I will be working across party lines in a bicameral fashion to draft sanctions and move quickly, appreciating President Trump’s willingness to work with the Congress. The Speaker indicated to me that time was of the essence.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 14, 2019
Pleased to have a conversation with Senator @LindseyGrahamSC this morning. Our first order of business was to agree that we must have a bipartisan, bicameral joint resolution to overturn the President’s dangerous decision in Syria immediately.
— Nancy Pelosi Verified Account @SpeakerPelosi 14 Oct 2019
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ..... aaaaaa
— Trump (Tweet in the works)
flagpole lies, again wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) You're probably a troll with the "follower" comment, so I won't even comment on that, though I WILL comment on the rest of your post.
2) Yes, currently Warren is my favorite (even though I don't agree with ALL of what she wants to do). I have mentioned this a few times now. Harris would be my second favorite, and Buttigieg third. I like smart people over almost anything else which is why Warren and Harris are my top two choices. Buttigieg would be my top choice if he had more experience. I like the fact that he was in the military, he's smart and measured. He spends some time in the House or Senate, and I may have to even campaign for him down the road. Biden has NEVER been my favorite, so you got that wrong.
3) Ah...definitely trolling with the Avenatti comment. I NEVER was for him and not even mildly interested that he had considered running. The ONLY thing I ever said positive about Avenatti is that he was coming (as in coming for Trump), and he did. Trump is "Individual-1" because of Avenatti. I had no interest in him as a political candidate.
Before you decide to tell me that I was for Biden and/or Avenatti, I say the burden of proof is on you. You will NOT be able to find a quote that suggests either thing from me. I challenge you to find one...you will not be able to, so don't waste your time.
All that said, ALL of the Democrat candidates are better than Trump, and so I will vote for whomever is the Democrat nominee...this time, EVEN if Trump is ousted before the election. The GOP has done a shameful job enabling this monster in the White House, and it needs to pay the price. In future elections, I will give a GOP candidate a fair shot. No freakin' way this time.
Says the guy who swore that no one could find a quote saying that he guarantees Trump won't be running for re-election. It's found, posted, and you flip flopped like Hillary Clinton versus just admitting that you were wrong. Now you'll say, I'm still not wrong (even though the point is that you said it but denied it) because he hasn't run yet. How embarrassing it must be to not man up to being wrong. What a liar.
All INCORRECT!
Trollminator wrote:
agip wrote:
I honestly have no strong preference. I'd probably vote for Biden because I feel the nation needs, more than anything, a quiet four years of rebuilding our national honor. Another four years of upheaval from warren and sanders would be a serious problem.
Mayor Pete is the question - I mean that is the guy who should be president. But Biden is more likely to win so I'll go with him.
Right now I have no favorite as I am less concerned about their actual policy/promises and more about who can beat trump. This will become more evident soon enough and I will 100% back that person. My personal preference although he likely has no shot at being the Dem nominee is Pete - new blood, wise beyond his years, seems more moderate, well rounded and less invested in radical ideas. He doesn't bring any baggage. Trump has made this very easy for me and hopefully for a majority of Dem voters - basically I have no problem voting for whoever the nominee is. Any functioning adult will 100% do. I will be even more hopeful if the Dem support consolidates behind the winner. This didn't happen in 2016 for a number of reasons, a major one being complacency. I believe the trump fear factor is going to far outweigh any reservations Dems may have about the nominee.
I actually could see myself voting for Pete over Trump. I would have to see more of him, though. What the country is going through now, and I would put it equally on Dems and on Trump, is ruining the country. The Democratic party has been hijacked by the radical left and Pete seems to be more of a moderate.
Trollminator wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Blah blah blah deflection
I'm waiting for your your answers. I have removed the insult to make you feel more comfortable.
Trollminator wrote:
Sally, I'm going to also point to another clear distinction here.. Biden's actions were done through official US policy, totally backed by Congress and our EU partners. He did it in the open. Now you can make the case he was still using his position to somehow protect his son (although there are clear arguments his son did not benefit at all from the prosecutor's removal). So if Biden was committing a crime so openly and clearly, why wouldn't anyone have called him out back then? Why wait almost 6 years until Biden becomes the clear threat to Trump to point the finger? And why not open an official investigation into the matter?
I'll ask you a few questions about the Ukraine/trump issue:
1. What would trump have to gain from Ukraine "do him a favor"?
2. What would Ukraine have to lose if they didn't do him a favor?
3. What would trump and those in his close circle have to lose if they didn't classify the call the way they did?
4. Why would trump openly harass and attack the whistle blower despite clear evidence that he/she filed the complaint properly?
5. Why would trump take the political risk of blocking anyone from giving testimony to a perfectly legal and warranted investigation?
This is pretty basic stuff Sally. I know it's too many questions for you all at once, but I hope you will at least try.
And I woulda gotten away with it if it weren’t for you metalling wrote:
Ru-roh....
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/us/politics/who-is-fiona-hill.html
....a felony....
https://t.co/JqphuDnTEA?ssr=trueSally Vix wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Right now I have no favorite as I am less concerned about their actual policy/promises and more about who can beat trump. This will become more evident soon enough and I will 100% back that person. My personal preference although he likely has no shot at being the Dem nominee is Pete - new blood, wise beyond his years, seems more moderate, well rounded and less invested in radical ideas. He doesn't bring any baggage. Trump has made this very easy for me and hopefully for a majority of Dem voters - basically I have no problem voting for whoever the nominee is. Any functioning adult will 100% do. I will be even more hopeful if the Dem support consolidates behind the winner. This didn't happen in 2016 for a number of reasons, a major one being complacency. I believe the trump fear factor is going to far outweigh any reservations Dems may have about the nominee.
