Saw that. The usual isn't working for them. The Journalists got all journalisty all of a sudden, and started asking tough questions.
I think they have collectively had it up to their eyeballs with the bull .
Martha MacCallum
✔
Marthamaccallum
AG Barr is overseeing an investigation into the origins of the 2016 Russia probe. Common knowledge. The Australian Ambassador to London is involved. Does not seem unusual that this investigation would be discussed
Trump president, not Biden
Gotta love media figures who pretend they aren't in the media.
Lowering the Barr
Whoopsie
so now you care about the popular vote?
that's interesting, but he received LESS votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016
and bill won way more electoral votes, for what that's worth
Clinton's election in 1992 would be a great example of why we should have run off elections but Republicans have no interest in making that argument.
Joe, Hunter Biden seen golfing with Ukraine gas company exec back in 2014, photo shows
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe...14-photo-shows
Trump president, not Biden
Trump President not much longer
You are not average if you are johnsmith
You got golden plates and such.
Hang them!
CIA coup when orange man outed himself.
hater thinking yet again.
A lot of reputable names will be included in this much awaited Trump impeachment if ever it will push through. People on twitter are making noise about it, one tweet after another.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...esident-trump/
The president of Ukraine said the same thing. Only problem was that Trump released the conversation. Foreign government officials do NOT want to be involved in this.
Also why the hearsay objection to the wb complaint is weak. Federal Rule 802 doesn’t apply.
Thought that was Joseph Smith
Correct you are.
But I deem it close enough because I can.
I would kindly point you to the alternative fact act of 2017.
Not a (un)popularity contest, but anyway ...
Support for Trump impeachment rises 6 points
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/463716-poll-nearly-half-of-americans-say-trump-should-be-impeached-and
Rapid Developments on the Australia Front
A few developments just now on the Australia front emerging out of the Australian press.
Here is a letter the Australian Ambassador to the US wrote to Bill Barr in May 2019 offering full assistance in Barr’s effort to investigate the origins of the Russia probe. It is cc’d to Mick Mulvaney at the White House.
Here is a Twitter thread from another Australian reporter giving some timeline and context.
The gist is this:
When Trump and Barr first announced Barr’s investigate the investigators operation,
Australia said it would assist the US if asked.
Then on May 25th Trump had a major public tantrum threatening Australia.
That apparently led to the Ambassador’s letter above.
So we see a common pattern.
Initial efforts to steer at least somewhat clear followed by Trump tantrums and threats
followed by more escalating obsequiousness and cooperation from the country in question.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/rapid-developments-on-the-australia-front
Harvard Law professor warns Trump:
If you resist the investigation, it’ll be ‘another article of impeachment’
People in President Donald Trump’s orbit are already suggesting they may defy cooperating with House Democrats’ impeachment investigation. Most notably,
Rudy Giuliani has claimed he has to “consider” whether to comply with it.
On MSNBC’s “All In” Monday, Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe offered
a stark warning to Trump’s team:
This isn’t like the previous battles with Democrats in court.
This will move fast — and steamroller anyone who gets in the way.
“No longer is it going to be a protracted fight in the courts,” said Tribe.
“Adam Schiff has made clear,
as I think the intelligence committee and the other committees will,
that from now on it’s a showdown.”
“That is, if they try to resist the subpoenas on the basis of phony attorney client privileges which, for example, in this case don’t apply,”
“Rudy was not acting as Donald Trump’s attorney and, anyway,
the attorney-client privilege doesn’t cover criminal conspiracies.
If they resist, instead of being taken to court they will simply be told, all right, we’re going to draw all the inferences against you.
This is going to become another article of impeachment
against the guy who is stonewalling and telling you to resist.”
“So that in the past it was all very polite, yes, please, answer, here’s another nasty letter.
Now it’s all going to be showdown time and it’s going to be quick and that’s important,”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/har...f-impeachment/
There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
