If Bolton is allowed to testify.

You mean, like the fact the Senate just voted not to allow any more testimony - those kids of facts?
No, like the content of Bolton's possible testimony, genius. You know, the the basic substance of this topic of which you seem utterly ignorant and which you are asking others to spoonfeed to you. Try to focus.

Also, I think there is a decent chance he will be called in front of Congress to testify in the future.


I'm always amused watching remedials squirm.

Right now, it is only your imagination in which Bolton will be testifying. You have a lot in common with Catniss, though Her own Trump derangement syndrome is I being expressed through her fantasies of Trump killing people. Your particular derangement is being expressed through your fantasies of Bolton testifying, but both of you are divorced from reality.

I really do not need you to spoon feed me the content of those voices in your head. I prefer to deal with facts than wild flights of paranoid fantasy.
 
EPs5WroW4AQIKQ_

Adam Schiff and the Whistleblower.....the guy he claims he doesn't know......
 
Right now, it is only your imagination in which Bolton will be testifying.
Irrelevant whining, as the original focus was the content of any possible testimony, not whether or not the gop Toadies would let him do so.

And Bolton has offered to go under oath, in front of congress. And the investigations will continue, regardless of the outcome of the impeachment trial. So it is perfectly reasonable to say there is a decent chance he will testify before the House. No, whining "nuh uh!!!!" and going deadweight on the floor is not a compelling counterargument to this.
 
EPs5WroW4AQIKQ_

Adam Schiff and the Whistleblower.....the guy he claims he doesn't know......
Haha dummy...do you even know who that is, in that picture?
Yep.....and so does half of Washington.

"We all owe Chief Justice John Roberts a big thank you for confirming the name of the phony, Deep State whistleblower who launched this stupid impeachment hoax.

Eric Ciaramella.

Eric Ciaramella.

Eric Ciaramella.

Eric Ciaramella, a CIA analyst and raging partisan who falsely accused President Trump of impeachable crimes, who has a history of working with former Vice President Joe Biden, and who might have had his own agenda in wanting Biden’s corruption in Ukraine covered up… Yep, that’s him.

After much speculation that Ciaramella is the guy, Roberts confirmed it Thursday through his unconstitutional act of commission.

Justice Cuck refused to read an impeachment question submitted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY).

The question was for House manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), whose staff worked with Eric Ciaramella to cobble together this hoax by way of a fake whistleblower complaint."
Nolte: Thank President John Roberts for Outing the Fake 'Whistleblower'
 
Last edited:
You want to be spoon-fed?
Oops, sorry son, being able to articulate your own thoughts in the English language isn't spoonfeeding. Your D grade stays in place. What is your first language?
Imagine that. You once again fail to acknowledge your hypocrisy. What a pompous buffoon.
Are you going to whine like a little bitch all day, or are you going to articulate your own thoughts in the English language?

Just kidding, we know which you will choose.
 
I'm thinking he won't.
If asked under oath, as he has publicly said he would do? Of course he would.

Try as you or they might to discredit him, his first-hand testimony aligns with all the other testimony and evidence. Calling him a big fat doodiehead isn't going to change that.


I don't have to discredit him. Like I said, I want him to testify under oath. It's your side that has an issue with his credibility anyway.




Notice it's the lead prosecutor on the Trump impeachment who is calling Bolten a liar.
 
What happens if he lies and confirms the House Democrats partisan accusations that the president
''withheld aid to Ukraine to get dirt on Biden", or even if it were true, is that the new precedent we'll have set ?

That the leader of the free world can be removed from office over a policy difference with one staff member ?



Day 9 of the impeachment trial.


So quick question..... if his testimony is so vital and important, then why didn't the house call him?

If the house didn't call him, because his testimony isn't that relevant, then why should the Senate?
 
I'm thinking they read it already and that's why this "bomb shell" is not I g more then Stormy Daniels type stuff.
Then you're not paying attention. Bolton would have (and is going to, as he will be testifying for the House eventually) confirm, first hand, that Trump did exactly what he is accused of doing. This information has already leaked.
Don't you think it odd that in the interview immediately after the call, he had nothing but praise for it?

Oh, wait -- he didn't have a book to sell then, or a need to be relevant.

He lied then, or he's lying now. Pick one.


I know no one wants it, but I think he should testify infront of a committee under oath .
 

Forum List

Back
Top