and the RATS, take another one in the.........HA ha!!!
Posted on 11/27/2019 2:39:17 PM PST by bobsunshine
Democrats use and abuse.
This is to poison his upcoming testimony in the Senate.
Also please note that all three situations took place between client and vendor, potential investee, networking contact, none of them situations where the woman had any structural recourse...
```````````````
If that’s the case there are other rationales - less likely the wife will find out, lower likelihood for office gossip etc.
Anyone still a Democrat in this day and age is not a good person.
He projected his own ‘quid pro quo’ mentality onto President Trump.
Yep. That’s what he thought.
And he was wrong.
Gordy Sondland, Harvey Weinstein. Jeffrey Epstein, Billy Clinton, Hunter Biden, etc., etc.
Our bourgeois, not content with having the wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take the greatest pleasure in seducing each other’s wives. - Communist Manifesto pg 32
Even Karl Marx didn’t like these azzhats. He actually referred to this scumbag class as “socialist bourgeois”
Where’s Ghislaine hiding...Hillary’s basement? N.O.W. headquarters?
Sorry girls/women. Justice? You may have to find another republic for it.
BOURGEOIS, SOCIALISM
A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances, in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.
To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of Socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.
We may site Proudhon’s Philosophie de la Misere as an example of this form.
The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom. They desire the existing state of society minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements.
Manifesto pg 49.
It’s politics. Happens every day in every administration.
Another Harvey Weinstein ........with a diplomaic portfolio.
Schiff ‘s writing articles of impeachment as we type-——its all Trump’s fault and its an impeachable offense......he brought it on himself.
Of course. That’s what we just witnessed in the Schiff Show. Lots of people who do little, know less, talk too much and change their views often. I couldn’t watch any of it without thinking “why on earth do we have so many people involved in all this?”
I’m trying to figure out the point of your post and how it relates to the article.
I think he's playing with fire on this. And if it blows up in his face, Schiff will have done it to himself in the way he tried to engineer and control the testimony.We have yet to see or hear one piece of evidence from Trump's side of the story.
What the Senate ends up doing, if they do pass articles, is anybody's guess. But if they choose to actually try the case fairly, and give Trump the room to introduce his own evidence and his own witnesses, it could get ugly for Schiff and company.
Gordon Sondland claimed there was a quid pro quo, but he wasn’t convincing enough, so leftist thugs are trying to take him down. Perhaps he’ll be more convincing when he reviews his memory of events for the Senate, or perhaps this will encourage others to do more creative writing before they give their anti-Trump testimony.
In Schiff’s deranged mind.....he is the white knight who is bringing down the king.
I would like to have encountered you in the workplace, instead of that one creep that I did...
This isn’t that hard to figure out. He testified That nobody on the planet told him to do an investigation on Biden for releasing the funds. Holmes testified that he heard that conversation. One of these two guys is lying.
Therefore, Sondland MUST be destroyed and proven to be a liar to bolster Holmes’ testimony as the one that is the trust.
It’s very clear-the two testimonies were very contradictory. One is lying and one is telling the truth. It’s impossible for both to be telling the truth. I was surprised someone didn’t make more of that in the actual hearing.
He looks like the guy saying, “it’s inconceivable “
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.