I actually could see myself voting for Pete over Trump. I would have to see more of him, though. What the country is going through now, and I would put it equally on Dems and on Trump, is ruining the country. The Democratic party has been hijacked by the radical left and Pete seems to be more of a moderate.
Right, equally.. because the current POTUS didn’t run on hate and division and does not continue to fuel those things every single day.
Your trolling skills are crap but you are very persistent. I am impressed by your posting frequency using the same lame tactics day in and out. It actually works but you invest so much in this I do wonder what is in it for you.
Trollminator wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Sally, I'm going to also point to another clear distinction here.. Biden's actions were done through official US policy, totally backed by Congress and our EU partners. He did it in the open. Now you can make the case he was still using his position to somehow protect his son (although there are clear arguments his son did not benefit at all from the prosecutor's removal). So if Biden was committing a crime so openly and clearly, why wouldn't anyone have called him out back then? Why wait almost 6 years until Biden becomes the clear threat to Trump to point the finger? And why not open an official investigation into the matter?
I'll ask you a few questions about the Ukraine/trump issue:
1. What would trump have to gain from Ukraine "do him a favor"?
2. What would Ukraine have to lose if they didn't do him a favor?
3. What would trump and those in his close circle have to lose if they didn't classify the call the way they did?
4. Why would trump openly harass and attack the whistle blower despite clear evidence that he/she filed the complaint properly?
5. Why would trump take the political risk of blocking anyone from giving testimony to a perfectly legal and warranted investigation?
This is pretty basic stuff Sally. I know it's too many questions for you all at once, but I hope you will at least try.
Contemplating your questions while doing some other stuff at the same time. 5) Is the investigation really perfectly legal and warranted? Why does Adam Schiff refuse to open up the impeachment "inquiry" so that Americans can see the process play out? What is hiding? 4) How has Trump openly harrassed and attacked the whistle blower? If Trump has truly committed impeachable offenses, why does Pelosi not have a House vote and begin IMMEDIATELY impeachment proceedings? Why have it secretly done behind closed doors? Nixon's removal was a bipartisan affair. This is going to be just like Obamacare. Republicans will be kept completely out of the process. It will be 100% Dems. Why not try to make it bipartisan? The American public will view it as a witch hunt unless Repubs are involved in the impeachment.
Sally Vix wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Contemplating your questions while doing some other stuff at the same time. 5) Is the investigation really perfectly legal and warranted? Why does Adam Schiff refuse to open up the impeachment "inquiry" so that Americans can see the process play out? What is hiding? 4) How has Trump openly harrassed and attacked the whistle blower? If Trump has truly committed impeachable offenses, why does Pelosi not have a House vote and begin IMMEDIATELY impeachment proceedings? Why have it secretly done behind closed doors? Nixon's removal was a bipartisan affair. This is going to be just like Obamacare. Republicans will be kept completely out of the process. It will be 100% Dems. Why not try to make it bipartisan? The American public will view it as a witch hunt unless Repubs are involved in the impeachment.
No, finish answering #1-3 then I’ll respond
We need to quit looking into Trump and need to look more closely at Hunter Biden (along with Daddy)
Besides dumping his wife for his brother's widow, he did some really bad things.
He has squandered his family's money on HOOKERS, STRIPPERS AND DRUGS. He and Flagpole would likely call the hookers and strippers WHORES. Alas, the apple does not fall far from the tree.
https://pagesix.com/2017/03/02/ex-claims-hunter-biden-blew-money-on-hookers-drugs/
Poor Ghost, this impeachment is just breaking your heart.
Trollminator wrote:
agip wrote:
I honestly have no strong preference. I'd probably vote for Biden because I feel the nation needs, more than anything, a quiet four years of rebuilding our national honor. Another four years of upheaval from warren and sanders would be a serious problem.
Mayor Pete is the question - I mean that is the guy who should be president. But Biden is more likely to win so I'll go with him.
Right now I have no favorite as I am less concerned about their actual policy/promises and more about who can beat trump. This will become more evident soon enough and I will 100% back that person. My personal preference although he likely has no shot at being the Dem nominee is Pete - new blood, wise beyond his years, seems more moderate, well rounded and less invested in radical ideas. He doesn't bring any baggage. Trump has made this very easy for me and hopefully for a majority of Dem voters - basically I have no problem voting for whoever the nominee is. Any functioning adult will 100% do. I will be even more hopeful if the Dem support consolidates behind the winner. This didn't happen in 2016 for a number of reasons, a major one being complacency. I believe the trump fear factor is going to far outweigh any reservations Dems may have about the nominee.
I agree with the last two posters. I like Pete, but I think in 4 years it might be more of his time. Although none of the candidates have my enthusiastic support, I like Biden. The country needs his stability and his judgement. It would be nice to have a president who is not a psychopath. That's not asking for too much is it?
40-45% want a psycho, ha ha.
In fact, that’s our new slogan, “Impeach the psycho!”
Love those fake teeth, Ghost! Looks totally natural, ha ha.
Fake teeth? You’re loosing it, Jesse. Tell the psyche doc it is TDS. He’ll know what drugs to prescribe.
Sally Vix wrote:
The Democratic party has been hijacked by the radical left and Pete seems to be more of a moderate.
There was an analysis of Trump tweets the other day that pointed out that of the various people Trump's identified as "the face of the Democratic party" has always been a person of color and/or a woman. Never has he tagged a white male, say Chuck Schumer or Joe Biden.
“Fake teeth? You’re loosing it!” /
You’re funny Ghost! OK, maybe you’re teeth are just loose! That happens after 80 years...
TDS, trump dental/dementia syndrome? Or is it just age?
Fiona Hill & John Bolton ratted out Stooge-liani before they quit!!
Quit cryin’, ghost!