Reminder to far right fringe revisionists

ApostleofGrief said:

pawz said:

ApostleofGrief said:

pawz said:

ApostleofGrief said:

The reason impeachment was initiated as an inquiry was strictly because the White House blocked an urgent whistleblower report. It was not started because Trump was working a quid pro quo of dirt for aid. That ensures it will happen though

If russia-gate wasn't enough, you fucking idiots just handed him 2020.

TYFYS

If the idiotic president had learned from Russia he wouldn't be getting impeached. Why do you support a treasonous bastard?

So you position is he should hang?


@NSA_Dawg ?

Do I seem like law enforcement?

2001400ex said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

ApostleofGrief said:

HoustonHusky said:

ApostleofGrief said:

The reason impeachment was initiated as an inquiry was strictly because the White House blocked an urgent whistleblower report. It was not started because Trump was working a quid pro quo of dirt for aid. That ensures it will happen though

By definition a “whistleblower” has first-hand knowledge of an event of which this guy did not, and Shitt has had it since August.

But OK...nominate Dementia Biden or Fauxahontas and see how that works out for you.

He did have first-hand knowledge. He was working with colleagues who told him what happened and that was corroborated with the phone reconstruction along with all relevant details!

There's a well established legal test for this:

Unless YOU have proof in HAND...it’s speculation for YOU. ‘Those who know’....meaning YOU are not a ‘THOSE’. I didn’t create the English language but ‘speculation’ is pretty cut and dry. Unless you are an eye witness, YOU are speculating. Word of mouth is not proof.

I don't feel like they had proof that Clinton had sexual relations with Monica when he was put under oath. So I dig your words in all caps, but you entire point is meaningless.

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

ApostleofGrief said:

HoustonHusky said:

ApostleofGrief said:

The reason impeachment was initiated as an inquiry was strictly because the White House blocked an urgent whistleblower report. It was not started because Trump was working a quid pro quo of dirt for aid. That ensures it will happen though

By definition a “whistleblower” has first-hand knowledge of an event of which this guy did not, and Shitt has had it since August.

But OK...nominate Dementia Biden or Fauxahontas and see how that works out for you.

He did have first-hand knowledge. He was working with colleagues who told him what happened and that was corroborated with the phone reconstruction along with all relevant details!

There's a well established legal test for this:

Unless YOU have proof in HAND...it’s speculation for YOU. ‘Those who know’....meaning YOU are not a ‘THOSE’. I didn’t create the English language but ‘speculation’ is pretty cut and dry. Unless you are an eye witness, YOU are speculating. Word of mouth is not proof.

I don't feel like they had proof that Clinton had sexual relations with Monica when he was put under oath. So I dig your words in all caps, but you entire point is meaningless.

Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.

Bob is wrong. As always:

Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her. His lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, stated with Clinton present that Lewinsky's affidavit showed that there was no sex in any manner, shape or form between Clinton and Lewinsky. The Starr Report states that the following day, Clinton "coached" his secretary Betty Currie into repeating his denials should she be called to testify.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

Pundits debated whether Clinton would address the allegations in his State of the Union Address. Ultimately, he chose not to mention them. Hillary Clinton remained supportive of her husband throughout the scandal. On January 27, in an appearance on NBC's Today she said, "The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president."

For the next several months and through the summer, the media debated whether an affair had occurred and whether Clinton had lied or obstructed justice, but nothing could be definitively established beyond the taped recordings because Lewinsky was unwilling to discuss the affair or testify about it. On July 28, 1998, a substantial delay after the public break of the scandal, Lewinsky received transactional immunity in exchange for grand jury testimony concerning her relationship with Clinton.[26] She also turned over a semen-stained blue dress (that Linda Tripp had encouraged her to save without dry cleaning) to the Starr investigators, thereby providing unambiguous DNA evidence that could prove the relationship despite Clinton's official denials.[27]

Clinton admitted in taped grand jury testimony on August 17, 1998, that he had engaged in an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. That evening he gave a nationally televised statement admitting that his relationship with Lewinsky was "not appropriate".[28][29]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton–Lewinsky_scandal