The Bolton Bombshell (from his book)

[bripat9643]

Trump didn't either....the dems wrapped it up because Trump was so dangerous they had to impeach and couldn't wait....LMFAO...

Factually incorrect. Trump refused to acknowledge any request or subpoena from the House.

He has every right to do so...Then it goes to court and a judge decides...the dems didn't want to wait for that to happen....

They didn't have years of stalling time.... Trump was cheating and corrupt right now and claimed he did nothing wrong, which was a tell tale sign he would continue to cheat in the upcoming election and continue to abuse his power.

Justice delayed, is justice denied.

They went through the courts to get Don McCann and Even though the courts have ruled against him at every turn and appeal level, he's taking it to the supreme court, so it will be nearly two years....

So if the accused claims he's innocent, that means he's guilty. Is that what you're saying?

president trump never claimed executive privilege, he simply ordered his staff to turn nothing over to them... He or staff never made any efforts to negotiate with congress which is the standard procedure and protocol, before filing suit and a court will even take on the case.

That is obstruction of congress.

You keep saying that, but you also keep failing to explain what the official process for invoking executive privilege is.

 

[bripat9643]

No one is stopping the house witnesses from testifying
THE Schiff Sham deserves all the bullshit it get's

Trump is stopping them.

no he isn't lol

Sure he is. He has told people not to testify. They complied with his orders.

Maybe the democrats should have fought to get him into the Schiff sham
You don't get to have a do over.

No fight needed. Not asking for a do over. Just asking for the Senate to treat the trial seriously.

You're asking for a do over.

 

[Denizen]

Dershowitz has a habit of defending guilty people like Donald Trump, OJ Simpson, and Jeffrey Epstein. The pay is better for getting the guilty acquitted.

LMAO, Racheal Maddow??

Rachel Maddow has more balls than the whole Trump family, including Jared, no-balls, Kushner.

Madcow DOES have balls, you're finally right about something, 3D!

She has more balls than s Senate-full of GOP Senators.

Yep, she LITERALLY does have balls, you're right about that. Though probably NOT quite as big as those sported by Michelle 'Big Mike" Obama.

Beats no-balls GOP lawmakers.

 

[harmonica]

Chaos defines the first three years of the Trump Administration, it has now infected the members of the Trump's Lawyers, from Rudy to the current crop of lawyers now putting all watchers to sleep.

In wake of Bolton book news, White House allies say Trump lawyers bungled defense


Reports that John Bolton has written a firsthand account of the president’s direct involvement in withholding aid to Ukraine has left some Republicans confused and angry over the legal strategy by the president’s defense team — which has devoted much of its arguments in the Senate impeachment trial to arguing that no such firsthand evidence existed.

One Republican operative who advises the White House said he was “flabbergasted at how stupidly they have handled this.”

Trump attorney Mike Purpura argued Saturday that “not a single witness testified that the president himself said that there was any connection between any investigations and security assistance, a presidential meeting or anything else.”

you're the fool

 

[Denizen]

Chaos defines the first three years of the Trump Administration, it has now infected the members of the Trump's Lawyers, from Rudy to the current crop of lawyers now putting all watchers to sleep.

In wake of Bolton book news, White House allies say Trump lawyers bungled defense


Reports that John Bolton has written a firsthand account of the president’s direct involvement in withholding aid to Ukraine has left some Republicans confused and angry over the legal strategy by the president’s defense team — which has devoted much of its arguments in the Senate impeachment trial to arguing that no such firsthand evidence existed.

One Republican operative who advises the White House said he was “flabbergasted at how stupidly they have handled this.”

Trump attorney Mike Purpura argued Saturday that “not a single witness testified that the president himself said that there was any connection between any investigations and security assistance, a presidential meeting or anything else.”

you're the fool

The fool store recalled you?

 

[Care4all]

Doesn't even matter Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz obliterated the Bolton nonsense. Even if true its not an impeachable offense. He gave an example, if a president told Israel U.S. aid would be withheld unless Israel agreed to stop building settlements a clear quid pro quo that's not an impeachable offense. In fact presidents have long exercised that authority.

