see how Schiff and Nadler made their case and proved Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
And Saturday's argument's by the President's Tremendous Legal Staff even created MORE reasonable doubt.
I think they should move directly to a vote and a verdict.
Their case is SUPER weak. Now, they bitch about witnesses. NOW. Lol. Too late, they should have had their ducks in a row before bringing this to the Senate. It's not the Senate's case.
We'll see, Mittens seems to want to be the new McCain.you wisely say “potentially” because you know nothing has been proven. You say it was worth looking into because you support Trump and the Dems say it wasn’t proper because both the DNC server and the Biden situations have been looked into and nothing was found. So unless Trump can explain why he used his office to go after his political opponents in such an unorthodox way then he is in trouble.Yes. If it was reasonable to suggest looking into the Biden's their entire case is in shambles. And most certainly it was reasonable to view the Biden Extortion and Bribery scheme as worth looking into. Potentially they have violated both US and Ukraine law.The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
IMHO, I think its almost a point of certitude that President Trump is going to be exonerated in the trial.
The only question is when.
It appears that Trump even has the support of sworn enemies like Pierre Delecto in the Senate- it looks like he is ready to run the board and have every single Republican as well as some fair thinking Dems voting for his exoneration.
Well, after the Defense finishes their 40 hours and they have 16 hours of questions, if 51 Senators think they need more evidence, they will ask for it.I just don't see how Schiff and Nadler made their case and proved Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
And Saturday's argument's by the President's Tremendous Legal Staff even created MORE reasonable doubt.
I think they should move directly to a vote and a verdict.
Their case is SUPER weak. Now, they bitch about witnesses. NOW. Lol. Too late, they should have had their ducks in a row before bringing this to the Senate. It's not the Senate's case.
It's a sloppy smear job, it seems like they think work this shoddy is enough. I wonder how many other character assassinations they have pulled off with less.Also, the lack of transparency in the House is disturbing. Anonymous "witnesses?" Bogus. How can they expect the American people to buy into this sham of an impeachment?
I just don't see how Schiff and Nadler made their case and proved Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
And Saturday's argument's by the President's Tremendous Legal Staff even created MORE reasonable doubt.
I think they should move directly to a vote and a verdict.
But Hunter Biden is definitely guilty..The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
But Hunter Biden is definitely guilty..The president does have every right to justify his actions and interest in the Biden’s. I’m sure that’s going to be the focus on Monday. Hunter doesn’t need to testify for that though. We should not need new intel to justify old actions. Trump should lay out his case By showing what evidence he had to justify why an investigation was warranted and why going outside our normal system To ask Ukraine to announce it was the method he chose to take.The President was right to bring up the Biden's apparent corruption with his fellow President. I too would like to see them look into it, I would like our US Attorneys to look into it ias well.
Now, even though the House impeachment managers are arguing about Biden corruption allegations in their Senate presentation, the two leaders of the House impeachment inquiry, Bug-eyed Schiff and Fat Jerry, took the position that Republican claims about the Bidens were irrelevant — a partisan red herring to distract from the “real” issues. They steadfastly refused to permit witnesses on that topic (including the Bidens themselves).
Moreover, the president was denied the right to have his counsel participate in the main investigative phase, run by Bug-eyed Schiff. So, even though Bug-eyed Schiff began the House hearings with an absurd parody version of the Trump–Zelensky conversation, falsely suggesting that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up dirt” about Biden, the House denied the president the opportunity to prove that he was actually asking for help investigating activity that, objectively, appears quite suspicious and potentially corrupt.
It is a much different scenario if there was a real basis to believe the Bidens’ conduct should be scrutinized. Joe Biden is not immune from investigation just because he is running for president — certainly no more than the president himself is immune (which, obviously, he’s not).
The president has to be given an opportunity to prove his rebuttal case. A trial is not a trial, not in the American tradition, if prosecutors are permitted to level a serious accusation and then deny the accused the right to mount a defense.
Trump Impeachment Trial: Democrats’ Burisma Bait and Switch | National Review
Trump really doesn't have to lay out any case at all or testify.
He is presumed innocent, and the Libs have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that there is reason to think that the Bidens are up to no good, particularly considering their involvement in the cocaine and prostitution rackets. And that is reasonable doubt.
and if he isn't --- he should testify and prove it!!!! plus his does drugs!!! guilty!!!
#MAGA
Hunter Biden and his Ukrainian gas firm colleagues had multiple contacts with the Obama State Department during the 2016 election cycle, including one just a month before Vice President Joe Biden forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating his son’s company for corruption, newly released memos show.
During that February 2016 contact, a U.S. representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with Undersecretary of State Catherine A. Novelli to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member, according to memos obtained under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. (I filed that suit this summer with the help of the public interest law firm the Southeastern Legal Foundation.)
Just three weeks before Burisma’s overture to State, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of the oligarch who owned the gas firm and employed Hunter Biden, a signal the long-running corruption probe was escalating in the middle of the U.S. presidential election.
Hunter Biden’s name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S. officials trying to arrange the meeting. The subject line for the email exchanges read simply “Burisma.”
“Per our conversation, Karen Tramontano of Blue Star Strategies requested a meeting to discuss with U/S Novelli USG remarks alleging Burisma (Ukrainian energy company) of corruption,” a Feb. 24, 2016, email between State officials read. “She noted that two high profile U.S. citizens are affiliated with the company (including Hunter Biden as a board member).
Read more about the Biden Corruption - aided by the Obama State Department @
Burisma Pressured Obama Admin Weeks Before Joe Biden Got Ukrainian Prosecutor Fired
Okay. We'll take your word for this because you are such an outstanding MENSA member and not at all full of crap!I guess you Trump Humpers think if you keep repeating a lie it will become the truth. Hate to tell you this, but it's still a lie, no matter how many times you repeat it.
You are dismissed, shitbag!
