Tulsi Gabbard

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 2:42pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Am I correct in regards to Hillary Clinton that her ‘Vast Right Wing Conspiracy’ is out, and in is Russian assets Tulsi Gabbard and Jill Stein being groomed to destroy the US by running as third-party candidates? If ‘the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long’ is thinking of jumping in the race for POTUS again, she is going about it rather oddly by smearing someone one of her own. Gabbard is a fighter and giving it right back to Clinton, even though she has no chance in the primary. But I do admire Gabbard spunk although her politics are rather rubbish. John Kerry is probably thinking it's time to report for POTUS duty again with such a week Democratic field and Clinton going nuts. But he may have problems with the Logan Act recently if he is thinking of jumping into the race.

I disagree, I think Gabbard does have a growing chance.
I recommend this interview;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXfsaJ8krw

There is a longer version that drills down more into her policies from the same source.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 2:44pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I shat on a poll from Fox News which was carried out mainly on mobile phones. I didn't think you would support them.
I referenced a poll from a respected source.

Carried out mainly on web browsers with a higher error so how is that more respected?

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 2:47pm

Overheal wrote: »

Carried out mainly on web browsers with a higher error so how is that more respected?

The Economist/youGov are not more respected sources in your eyes?
Really?

Overheal · 21-10-2019 2:54pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

The Economist/youGov are not more respected sources in your eyes?
Really?

Frankly, no. And your contention wasn’t because it was a “Fox” poll, it was because the error rate was [less than the yougov poll] and because it was carried out via mobile phone whereas yougov was handled by a browser page.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:01pm

Overheal wrote: »

Frankly, no. And your contention wasn’t because it was a “Fox” poll, it was because the error rate was [less than the yougov poll] and because it was carried out via mobile phone whereas yougov was handled by a browser page.

My main contention was that it was a Fox News poll. Frankly.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 3:02pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

My main contention was that it was a Fox News poll. Frankly.

Don’t see a problem with it then. Now the cell phone blustering you did just looks childish.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:03pm

Overheal wrote: »

Don’t see a problem with it then. Now the cell phone blustering you did just looks childish.

So does your signature.

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:04pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I disagree, I think Gabbard does have a growing chance.
I recommend this interview;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXfsaJ8krw

There is a longer version that drills down more into her policies from the same source.

She’s the logical choice of sane Democrats... but unfortunately the primaries are controlled by the progressive extremists and media activists. The DNC and the mainstream media have been ignoring Gabbard for months. She’s running a classy campaign, she’s civil, and she understands the detrimental impact the radical left's unmerciful attempts to overturn the 2016 election and destroy Trump will actually have on the voters. The Democratic party and their medial handmaidens can have none of that. The fact that the DNC is giving Bernie Sanders, who is not even a member of their party more love than Gabbard should tell you everything you need to know.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 3:06pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

So does your signature.

Are those still a thing? Haven’t had them on in years

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:08pm

notobtuse wrote: »

She’s the logical choice of sane Democrats... but unfortunately the primaries are controlled by the progressive extremists and media activists. The DNC and the mainstream media have been ignoring Gabbard for months. She’s running a classy campaign, she’s civil, and she understands the detrimental impact the radical left's unmerciful attempts to overturn the 2016 election and destroy Trump will actually have on the voters. The Democratic party and their medial handmaidens can have none of that. The fact that the DNC is giving Bernie Sanders, who is not even a member of their party more love than Gabbard should tell you everything you need to know.

I don't blame them for backing Bernie, he's one of the few with an actual chance.
The GOP is as rotten, if not more so than the DNC.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:10pm

Overheal wrote: »

Are those still a thing? Haven’t had them on in years

Sorry, I was childishly referring to the tag under your name.

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:16pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I don't blame them for backing Bernie, he's one of the few with an actual chance.
The GOP is as rotten, if not more so than the DNC.

Bernie would bankrupt the country. Voters may like some of feel good nonsense he spouts but in the end they'll understand nothing is free and they'll vote with their pocketbooks... once they come to realize the government will be putting most of them into the poor house to pay for his ideas.

I'd hold judgement on that rotten thing until the Barr and Durham reports comes out. A whole lot of powerful Democrats should be worried about jail time. They're probably talking to their lawyers right now working out some plea deal strategy. And I think Gabbard is seeing this writing on the wall.

James Brown · 21-10-2019 3:18pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Bernie would bankrupt the country. Voters may like some of feel good nonsense he spouts but in the end they'll understand nothing is free and they'll vote with their pocketbooks... once they come to realize the government will be putting most of them into the poor house to pay for his ideas.

I'd hold judgement on that rotten thing until the Barr and Durham reports comes out. A whole lot of powerful Democrats should be worried about jail time. They're probably talking to their lawyers right now working out some plea deal strategy.