AND Ukraine Got Their Aid Weeks Before The Deadline
AND With-Out Ukraine Firing Up Another Investigation
AND With-Out Ukraine Noticing If The Funds Were Held Up
AND With-Out Zelensky Knowing He Had To Do Anything

Ukraine President Zelensky: I feel 'no pressure' to investigate Bidens - CNN Video




View attachment 302973

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Leaked by the times, link for pre orders goes up hours later .....same publisher as comey ....Mitt magic underwear romney starts running his moutH ...and they eat it up

To leftards they're so brain dead they've always seen establishment dorks as globo homo incs fake 2 party systems fake opposition...

I guess the walrus is not a war criminal anymore lol

 

[Cellblock2429]

2) Assuming those quotes are NOT true, STILL someone on that panel is the villain making up shit...

If the quotes were fake, Bolton would be the first to say so. But instead neither he or his lawyer refuted a word.

/——/ Bolton wants to sell books and he just got 5 million dollars in free advertising.

“If you write a book like this and you’re part of the Security Council, National Security Council apparatus, you have to submit this to the National Security Council for vetting before it can be send to the publisher. They have to clear it to make sure no national security secrets or violations are being written about and published. Alexander Vindman’s brother, Yevgeny Vindman, is the guy vetting Bolton’s book!

Isn’t it just magical that on the very day after the Trump defense team decimates the House managers’ case, the very next day here comes this leak from the New York Times about what Trump told Bolton supposedly that he didn’t want to do?” - Rush

 

[The Original Tree]

Cheapest political stunt I ever saw for a case that a Schiff lost clear back in the house when he proved to the world he was a dishonest evil lying schmuck

 

[hadit]

Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Demands for Inquiries, Bolton Book Says

John Bolton Reportedly Recalls Trump Tying Ukraine Aid To Biden Investigation

.
Bolton ---> Wanting to destroy Trump over peanuts because he thinks (at least as the patriot Bolton likes to think of himself as) this is what is best for our nation. Or, is it really all about your ego John, which you value so much more dearly than any higher cause?

Yeah, Bolton is a pompous ass, but if he can take down Trump* - he's my hero.

Do you believe everything Bolton says, or just the parts that agree with your agenda?

 

[hadit]

You don't know what he is going to say, do you?

You are just wishing on a falling star.

Then you agree to have Bolton testify. He will put it all to rest.

Nope, let the commies dance with the witnesses they brought to the dance, after all they have an irrefutable case, right?

.

Scared, aren’t you.

Why would anyone believe Bolton, a well known crazed Neocon jackass? Donnie fired the scumbag. No doubt he will shit on Donnie and he is not above lying.

Put him under oath.

The place and time to do that was during the House investigation. Obviously, the democrats in the House didn't think his testimony was all that important.

 

[hadit]

Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.

WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

NYT: Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Demands for Inquiries, Bolton Book Says

John Bolton Reportedly Recalls Trump Tying Ukraine Aid To Biden Investigation

How can Republicans not vote for witnesses after this? By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt. They are two of the Times best and most credible reporters.

Bolton wasn't in on the call.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

There’s much more to this than the phone call. Bolton was in on many things.

The impeachment is about the phone call. Nothing else factual has been provided as evidence.

You’re factually incorrect. The case against Trump goes well beyond the phone call with Zelensky.

"The case against Trump" is limited to the articles of impeachment. That's what the Senate had to vote on, not a bunch of other stuff drummed up at the last minute, also what they did to Kavanaugh.

 

[Seawytch]

That’s the problem with having no credibility. No one seriously believes Trump.

The only places where Trump lacks credibility is among the maive morons who believe the lying liars of the MSM. *zzzzzzzz*

I’m going to remind you that the first thing Trump said about aid to Ukraine is that he didn’t delay it at all. I bet you believed him.

Link?

Oh, never mind! You just lied.

That was just like how the Dems forgot to mention that Trump offered to meet with Zelensky three times.

No, he didn't. Trump lied...repeatedly.

Column: How often has Trump changed his story on Ukraine? Let us count the ways

Trump’s first response, after a whistleblower in the National Security Council raised the alarm that the president had held up military aid to Ukraine while demanding Kyiv investigate his political rivals, was simple: It never happened.

“I didn’t delay anything,” Trump told reporters.

