VP Kackles Harris dishonors God and the US Constitution

[mark francis]

I didn't see anything to prove they were anything but republican supporters.
The fact they were there at the request of Trump says it all.
The source is a right wing republican supporting rag which no rational person would acknowledge if they want fact.

I see. Saddam had his WMD factory workers wear uniforms saying "Milk Factory Worker" in English for leftist American news reporters, so the American leftist reporters claimed that was proof those men were not bomb-making but were producing baby milk formula. Stupid Americans bought that deliberate lie to their own shame.
Likewise, Leftists dressed their violent thugs in MAGA hats to smash the Capitol windows and furniture and stupid Americans believe the wicked democrat lies that Trump and his supporters planned the 'seditious terrorist attack.'

 

[mark francis]

You're a fool. There were witnesses in the WH who testified to what he said.

Here's the link so I expect no more of your lies. You are clearly not older than 16 and suffer from Trump defeat syndrome.

Trump–Ukraine scandal - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Sadly, the American people bought into the Schiff-show lies that resulted in the democrat mob unjustly impeaching Trump on the testimony of lying hearsay witnesses. The fact that democrats are not now being forced to answer for the injustice done to President Trump at the hands of liars, thugs, crooks, and deceivers is a sad testimony to the depth of depravity to which American justice has fallen.

HUGE! Perjury? Vindman Testified Earlier That He DID NOT Know the Identity of the Whistleblower But Nunes Just Caught Him (VIDEO) (thegatewaypundit.com)

HUGE! Perjury? Vindman Testified Earlier That He DID NOT Know the Identity of the Whistleblower But Nunes Just Caught Him (VIDEO)

By Cristina Laila
Published November 19, 2019 at 10:21am
217 Comments
On Tuesday NSC leaker Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams testified on day 3 of the Adam Schiff Show Trial.

Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-CA) straight up asked Vindman if he discussed the July 25 Trump-Zelensky phone call with anyone outside of the White House.

Vindman testified on Tuesday that he spoke to two people about Trump’s call to Zelensky — George Kent, a State Department employee and ‘someone in the intelligence community’ about Trump’s phone call — Vindman would not name the second person.

House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) quickly interjected when Nunes began to drill down to find out which agency this second anonymous person worked for.

Schiff said he wanted to “protect the whistleblower” and wouldn’t let Vindman answer.

Nunes then pointed out that Vindman previously testified in a closed-door deposition that he DID NOT know the identity of the whistleblower and if that were true then how would he know to keep the second person’s name private?

But Vindman on Tuesday admitted to being the primary source of the leak to the whistleblower (Eric Ciaramella).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1196818818703777792

Vindman testified behind closed doors recently that he has no idea who the whistleblower is.

“I want the committee to know I am not the whistleblower who brought this issue to the CIA and the committee’s attention. I do not know who the whistleblower is, and I would not feel comfortable to speculate as to the identity of the whistleblower,” Vindman previously said under oath. (screenshot of his testimony below)

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Secrity and Governmental Affairs Ron Johnson (R-WI) blasted Lt. Col Vindman in an 11-page letter written to ranking member of the House Intel Committee Devin Nunes and Rep. Jim Jordan and accused Vindman of illegally leaking contents of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky.

Suspicions are growing on The Hill that Lt. Col Alexander Vindman was also the source of leak of the suspension of US aid story published by far-left Politico in August.

If good men were in charge, Vindman would now have been jailed for lying to Congress. Look at how severely the vengeful democrat mob went after Roger Stone for saying things they did not like and the way the depraved mob kept General Flynn tied up in court for being coerced to admit to a crime he never committed that involved the term 'lying.'

 

[Boris Norris]

Sadly, the American people bought into the Schiff-show lies that resulted in the democrat mob unjustly impeaching Trump on the testimony of lying hearsay witnesses. The fact that democrats are not now being forced to answer for the injustice done to President Trump at the hands of liars, thugs, crooks, and deceivers is a sad testimony to the depth of depravity to which American justice has fallen.