How do you define 'Bankrupt'? You've bottomless Government borrowing there.

Barr is soiled goods. He should be removed.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:19pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Bernie would bankrupt the country. Voters may like some of feel good nonsense he spouts but in the end they'll understand nothing is free and they'll vote with their pocketbooks... once they come to realize the government will be putting most of them into the poor house to pay for his ideas.

I'd hold judgement on that rotten thing until the Barr and Durham reports comes out. A whole lot of powerful Democrats should be worried about jail time. They're probably talking to their lawyers right now working out some plea deal strategy.

Don't get your hopes up, contrary to popular belief Barr is actually a deep state player.

rossie1977 · 21-10-2019 3:19pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Gabbard is a right wing Democrat. The U.S. needs a left leaning politician. Clinton seemed sad and petty talking about her. Clinton is like the conservative ghost of elections past.
It's looking like Biden. He might even get a few sympathy votes from the Trump assassination attempt.

Love Bernie, but ain't never going to happen.
Unless the Republicans grow a conscience and ethics, Trump is still a strong contender.

There are barely any left leaning politicans in America (there is only handful in Ireland in truth) and only two running for President in 2020.

America needs someone not so far to the right, someone:
* Who is not as nationalistic
* who isn't identifying enemies and using them as a unifying cause
* who has more respect for human rights
* who is unlikely to indulge in rampant sexism
* who won't attempt to control the mass media
* who doesn't have distain for the arts and intellectuals in science
* who doesn't believe corporate power should be protected at all costs
* who isn't obsessed with crime and punishment.
* who won't engage in rampant cronyism and corruption

rossie1977 · 21-10-2019 3:23pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I'd hold judgement on that rotten thing until the Barr and Durham reports comes out. A whole lot of powerful Democrats should be worried about jail time. They're probably talking to their lawyers right now working out some plea deal strategy. And I think Gabbard is seeing this writing on the wall.

You do know what this supposed investigation entails right https://www.justsecurity.org/66609/bill-barrs-witch-hunt/

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:26pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Don't get your hopes up, contrary to popular belief Barr is actually a deep state player.

He might be that but he's also a straight shooter. Going after the Mifsud records should scare everyone involved in the FISA abuse.. going all the way up to Obama. I'm sure the deep state GOP members will be pushing Trump not to take the bad players out behind the woodshed for the good of the country, but if he allows them to get away with their near treason actions it will only encourage others doing the same in the future.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:26pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

There are barely any left leaning politicans in America (there is only handful in Ireland in truth) and only two running for President in 2020.

America needs someone not so far to the right, someone:
* Who is not as nationalistic
* who isn't identifying enemies and using them as a unifying cause
* who has more respect for human rights
* who is unlikely to indulge in rampant sexism
* who won't attempt to control the mass media
* who doesn't have distain for the arts and intellectuals in science
* who doesn't believe corporate power should be protected at all costs
* who isn't obsessed with crime and punishment.
* who won't engage in rampant cronyism and corruption

You've just described Tulsi!
I'll post this link to the only full interview I've found where she describes her policies. I urge you to watch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVvYH6Kkj_s

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:29pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

You do know what this supposed investigation entails right https://www.justsecurity.org/66609/bill-barrs-witch-hunt/

I want it all to come out... the good, the bad and the ugly from players on both sides of the political aisle. And here's a novel idea not seen in the age of Trump... equal justice under the law. I guess you can tell I'm not a democrat or one of their media handmaidens.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:31pm

notobtuse wrote: »

He might be that but he's also a straight shooter. Going after the Mifsud records should scare everyone involved in the FISA abuse.. going all the way up to Obama. I'm sure the deep state GOP members will be pushing Trump not to take the bad players out behind the woodshed for the good of the country, but if he allows them to get away with their near treason actions it will only encourage others doing the same in the future.

Do you think he'll be allowed to be fair and do the same to the clearly corrupt GOP? Not a chance.
It won't help to only get rid one side of the most corrupt undemocratic governmental system in the western hemisphere. Ignoring Ireland of course.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 3:32pm

notobtuse wrote: »

He might be that but he's also a straight shooter. Going after the Mifsud records should scare everyone involved in the FISA abuse.. going all the way up to Obama. I'm sure the deep state GOP members will be pushing Trump not to take the bad players out behind the woodshed for the good of the country, but if he allows them to get away with their near treason actions it will only encourage others doing the same in the future.

Nice little loophole for your personal narrative if the investigation shows everything went by the book.

Schiff already wrote a detailed explanation about the FISA alleged abuses, and the White House redacted it. Then he pushed Nunes to release his own memo (fully unclassified, such a beautiful perfect letter) which is both interesting for what it says and what it doesn’t.

