[Vacuum7]

Just heard that the famous "WHISTLEBLOWER" is a CIA Analyst/CIA Officer that worked in the Executive Branch while Obama was POTUS and had a close working relationship to Joe Biden. He is also a registered Democrat......How come no one should be surprised at this?

[jlisenbe]

Evidently he did work for the CIA during the Obama years. The part about him being close to the Bidens seems to be suspect. That news came out a couple of weeks ago. At any rate, his information was second hand and the telephone transcript was made public days ago, so I'm not sure what significance the story has now. People can read the transcript and draw their own conclusions.

https://www.newsmax.com/us/cia-whist.../26/id/934481/

[talaniman]

BREAKING NEWS

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

[jlisenbe]

So he'll testify and, in all likelihood, will add nothing, and then the dems will have to chase another ghost around. At some point they have to come up with evidence of a crime.

[talaniman]

Get dirt on the Bidens you get Javelins-CRIME

Nobody testifies to Congress-Obstruction.

Defy document subpoenas by Congress-Obstruction

Getting your cabinet to pressure Ukraine to get dirt on political opponents-CRIME

This is just the FEDERAL stuff.

[jlisenbe]

Get dirt on the Bidens you get Javelins-CRIME

Denied by the Ukrainian PM. Good luck with that one. Strike one.

Nobody testifies to Congress-Obstruction.

Defy document subpoenas by Congress-Obstruction

Also known as executive privilege in both cases. That's strike two.

Getting your cabinet to pressure Ukraine to get dirt on political opponents-CRIME

And again, no evidence. Strike three. You're out, my friend.

This is just the FEDERAL stuff.

It's "stuff" alright,. Won't say what kind.

[talaniman]

It doesn't work that way! Just sit back and take notes while the investigation process works with the dufus and his minions since we are at the evidence gathering point in the process and not as you hope at the end point. You had your chance to investigate and present your evidence against HC, Obama and whomever else you wanted and blew it so I understand your desire to dismiss OUR turn at bat and call the game.

No evidence huh? I doubt you would know it if you saw it since you never have before. Or maybe you rather not see it, because you got judges, and tax cuts that add to your deficits.

Plenty of evidence the dufus doesn't know what he is doing or if he does it's all screwed up, and may be unlawful. For sure he lies through his teeth. All these things in which you completely ignore the evidence or dismiss it.

[Vacuum7]

Someone smart is advising Trump in all this: The Executive Privilege power is something that is insurmountable for the Democrats.....so I see this as really crippling their case before it even gets started. If Nixon has taken this route, he probably could have waded right on through Watergate.

What is really a strange oddity in all of this is the whole Democrat argument that Trump did something wrong with the Ukraine….here's why:

1) Demos claim that Trump threatened to withhold weapons to Ukraine if Ukraine didn't reopen the Biden investigation and saying that this is a problem because Biden is a candidate opposing Trump.

2) Demos want to leverage Ukraine into cooperating with them by sending a "delegation" to interview Ukrainian officials and get then to confess to them that Trump pressured them into reopen the Biden investigation EVEN THOUGH they have already said he didn't: Aren't the Demos PRESSURING the Ukrainians to Biden's political rival Trump.

How come its O.K. if the Demos do it but not Trump?

[jlisenbe]

You had your chance to investigate and present your evidence against HC, Obama and whomever else you wanted and blew it

Once again your neglect of history is causing problems. Remember the secret 40 minute meeting between AG Lynch and Bill Clinton? Remember how, just days later, the Justice Department coincidentally decided not to being charges against HC? So guess who it was who actually "blew it".

[talaniman]

I also remember the hub bub of HC being under investigation, very publicly, but nobody knew that the dufus was too, or that the Russians were waging cyber war propaganda. LOL, Lynch recused herself, what more did you want and HC lost the election, so why are you still beetching about this stuff? You ain't said a word about the dufus doing anti Christian stuff, you give him a free pass on that as long as he gives you tax breaks and judges so why is liberals admitting our sins while you keep sinning so important?

We blew NOTHING and the real question becomes can we investigate and prosecute you're side better than you did our side. You want us to blow it since you protect the dufus and think you can do a better job than we did protecting HC.

Sounds like a person problem to me. Beetch all you want, it's your right.

[jlisenbe]

Lynch recused herself, what more did you want and HC lost the election

So let's see if I understand your point. AG Lynch has a meeting with the husband of a powerful political figure under active criminal investigation. Now that would be bad enough since every first year law student knows you don't do that. But the meeting is not held in her office in D.C. Rather, it is held at a remote terminal in an airport where she and BC meet secretly for nearly an hour. ONLY when the news became public did she recuse herself, which of course means nothing since she can easily pick up a telephone and call the FBI director and give him "advice". She was never so much as reprimanded for her extremely unethical behavior. And unlike the "case" against Trump, the evidence for the meeting with BC was overwhelming, so much so that Lynch had to admit it happened.

But Tal is fine with all of that. See what I mean about your selective outrage??? I'll begin to take you more seriously when you begin to be an equal opportunity critic. Your approach is, "Hey, you're a conservative so you're guilty, but that guy over there is a liberal so he's fine."

To demonstrate my point, let's play the "Critic the Pres" game. I'll make two criticisms of Trump, and you follow that with two criticisms of Obama.

1. He continues to run enormous budget deficits during a time of great economic performance.
2. His sudden abandonment of the Kurds was reprehensible.

OK, your turn!

[talaniman]

Obama should have turned Syria to dust after Assad used chemicals on his own people, instead of waiting for congressioal approval. That's all I got back to you!

Oh wait I got another one, he should have made congress pass a building project funded by public and private infrastructure bank started with a 2% tax on rich guys. JOBS, upgrade schools, roads, and bridges was a missed opportunity for the country.

Now it's YOUR turn.

[jlisenbe]

Well, your critique was a little suspect in that you could not bring yourself to be critical of anything Obama actually DID, but rather what he should have done. Nonetheless, it's a start.

1. Trump's never ending running of his big mouth, his increasingly routine use of crude and profane language, and his frequent use of name calling (much like Tal!) are all irritating and need to stop. They cheapen political discourse.
2. He began passing out tax cuts with no intentions of making spending cuts. He should have balanced the budget first, and then given tax cuts.

Back to you.

[talaniman]

Obama let Moscow Mitch cheat him out of a SCOTUS seat, and left HC to the mercy of repub House investigations over Bengahzi, even though they looked stupid when they failed to find anything or lay a glove on her after 7 tries.

Obama couldn't help HC get elected and we got this dufus in the WH!

[jlisenbe]

1. Trump repeatedly said he would release his tax returns, but then he didn't.
2. Trump should have been more supportive of Kavanaugh.

[talaniman]

I got nuthin' YOU WIN! Congrats on your victory.

8D

[jlisenbe]

ASTONISHINGLY left off your list were Benghazi, the VA scandal, the Lynch/Clinton tarmac meeting, the doubling of the national debt, handing over billions to Iran, the tepid economic growth, and the IRS scandal. Wow. How can you bring yourself to be critical of Trump after giving Obama such a free ride??? And you call that having NUTHIN??? Really???

[talaniman]

You are so consistent, I give you that. Even when you win you beetch!

[jlisenbe]

Even when you win you beetch!

Your incredible, shrinking memory demanded it.

[talaniman]

Who needs a memory when you have creative cartoons?