HUGE! Perjury? Vindman Testified Earlier That He DID NOT Know the Identity of the Whistleblower But Nunes Just Caught Him (VIDEO) (thegatewaypundit.com)

HUGE! Perjury? Vindman Testified Earlier That He DID NOT Know the Identity of the Whistleblower But Nunes Just Caught Him (VIDEO)

By Cristina Laila
Published November 19, 2019 at 10:21am
217 Comments
On Tuesday NSC leaker Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams testified on day 3 of the Adam Schiff Show Trial.

Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-CA) straight up asked Vindman if he discussed the July 25 Trump-Zelensky phone call with anyone outside of the White House.

Vindman testified on Tuesday that he spoke to two people about Trump’s call to Zelensky — George Kent, a State Department employee and ‘someone in the intelligence community’ about Trump’s phone call — Vindman would not name the second person.

House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) quickly interjected when Nunes began to drill down to find out which agency this second anonymous person worked for.

Schiff said he wanted to “protect the whistleblower” and wouldn’t let Vindman answer.

Nunes then pointed out that Vindman previously testified in a closed-door deposition that he DID NOT know the identity of the whistleblower and if that were true then how would he know to keep the second person’s name private?

But Vindman on Tuesday admitted to being the primary source of the leak to the whistleblower (Eric Ciaramella).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1196818818703777792

Vindman testified behind closed doors recently that he has no idea who the whistleblower is.

“I want the committee to know I am not the whistleblower who brought this issue to the CIA and the committee’s attention. I do not know who the whistleblower is, and I would not feel comfortable to speculate as to the identity of the whistleblower,” Vindman previously said under oath. (screenshot of his testimony below)

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Secrity and Governmental Affairs Ron Johnson (R-WI) blasted Lt. Col Vindman in an 11-page letter written to ranking member of the House Intel Committee Devin Nunes and Rep. Jim Jordan and accused Vindman of illegally leaking contents of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky.

Suspicions are growing on The Hill that Lt. Col Alexander Vindman was also the source of leak of the suspension of US aid story published by far-left Politico in August.

If good men were in charge, Vindman would now have been jailed for lying to Congress. Look at how severely the vengeful democrat mob went after Roger Stone for saying things they did not like and the way the depraved mob kept General Flynn tied up in court for being coerced to admit to a crime he never committed that involved the term 'lying.'

Oh how shocking but it means nothing. Trump is gone and his impeachment stays. Tough titties little man. You lose.

 

[Boris Norris]

I see. Saddam had his WMD factory workers wear uniforms saying "Milk Factory Worker" in English for leftist American news reporters, so the American leftist reporters claimed that was proof those men were not bomb-making but were producing baby milk formula. Stupid Americans bought that deliberate lie to their own shame.
Likewise, Leftists dressed their violent thugs in MAGA hats

Really?? Are you barking mad? What are they putting in your porridge.

to smash the Capitol windows and furniture and stupid Americans believe the wicked democrat lies that Trump and his supporters planned the 'seditious terrorist attack.'

Those wicked democrats again. Something should be done about them.
I know. Let's have a revolution and storm the Capitol and take over the country. Wait. That won't work. Trump tried it and he failed.

 

[Starcastle]

I'm curious about the title of the thread. How do you dishonor god?

 

[Starcastle]

being an "opponent of god" doesn't make you a seditionist and traitor, *****. lol.
you're so stupid.

and not quoting something from the DOI doesn't make you an opponent of the constituion, *****.

No!
God dishonored!

 

[Boris Norris]

I'm curious about the title of the thread. How do you dishonor god?

Apparently it only happens to democrats who don't lock the boots of some hideous god. Even when they carry out govt policy the godbotherers call it dishonoring god. They're paranoid about it.

 

[pjmret]

Only a ***** would assume the black-clad supporters could not possibly have been there because leftist democrats paid them to be there to incite and commit violence.

only a ***** would claim they are leftists with no proof, as if wearing black makes them leftists. lol.

show your proof they were paid by leftists to be there and incite and commit violence, *****. lol.