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:39pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Do you think he'll be allowed to be fair and do the same to the clearly corrupt GOP? Not a chance.
It won't help to only get rid one side of the most corrupt undemocratic governmental system in the western hemisphere. Ignoring Ireland of course.

I can give you an extensive list of corrupt Democrats, and their political appointees in the DOJ, FBI and State Department, in the matter. What GOP members are you referring to and why?

Gabbard at least doesn't seem to support the corrupt Democrats, which is also why she'll' be kept far away from any chance at the primary.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:40pm

Overheal wrote: »

Nice little loophole for your personal narrative if the investigation shows everything went by the book.

Schiff already wrote a detailed explanation about the FISA alleged abuses, and the White House redacted it. Then he pushed Nunes to release his own memo (fully unclassified, such a beautiful perfect letter) which is both interesting for what it says and what it doesn’t.

Please don't reference Schiff, he's a bad actor in this. Did you not see his complete fantasy portrayal of the Trump phone call?

James Brown · 21-10-2019 3:41pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I want it all to come out... the good, the bad and the ugly from players on both sides of the political aisle. And here's a novel idea not seen in the age of Trump... equal justice under the law. I guess you can tell I'm not a democrat or one of their media handmaidens.

I agree. Everyone should be held to account but it requires the Republicans using ethics. Unlikely.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:46pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I can give you an extensive list of corrupt Democrats, and their political appointees in the DOJ, FBI and State Department, in the matter. What GOP members are you referring to and why?

Gabbard at least doesn't seem to support the corrupt Democrats, which is also why she'll' be kept far away from any chance at the primary.

It's a long list, I can't be arsed with that much typing. Start with the 129 who voted to go to war with Turkey. Of course not all 129 are corrupt, so probably 80/90% of those.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 3:47pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Please don't reference Schiff, he's a bad actor in this. Did you not see his complete fantasy portrayal of the Trump phone call?

I saw something he clearly telegraphed was going to be an exaggeration. I don’t see how this makes Schiff a ‘bad actor’ vs. Trump...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

Or any of his... surrogates? Tell me what role model you’re saying Schiff is disgracing?

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:48pm

Overheal wrote: »

I saw something he clearly telegraphed was going to be an exaggeration. I don’t see how this makes Schiff a ‘bad actor’ vs. Trump...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

Or any of his... surrogates? Tell me what role model you’re saying Schiff is disgracing?

Linky no worky. opps, linky now worky.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 3:51pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Linky no worky. opps, linky now worky.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:51pm

Overheal wrote: »

I saw something he clearly telegraphed was going to be an exaggeration. I don’t see how this makes Schiff a ‘bad actor’ vs. Trump...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

Or any of his... surrogates? Tell me what role model you’re saying Schiff is disgracing?

At least I can laugh at Trump. Schiff makes me cry.

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:52pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

It's a long list, I can't be arsed with that much typing. Start with the 129 who voted to go to war with Turkey. Of course not all 129 are corrupt, so probably 80/90% of those.

So I see you got nothing!

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 3:53pm

notobtuse wrote: »

So I see you got nothing!

Tempting.....

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 3:53pm

Overheal wrote: »

I saw something he clearly telegraphed was going to be an exaggeration. I don’t see how this makes Schiff a ‘bad actor’ vs. Trump...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

Or any of his... surrogates? Tell me what role model you’re saying Schiff is disgracing?

That old chestnut.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsaB3ynIZH4

rossie1977 · 21-10-2019 3:55pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I want it all to come out... the good, the bad and the ugly from players on both sides of the political aisle. And here's a novel idea not seen in the age of Trump... equal justice under the law. I guess you can tell I'm not a democrat or one of their media handmaidens.

Which media?

The one that dedicated far more negative news-stories about Hillary Clinton in run up to last election?

https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

In six days, the NYT had as many front page stories on Clinton's emails as they did about all the policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election. When Clinton was cleared the other day by state department the story didn't feature on the front page, it was on page 16.

This is the supposed pro Democrat media...

This is the kind of stuff the non pro Dem media were publishing

HILLARY-CLINTON-National-Enquirer-.jpeg?quality=75&strip=all&w=690&h=399

HILLARY-CLINTON-National-Enquirer-.jpeg?quality=75&strip=all&w=690&h=399

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 3:56pm

mad muffin wrote: »

That old chestnut.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsaB3ynIZH4

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 3:57pm

notobtuse wrote: »

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

All they have is lies. As is clearly evident by Hillary’s commentary on Russian “assets”.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:04pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

At least I can laugh at Trump. Schiff makes me cry.

Valid complaint but I don’t think it warrants censure imo

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:06pm

mad muffin wrote: »

All they have is lies. As is clearly evident by Hillary’s commentary on Russian “assets”.