Even he could see that whopper wouldn’t hold. Too many bureaucrats knew the White House had stopped the aid that a bipartisan majority in Congress had approved for a struggling democracy facing Russian aggression.

So Trump modified his excuse. “Why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?” Besides, other governments weren’t giving enough. “I’d withhold again, and I’ll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute,” he said.

That wasn’t convincing either. So the president tried again: He blocked the aid but never demanded anything in return for releasing it.

“No quid pro quo!” Trump insisted.

A parade of current and former officials told Congress that wasn’t true, either.​

Seabitch, you and the author are cherry-picking words without context. Trump didn't delay anything is true because you left out the part where it said it was in exchange for Ukraine investigating his political rival. THAT did not happen which is why he said he didn't delay anything.

Typical LA Slime mud-slinging!

He still said he hadn't held up aid. That was a lie. Trump has lied every step of the way since his "drug deal" was uncovered by the whistleblower.

Q How do you explain the military aid, sir? How do you explain delaying military aid (inaudible)?

THE PRESIDENT: Because I want Germany and I want France and I want the European Union to put up money. And I didn’t delay anything. We paid the military aid, to the best of my knowledge.​

That was a lie.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The only places where Trump lacks credibility is among the maive morons who believe the lying liars of the MSM. *zzzzzzzz*

I’m going to remind you that the first thing Trump said about aid to Ukraine is that he didn’t delay it at all. I bet you believed him.

Link?

Oh, never mind! You just lied.

That was just like how the Dems forgot to mention that Trump offered to meet with Zelensky three times.

No, he didn't. Trump lied...repeatedly.

Column: How often has Trump changed his story on Ukraine? Let us count the ways

Trump’s first response, after a whistleblower in the National Security Council raised the alarm that the president had held up military aid to Ukraine while demanding Kyiv investigate his political rivals, was simple: It never happened.

“I didn’t delay anything,” Trump told reporters.

Even he could see that whopper wouldn’t hold. Too many bureaucrats knew the White House had stopped the aid that a bipartisan majority in Congress had approved for a struggling democracy facing Russian aggression.

So Trump modified his excuse. “Why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?” Besides, other governments weren’t giving enough. “I’d withhold again, and I’ll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute,” he said.

That wasn’t convincing either. So the president tried again: He blocked the aid but never demanded anything in return for releasing it.

“No quid pro quo!” Trump insisted.

A parade of current and former officials told Congress that wasn’t true, either.​

Seabitch, you and the author are cherry-picking words without context. Trump didn't delay anything is true because you left out the part where it said it was in exchange for Ukraine investigating his political rival. THAT did not happen which is why he said he didn't delay anything.

Typical LA Slime mud-slinging!

He still said he hadn't held up aid. That was a lie. Trump has lied every step of the way since his "drug deal" was uncovered by the whistleblower.

Q How do you explain the military aid, sir? How do you explain delaying military aid (inaudible)?

THE PRESIDENT: Because I want Germany and I want France and I want the European Union to put up money. And I didn’t delay anything. We paid the military aid, to the best of my knowledge.​

That was a lie.

How can it be a lie if he said exactly what you posted, dumbass?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Can you point to the Trump admin actually invoking executive privilege?

Trump would not allow administration personnel to participate in Adam Schiff's crazy circus and no one contested Trump's right to do so.
You do the math, smart guy.

So...No you can't?

No one contested? WTF, dude.
He was impeached for it, dope.

 

[colfax_m]

I

Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.

WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

NYT: Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Demands for Inquiries, Bolton Book Says

John Bolton Reportedly Recalls Trump Tying Ukraine Aid To Biden Investigation

How can Republicans not vote for witnesses after this? By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt. They are two of the Times best and most credible reporters.

Bolton wasn't in on the call.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

There’s much more to this than the phone call. Bolton was in on many things.

The impeachment is about the phone call. Nothing else factual has been provided as evidence.

You’re factually incorrect. The case against Trump goes well beyond the phone call with Zelensky.

"The case against Trump" is limited to the articles of impeachment. That's what the Senate had to vote on, not a bunch of other stuff drummed up at the last minute, also what they did to Kavanaugh.

No one is trying to add any articles of impeachment. Only including all testimony relevant to these articles.

 

[Seawytch]

I’m going to remind you that the first thing Trump said about aid to Ukraine is that he didn’t delay it at all. I bet you believed him.