 

[mark francis]

Oh how shocking but it means nothing. Trump is gone and his impeachment stays. Tough titties little man. You lose.

Retrials are common in America when the star witness is discovered to have lied under oath and the prosecution is proven to have been in collusion with the lying witness to produce lying evidence. Trump was unjustly impeached by liars who falsely accused him and convicted him of a crime he did not commit.

 

[mark francis]

only a ***** would claim they are leftists with no proof, as if wearing black makes them leftists. lol.

show your proof they were paid by leftists to be there and incite and commit violence, *****. lol.

Democrats are hiding evidence that contradicts their narratives and for that innocent Americans are being sent to p[rison on trumped-up charges. The Jan 6 democrat lynch mob is despicable for that.

 

[pjmret]

Retrials are common in America when the star witness is discovered to have lied under oath and the prosecution is proven to have been in collusion with the lying witness to produce lying evidence. Trump was unjustly impeached by liars who falsely accused him and convicted him of a crime he did not commit.

actually he wasn't convicted in the impeachment, *****.

 

[mark francis]

actually he wasn't convicted in the impeachment, *****.

Don't I know it? He was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors but was never charged or convicted of any high crimes and misdemeanors.

 

[pjmret]

Don't I know it? He was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors but was never charged or convicted of any high crimes and misdemeanors.

sure he was. "high crimes and misdemeaners" means general malfeasance under old english law where it came from, and he was charged with actions that the house considered malfeasance.


here is the origin and examples of the term, *****, for your education

But this is not, in fact, what the Constitution requires. “High crimes and misdemeanors” is not, and has never been, limited to indictable criminality.

The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct by officials

The impeachment of the King's Chancellor, Michael de la Pole, 1st Earl of Suffolk in 1386 was the first case to use this charge.[1][2] One charge under this heading all

Since 1386, the English parliament had used the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” to describe one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” etc.[8]eged that de la Pole broke a promise to Parliament to follow the advice of a committee regarding improvement of the kingdom.

James Madison said that "impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate.

 

[mark francis]

sure he was. "high crimes and misdemeaners" means general malfeasance under old english law where it came from, and he was charged with actions that the house considered malfeasance.


here is the origin and examples of the term, *****, for your education

But this is not, in fact, what the Constitution requires. “High crimes and misdemeanors” is not, and has never been, limited to indictable criminality.

The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct by officials

The impeachment of the King's Chancellor, Michael de la Pole, 1st Earl of Suffolk in 1386 was the first case to use this charge.[1][2] One charge under this heading all

Since 1386, the English parliament had used the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” to describe one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” etc.[8]eged that de la Pole broke a promise to Parliament to follow the advice of a committee regarding improvement of the kingdom.

We are not under ancient English law.

James Madison said that "impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate.

Did Obama steal money and give it to Muslim terrorists without permission? Yes. Was it illegal? Not according to everyone. Could he be impeached for giving that money to terrorists without permission? Absolutely, but only if lawmakers agreed to the process.

Did Trump commit a high crime? Not according to everyone, but democrats had just enough power to charge him with the unsubstantiated crime based upon their biased interpretations of his actions and they impeached him by party desire and edict, not because he was actually guilty of anything.

 

[pjmret]

We are not under ancient English law.

Did Obama steal money and give it to Muslim terrorists without permission? Yes. Was it illegal? Not according to everyone. Could he be impeached for giving that money to terrorists without permission? Absolutely, but only if lawmakers agreed to the process.

Did Trump commit a high crime? Not according to everyone, but democrats had just enough power to charge him with the unsubstantiated crime based upon their biased interpretations of his actions and they impeached him by party desire and edict, not because he was actually guilty of anything.

if what obama did was "steal' it was illegal, *****. show me ANYONE who says it was illegal, duh.

and of course "not everyone" agreed with the impeachment of trump. duh.