Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham: Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020 Let's see if we can get this straight. 1.

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "The corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

Carol Kelly

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

This is your best post ever. Keep it up.

Liberty Tree

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

Right on target.

CarryOn

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

Great post. Says it all. Thanks for posting.

okie don

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

Great post. Thanks Parky.
Not much the libtards can say to refute this...

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

okie don wrote:

Great post. Thanks Parky.
Not much the libtards can say to refute this...

Probably why we haven't heard from them.

federally indicted mattoid

Parky60 wrote:

Running out of words to describe the impeachment sham
Eric Georgatos ~ January 21, 2020
Let's see if we can get this straight.

1. Joe Biden is on videotape proudly recalling his promise (while serving as vice president of the United States) to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine unless a Ukrainian prosecutor threatening to expose the corruption of Biden's son was promptly fired. This is known as a quid pro quo: you get rid of the prosecutor, and you get the money. The quid pro quo was executed: the prosecutor was fired, and the aid was released. While Joe Biden was vice president of the United States.

2. "[T]he corruption of Biden's son" H****r, which was at risk of exposure by the fired Ukrainian prosecutor, is irrefutable on the basis of publicly known information: he was paid more than $50K per month to sit on the board of Burisma, a position for which he had absolutely no qualifications — except his last name. This information is not the product of anyone "digging up dirt" on a political opponent; this is not even "dirt" in the sense of uncorroborated hearsay. It is documented corruption, per se — in plain sight of anyone with a conscience. It is self-evident; it is not remotely debatable.

3. President Donald Trump thought an investigation into the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine might be in America's interest and thought about withholding foreign aid from Ukraine absent such an investigation. He may have even said so to some people. He may think or say so to this day. He might think or say that if the American people fully realized how corrupt Joe Biden is, they wouldn't v**e for him ever again — and he might be right. So what? We know from publicly available information that Ukraine did not complete any investigation of the Bidens and did in fact receive the foreign aid from the USA. And we know that the Bidens' corruption in the Ukraine stands to this day, unaddressed by anyone with authority to impose accountability.

4. Because Joe Biden is a candidate for the 2020 Democrat nomination for the president of the United States, our ruling-class elites tell us it is an impeachable offense by President Trump to consider urging the Ukrainians to conduct an investigation of the manifest corruption of the Bidens. Thus, the new "law" in America, according to our ruling class, is that if you are a Democrat candidate for president, even if you have committed crimes and indulged in corrupt acts, you get a free pass from investigation or accountability. To investigate a Democrat's corruption in such circumstances would be to "interfere" with a U.S. e******n. President Trump violated this law, and so there shall be a trial in the United States Senate to assess his "guilt."

5. According to our ruling class, the t***sparent corruption of the Bidens is not relevant to evaluating whether Trump's actions are impeachable because...

There is no "because"; there are no reasons, except Orange Man Bad.

"Orwellian" doesn't begin to describe this spectacle of hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy among America's ruling class.

Hot and cold anger doesn't begin to describe the mood of Americans massively insulted by this charade that mocks and defiles the very concepts of t***h and justice.

Americans are not stupid; they are not undiscerning; they are not morally vacuous—and they are watching their ruling class.

You think Boris Johnson won a landslide? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

b Running out of words to describe the impeachmen... (show quote)

Do you have any idea why Donald Trump didn't have a

federally indicted mattoid

useful mattoid 45 wrote:

Do you have any idea why Donald Trump didn't have a

... hit send too early...

Why didn't Donald have the investigation done with official government agencies? Why did he send Lev parnis to take her out? Why did Rudy Giuliani smear Marie Yovanovich?

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

useful mattoid 45 wrote:

... hit send too early...

Why didn't Donald have the investigation done with official government agencies? Why did he send Lev parnis to take her out? Why did Rudy Giuliani smear Marie Yovanovich?

Because she exceeded her mandate and worked to undermine the president. But he could have fired her for any reason, like having frizzy hair.

Kickaha Loc: Nebraska

useful mattoid 45 wrote:

... hit send too early...

Why didn't Donald have the investigation done with official government agencies? Why did he send Lev parnis to take her out? Why did Rudy Giuliani smear Marie Yovanovich?

Trump wanted to recall her earlier but someone talked him out of it. We wouldn't have had these problems if Trump had replaced her when he first wanted to. Also it is hard to have your foreign policy carried out when you can't even get Congress to approve ambassadors. US foreign policy has been hampered by Obama holdovers ignoring and actively opposing the President's foreign policy directives.

Carol Kelly

Peewee wrote:

Because she exceeded her mandate and worked to undermine the president. But he could have fired her for any reason, like having frizzy hair.

Also she was one of Obama’s people. Most presidents appoint like thinking ambassadors.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Carol Kelly wrote:

Also she was one of Obama’s people. Most presidents appoint like thinking ambassadors.

Obama did, another g*******t anti-American.

federally indicted mattoid

Kickaha wrote:

Trump wanted to recall her earlier but someone talked him out of it. We wouldn't have had these problems if Trump had replaced her when he first wanted to. Also it is hard to have your foreign policy carried out when you can't even get Congress to approve ambassadors. US foreign policy has been hampered by Obama holdovers ignoring and actively opposing the President's foreign policy directives.

So if it's hard, you do it the underhanded way? Is this going to be the new excuse?

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

useful mattoid 45 wrote:

So if it's hard, you do it the underhanded way? Is this going to be the new excuse?

Nothing was underhanded, except to a lib mind.