CNN Host, Reporter Agree Impeaching Trump Over Sex is Dem Hypocrisy with Icky Witnesses

[Doc7505]

CNN Host, Reporter Agree Impeaching Trump Over Sex is Dem Hypocrisy with Icky Witnesses​

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...-dem-hypocrisy
By P.J. Gladnick
Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigative Correpondent for Yahoo News, is unable to find any real proof of Trump-Russia collusion based on the latest court filings by Special Counsel Robert Mueller when he appeared on CNN's December 8 Smerconish show, hosted by Michael Smerconish… But first, Isikoff agreed with Smerconish on the appearance of Democratic hypocrisy on impeaching over sex. Rep. Jerrold Nadler "eloquently" argued Clinton shouldn't be impeached for lying to conceal an affair with an intern. So how is Nadler going to impeach using sketchy witnesses like Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti?....And since we learned from loud proclamations of the Democrats that matters of sex is not an impeachable offense, what about the heart of the matter that Mueller is supposedly investigating, namely Trump-Russia collusion?
"Yes it is intriguing but it doesn't have the magic words "substantial assistance to the investigation" which is the language you use when you're flagging this guy, this cooperating witness gave us evidence we can use to prosecute somebody else".... Sniff! No magic words that can provide a lifeline to liberals desperate for impeachment.


~~~~~~
Strange.... Even Michael Isikoff finds NO definitive proof of collusion. So now the Democrats want to impeach Trump for basically the same thing for what the Justice Department dropped charges against John Edwards.
On the other hand, Democrats have found it justifiable to cover FDR, JFK, LBJ, EFK, Bill Clinton including John Edwards and Obama sexual affairs and proclivities. The idea that settling harassment claims violates campaign laws is laughable.
Then there's myriads of members of Congress and their staffs accused of sexual harassment allowed to hush up and pay off their accusers from a secret “shush” fund full of taxpayer dollars? Since 1995, it turns out. 235 complainants received compensation totaling $15.2 million between 1997 and 2014. That’s more than one settlement per month for 17 years and nearly $1 million per year. Democratic hypocrisy knows no bounds in the politics of America.... https://thehill.com/opinion...

 

[HenryBHough]

Unable to find a viable candidate for 2020 Democrats have to find little things to do to occupy the tiny bit of brain each has left.....

 

[mudwhistle]

CNN Host, Reporter Agree Impeaching Trump Over Sex is Dem Hypocrisy with Icky Witnesses​

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...-dem-hypocrisy
By P.J. Gladnick
Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigative Correpondent for Yahoo News, is unable to find any real proof of Trump-Russia collusion based on the latest court filings by Special Counsel Robert Mueller when he appeared on CNN's December 8 Smerconish show, hosted by Michael Smerconish… But first, Isikoff agreed with Smerconish on the appearance of Democratic hypocrisy on impeaching over sex. Rep. Jerrold Nadler "eloquently" argued Clinton shouldn't be impeached for lying to conceal an affair with an intern. So how is Nadler going to impeach using sketchy witnesses like Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti?....And since we learned from loud proclamations of the Democrats that matters of sex is not an impeachable offense, what about the heart of the matter that Mueller is supposedly investigating, namely Trump-Russia collusion?
"Yes it is intriguing but it doesn't have the magic words "substantial assistance to the investigation" which is the language you use when you're flagging this guy, this cooperating witness gave us evidence we can use to prosecute somebody else".... Sniff! No magic words that can provide a lifeline to liberals desperate for impeachment.


~~~~~~
Strange.... Even Michael Isikoff finds NO definitive proof of collusion. So now the Democrats want to impeach Trump for basically the same thing for what the Justice Department dropped charges against John Edwards.
On the other hand, Democrats have found it justifiable to cover FDR, JFK, LBJ, EFK, Bill Clinton including John Edwards and Obama sexual affairs and proclivities. The idea that settling harassment claims violates campaign laws is laughable.
Then there's myriads of members of Congress and their staffs accused of sexual harassment allowed to hush up and pay off their accusers from a secret “shush” fund full of taxpayer dollars? Since 1995, it turns out. 235 complainants received compensation totaling $15.2 million between 1997 and 2014. That’s more than one settlement per month for 17 years and nearly $1 million per year. Democratic hypocrisy knows no bounds in the politics of America.... https://thehill.com/opinion...

Aren't you supposed to get impeached for what you did while in office, not before you were in office?????????????

 

[harmonica]

.....the DemoRAts said FK you to America's justice system when they let Bill off the hook for committing a serious crime

 

[cutter]

From cnn, is the world about to shift or something really life changing. CNN of all the networks to defend Trump. I think it’s time for the good scotch.

 

[candycorn]

CNN Host, Reporter Agree Impeaching Trump Over Sex is Dem Hypocrisy with Icky Witnesses​

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...-dem-hypocrisy
By P.J. Gladnick
Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigative Correpondent for Yahoo News, is unable to find any real proof of Trump-Russia collusion based on the latest court filings by Special Counsel Robert Mueller when he appeared on CNN's December 8 Smerconish show, hosted by Michael Smerconish… But first, Isikoff agreed with Smerconish on the appearance of Democratic hypocrisy on impeaching over sex. Rep. Jerrold Nadler "eloquently" argued Clinton shouldn't be impeached for lying to conceal an affair with an intern. So how is Nadler going to impeach using sketchy witnesses like Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti?....And since we learned from loud proclamations of the Democrats that matters of sex is not an impeachable offense, what about the heart of the matter that Mueller is supposedly investigating, namely Trump-Russia collusion?
"Yes it is intriguing but it doesn't have the magic words "substantial assistance to the investigation" which is the language you use when you're flagging this guy, this cooperating witness gave us evidence we can use to prosecute somebody else".... Sniff! No magic words that can provide a lifeline to liberals desperate for impeachment.


~~~~~~
Strange.... Even Michael Isikoff finds NO definitive proof of collusion. So now the Democrats want to impeach Trump for basically the same thing for what the Justice Department dropped charges against John Edwards.
On the other hand, Democrats have found it justifiable to cover FDR, JFK, LBJ, EFK, Bill Clinton including John Edwards and Obama sexual affairs and proclivities. The idea that settling harassment claims violates campaign laws is laughable.
Then there's myriads of members of Congress and their staffs accused of sexual harassment allowed to hush up and pay off their accusers from a secret “shush” fund full of taxpayer dollars? Since 1995, it turns out. 235 complainants received compensation totaling $15.2 million between 1997 and 2014. That’s more than one settlement per month for 17 years and nearly $1 million per year. Democratic hypocrisy knows no bounds in the politics of America.... https://thehill.com/opinion...

Its not only that; it’s also a stupid idea.

 

[mdk]

President Trump and Clinton are both creepy, poon hounds. No wonder they were such friends.

 

[Doc7505]

President Trump and Clinton are both creepy, poon hounds. No wonder they were such friends.

No doubt, but you omit FDR, JFK, LBJ, EFK, John Edwards, and BHO Democrats all. Then there's Al Gore and his sleazy escapades.

 

[mdk]

President Trump and Clinton are both creepy, poon hounds. No wonder they were such friends.

No doubt, but you omit FDR, JFK, LBJ, EFK, John Edwards, and BHO Democrats all.

And Cleveland, Harding, Eisenhower...

When it comes to cheating on your spouse one’s political affiliation is rather meaningless. Powerful men cheat.

I am not sure why you added President Obama to that list, but I am sure you have some shady source filled with unprovable accusations and smears.