What a crack up!! Sekulow quoting Schiff from back in 2012.
Jan 21, 2020 14:27:06 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
Sekulow quoting Schiff from 2012 regarding the need and requirement of executive privilege. LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Jan 21, 2020 14:31:34 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Sekulow quoting Schiff from 2012 regarding the need and requirement of executive privilege. LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Schitt might want to STFU before he’s arrested!!!
Jan 21, 2020 14:38:13 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
steve66613 wrote:
Schitt might want to STFU before he’s arrested!!!
He'll sing like a parakeet, which he looks like!
Jan 21, 2020 15:11:21 #
steve66613 wrote:
Schitt might want to STFU before he’s arrested!!!
We better find some way to shut Schiff and Pelosi up or as soon as this one is over, we will go right back into another one. Why not just enact a law against Schifty.
Jan 21, 2020 15:41:06 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Sekulow quoting Schiff from 2012 regarding the need and requirement of executive privilege. LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry I missed that. We had lunch with a group from our high school which is now a Federal Building? No kidding.
Jan 21, 2020 16:01:30 #
Noraa
Loc: Kansas
nwtk2007 wrote:
He'll sing like a parakeet, which he looks like!
Please don't insult parakeets like that!
Jan 21, 2020 16:06:39 #
Jan 21, 2020 19:20:04 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Sekulow quoting Schiff from 2012 regarding the need and requirement of executive privilege. LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
Schiff sure thought it was good back when Holder was prevented from testifying and ended up being found in contempt. Democratic hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!
I liked the part where Sekulow lied about republicans being allowed to be part of the investigation and Schumer calling him out right in front of Roberts!
And when Sekulow boasted that it was Trump who gave lethal weapons to Ukraine it was Schiff who pointed out that it was congress who gave the weapons to Ukraine and it was Trump who was tried to prevent it! Talk about LOL. I'm still laughing...
Jan 21, 2020 19:50:15 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
PeterS wrote:
I liked the part where Sekulow lied about republicans being allowed to be part of the investigation and Schumer calling him out right in front of Roberts!
And when Sekulow boasted that it was Trump who gave lethal weapons to Ukraine it was Schiff who pointed out that it was congress who gave the weapons to Ukraine and it was Trump who was tried to prevent it! Talk about LOL. I'm still laughing...
And when Sekulow boasted that it was Trump who gave lethal weapons to Ukraine it was Schiff who pointed out that it was congress who gave the weapons to Ukraine and it was Trump who was tried to prevent it! Talk about LOL. I'm still laughing...
Schiff refused to allow republicans to ask important questions and also denied them some witnesses when they were conducting the inquiry in the basement. In fact, Schiff denied them some questions throughout the entire thing. Republicans were denied access to the whistleblower and to have Schiff be questioned as a witness. So yes, they were not allowed to be a part of the investigation.
The argument regarding weapons to Ukraine is just stupid rhetoric; for eight years Obama denied weapons to Ukraine allowing Russia to gain a huge foot hold in the eastern region as well as allowing Russia to get Crimea which I think Obama actually allowed Putin to have as a "favor." Schiff was only making an argument for show, but it had zero point. Also, The funds were released before Russia could gain more and in fact, we nnow know that the funds in question had ZERO effect on the war.
Laugh away, but Schiff's points were stupid at best, misrepresentations and in fact, lies.
Jan 21, 2020 19:51:20 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
PeterS wrote:
I liked the part where Sekulow lied about republicans being allowed to be part of the investigation and Schumer calling him out right in front of Roberts!
And when Sekulow boasted that it was Trump who gave lethal weapons to Ukraine it was Schiff who pointed out that it was congress who gave the weapons to Ukraine and it was Trump who was tried to prevent it! Talk about LOL. I'm still laughing...
And when Sekulow boasted that it was Trump who gave lethal weapons to Ukraine it was Schiff who pointed out that it was congress who gave the weapons to Ukraine and it was Trump who was tried to prevent it! Talk about LOL. I'm still laughing...
And trust me, Roberts was well aware of it.
Jan 21, 2020 19:55:28 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
Sekulow made great points on democrat hypocrisy throughout, using their own contradictory BS against them.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
Jan 21, 2020 20:17:17 #
Jan 22, 2020 06:08:19 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Sekulow made great points on democrat hypocrisy throughout, using their own contradictory BS against them.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
They really believe the majority but into their lies.
Jan 22, 2020 10:12:05 #
bggamers
Loc: georgia
trashbaum wrote:
We better find some way to shut Schiff and Pelosi up or as soon as this one is over, we will go right back into another one. Why not just enact a law against Schifty.
They have already promised to do just that I think a few are going up for ree******n and I think this is why they are so desperate we need to replace all these i***ts so everyone get out and v**e!!!!
Jan 22, 2020 10:12:57 #
bggamers
Loc: georgia
nwtk2007 wrote:
Sekulow made great points on democrat hypocrisy throughout, using their own contradictory BS against them.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
One point was well made; Schiff and Nadler say the evidence is overwhelming so why are they wanting to have witnesses and more testimony for new "evidence?" If it's as over whelming as they say, then why do they want more?? Because they know they have nothing and have wasted everyone's time and money. They don't get a so over in the Senate.
Fishing expedition
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.