Link?

Oh, never mind! You just lied.

That was just like how the Dems forgot to mention that Trump offered to meet with Zelensky three times.

No, he didn't. Trump lied...repeatedly.

Column: How often has Trump changed his story on Ukraine? Let us count the ways

Trump’s first response, after a whistleblower in the National Security Council raised the alarm that the president had held up military aid to Ukraine while demanding Kyiv investigate his political rivals, was simple: It never happened.

“I didn’t delay anything,” Trump told reporters.

Even he could see that whopper wouldn’t hold. Too many bureaucrats knew the White House had stopped the aid that a bipartisan majority in Congress had approved for a struggling democracy facing Russian aggression.

So Trump modified his excuse. “Why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?” Besides, other governments weren’t giving enough. “I’d withhold again, and I’ll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute,” he said.

That wasn’t convincing either. So the president tried again: He blocked the aid but never demanded anything in return for releasing it.

“No quid pro quo!” Trump insisted.

A parade of current and former officials told Congress that wasn’t true, either.​

Seabitch, you and the author are cherry-picking words without context. Trump didn't delay anything is true because you left out the part where it said it was in exchange for Ukraine investigating his political rival. THAT did not happen which is why he said he didn't delay anything.

Typical LA Slime mud-slinging!

He still said he hadn't held up aid. That was a lie. Trump has lied every step of the way since his "drug deal" was uncovered by the whistleblower.

Q How do you explain the military aid, sir? How do you explain delaying military aid (inaudible)?

THE PRESIDENT: Because I want Germany and I want France and I want the European Union to put up money. And I didn’t delay anything. We paid the military aid, to the best of my knowledge.​

That was a lie.

How can it be a lie if he said exactly what you posted, dumbass?

Because we know that he did in fact hold up the aid. Trump's story continued to change as information about the Ukraine call came trickling out. He lied like he always does and just adjusts the lie as more evidence is produced.

 

[colfax_m]

Turns out Russia was responsible for attacking the Democratic Party to help Trump get elected. Trump knew and didn’t care. He likes to pretend it was someone else because he’s embarrassed by it.

And the "grab 'em by the ***** tape" helped him too.

I know.....

The universie is tilted.

Nope. But the Russian hacks were released immediately after the tape of Trump admitting to sexual assault became public.

You see, the Russian government broke laws to help Donny. No one broke laws to release the tape.

When does that trial start ?

Soon as Trump arrests the Russians.

How do you arrest someone safe in their country with no chance at extradition?

Should we do like Obama and hit them with a drone strike?

Nah. Just explaining to you when the trial starts.

 

[colfax_m]

So you want a trial with no witnesses? What kind of bogus trial is that?

No one is stopping the house witnesses from testifying
THE Schiff Sham deserves all the bullshit it get's

Trump is stopping them.

no he isn't lol

Sure he is. He has told people not to testify. They complied with his orders.

Take him to court! The Dems refused to do so. So much for your feckless leadership!

They impeached him instead. Seems like a perfectly viable alternative.

 

[colfax_m]

No whistleblower? Better tell the ICIG.

Here I thought y’all were going to lock Clinton up. Whatever happened to that?

It got buried under Russiagate.

What happened to that.

Turns out Russia was responsible for attacking the Democratic Party to help Trump get elected. Trump knew and didn’t care. He likes to pretend it was someone else because he’s embarrassed by it.

Why did they (the alledged Russian's), attack the Democratic party ?? Was it because they were corrupt and the Russian's knew it ?? Did the Democrat's ever dispute any of the facts or charges made against them, otherwise by these alledged Russian's or their proxies ??

If any of it was true against the crats after these alledged hacks, and it was proven criminal, then shouldn't the Democrat's accused be investigated for having done criminal things that were outed in the alledged hacks ?

Russians attacked the Democratic Party to weaken them and help Trump. Trump weakens the country so it’s good for Russia. No criminal activity was by the hacks so no charges could be filed against Democrats.

If that were true, boy did they **** up! Trump has been a pain in Putin's ass since day one.

In a way. But it’s little doubt we are a weaker, less coherent, less accountable, less united, less reliable, and less engaged in the world now than we have been in a very long time.