“All they have is lies”

/zeroes in on single ridiculous quote between mountains of real stuff

notobtuse · 21-10-2019 4:08pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

Which media?

The one that dedicated far more negative news-stories about Hillary Clinton in run up to last election?

https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

In six days, the NYT had as many front page stories on Clinton's emails as they did about all the policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election. When Clinton was cleared the other day by state department the story didn't feature on the front page, it was on page 16.

This is the supposed pro Democrat media...

This is the kind of stuff the non pro Dem media were publishing

Six days of coverage? Knock me over with a feather! And were any of them 'mainstream media' entities calling for Hillary's arrest because of all the numerous crimes she committed in regards to those email?

And dear lord, did you even bother to see the name on those covers you show. None are legitimate media sources.

And I'm all in... and calling your Hillary email coverage, and raising you the study of media Trump hatred showing 92% negative coverage of his presidency:
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-trump-hatred-coverage/

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 4:08pm

Overheal wrote: »

Valid complaint but I don’t think it warrants censure imo

Censure? I think he should be drummed out of politics forever.
He was caught by the bollix when Trump released the transcript.
I've read the transcript and watched the lying statement, which was carried live by most networks by the way.

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 4:12pm

Overheal wrote: »

“All they have is lies”

/zeroes in on single ridiculous quote between mountains of real stuff

Dude don’t deflect from your action. You posted a lie. I fact checked you. Just man up.

James Brown · 21-10-2019 4:15pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Six days of coverage? Knock me over with a feather! And were any of them 'mainstream media' entities calling for Hillary's arrest because of all the numerous crimes she committed in regards to those email?

And dear lord, did you even bother to see the name on those covers you show. None are legitimate media sources.

And I'm all in... and calling your Hillary email coverage, and raising you the study of media Trump hatred showing 92% negative coverage of his presidency:
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-trump-hatred-coverage/

Yes, Trump allied rags.
The funny thing about Trump is the series of lame defences.
What if the negative coverage of Trump relates to Trumps actions and comments? Would probably balance out.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:19pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Censure? I think he should be drummed out of politics forever.
He was caught by the bollix when Trump released the transcript.
I've read the transcript and watched the lying statement, which was carried live by most networks by the way.

And? He didn’t pass it off as verbatim.

Remember when Barr made a press release saying the Mueller report totally vindicated Trump - when Barr thought the public wasn’t going to get to see it? Why wasn’t Barr run out of politics?

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:20pm

mad muffin wrote: »

Dude don’t deflect from your action. You posted a lie. I fact checked you. Just man up.

Fact checked what?

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 4:22pm

Overheal wrote: »

Fact checked what?

The video you posted. Which as you found out is a lie.

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 4:24pm

Overheal wrote: »

And? He didn’t pass it off as verbatim.

Remember when Barr made a press release saying the Mueller report totally vindicated Trump - when Barr thought the public wasn’t going to get to see it? Why wasn’t Barr run out of politics?

I recommend you widen your news sources.
He did try to pass it off as verbatim, until the transcript was released that is.
The Mueller report did vindicate Trump. It unfortunately was clearly based on a lie. The Russians didn't hack the DNC servers.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:31pm

mad muffin wrote: »

The video you posted. Which as you found out is a lie.

It’s years old and not really up for debate. The video isn’t a deepfake he indeed mocked the reporter.

The point you’re continuing to ignore is that there isn’t anyone in Trumpworld that exemplifies any sort of ‘dignity’ available to be offended by Schiff’s exaggeration of the Ukraine call.

Overheal · 21-10-2019 4:35pm

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I recommend you widen your news sources.
He did try to pass it off as verbatim, until the transcript was released that is.

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.

The Mueller report did vindicate Trump. It unfortunately was clearly based on a lie. The Russians didn't hack the DNC servers.

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 4:37pm

Overheal wrote: »

It’s years old and not really up for debate. The video isn’t a deepfake he indeed mocked the reporter.

The point you’re continuing to ignore is that there isn’t anyone in Trumpworld that exemplifies any sort of ‘dignity’ available to be offended by Schiff’s exaggeration of the Ukraine call.

I’m not getting in to it with you. The videos speak for themselves.

You’ve already derailed this thread. This thread is about Tulsi Gabbard. Not Donald Trump.

There’s a Donald Trump bashing thread in the politics section. You can go post your videos there.

mad muffin · 21-10-2019 4:38pm

Overheal wrote: »

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

What has this got to do with the thread subject? Can you stick to the subject?

Spencerfreeman · 21-10-2019 4:43pm

Overheal wrote: »

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

Yes OK, i may have overstated it with the term verbatim but you tell me, what document was he reading from? It's still a gross misrepresentation of what was published.
Mueller, IMO, is the one guilty of collusion. He has lied at every turn.

Tulsi Gabbard

Comments