If you Believe in Science and Mathermatics

[cabse5]

Like Vindman?

What evidence did Vindman's testimony provide? That Vindman disagreed with Trump's policies?

 

[Paradoxical]

The fact that you don't know that William Barr, Trump's lapdog didn't look at every possible way to steal this election is amazing.

He is AG, unlike Holder, who said he was Obama's wingman

WHY do far left zealots always accuse Republicans of doing what they do? It's downright cray.

 

[GolfingChef]

WHY do far left zealots always accuse Republicans of doing what they do?

the same reason you far right zealots always accuse Dems of doing what you do.

 

[Paradoxical]

Why were Rudy and Jenna not under oath yesterday in Michigan?

I guess because the guy trying to do it was a liberal jerk would be my best guess.

 

[GolfingChef]

I guess because the guy trying to do it was a liberal jerk would be my best guess.

Yes, only a liberal would expect people to be sworn in at a "hearing"

 

[Rudy]

He is AG, unlike Holder, who said he was Obama's wingman

WHY do far left zealots always accuse Republicans of doing what they do? It's downright cray.

I am doing something that Barr is doing? How so?

 

[Paradoxical]

View attachment 67307223

Says the liberal who thinks he's a libertarian.

 

[Paradoxical]

What evidence did Vindman's testimony provide? That Vindman disagreed with Trump's policies?

That is very true. He whined to some people, probably that attorney who vowed to get Trump impeached, who went to Schiff.

 

[GolfingChef]

Says the liberal who thinks he's a libertarian.

it is so cute how you think not worshiping Trump makes one a liberal.

but I expect nothing less from the partisan sheep

 

[BlueTex]

I guess because the guy trying to do it was a liberal jerk would be my best guess.

LOL... Why wouldn't these "hearings" require all those who testify to something this serious to do so under oath?

 

[Paradoxical]

Yes, only a liberal would expect people to be sworn in at a "hearing"

It was not agreed to and you know it.

 

[Paradoxical]

LOL... Why wouldn't these "hearings" require all those who testify to something this serious to do so under oath?

I am for it. Should have been agreed to so you libbies don;t whine like babies.

 

[BlueTex]

I am for it. Should have been agreed to so you libbies don;t whine like babies.

Why do you suppose the committee in Michigan voted 5-3 against having those "testifying" under oath?

 

[GolfingChef]

It was not agreed to and you know it.

of course it was not, then Rudy could not lie. The question is why was it not?

What purpose can be served by not swearing someone in for a hearing, well other than so they can lie at will.

 

[Paradoxical]

Why do you suppose the committee in Michigan voted 5-3 against having those "testifying" under oath?

I am not on the committee and have no idea. You?

 

[Paradoxical]

of course it was not, then Rudy could not lie. The question is why was it not?

What purpose can be served by not swearing someone in for a hearing, well other than so they can lie at will.

Send them an email with your query.

 

[GolfingChef]

Send them an email with your query.

why ask them when we all know the answer?

 

[GolfingChef]

I am not on the committee and have no idea. You?

so that Rudy and all the rest could lie at will and not face any consequences.

 

[Paradoxical]

so that Rudy and all the rest could lie at will and not face any consequences.

Do you think they wanted to "pull a Flynn" on the one giving witness to what they saw?

 

[GolfingChef]

Do you think they wanted to "pull a Flynn" on the one giving witness to what they saw?

I think they wanted people to be able to say anything and everything and face no consequences if they were not telling the truth.

And that is what we saw. The drunk lady that was too crazy even for Rudy was the best.

 

[cabse5]

I am not on the committee and have no idea. You?

The Michigan meeting was a fact finding meeting. There was every intent to establish the possibility of voter corruption but no real intent on blaming or charging anyone. For example, the postal managers that were confronted by the PV phone callers were never demanded to testify at the hearing, either...Why didn't the meeting demand that postal managers testify let alone be under oath to find out if ballots had been backdated at postal processing centers?

The Michigan committee was a fact finding committee.

 

[vegas giants]

The Michigan meeting was a fact finding meeting. There was every intent to establish the possibility of voter corruption but no real intent on blaming or charging anyone. For example, the postal managers that were confronted by the PV phone callers were never demanded to testify at the hearing, either...Why didn't the meeting demand that postal managers testify let alone be under oath to find out if ballots had been backdated at postal processing centers?

The Michigan committee was a fact finding committee.

Because then everyone would have to testify under oath. And the accusers did not want that

 

[cabse5]

Says the liberal who thinks he's a libertarian.

View attachment 67307223

Everyone 'cept for progressives know that progressives are totalitarians.
Some liberals aren't totalitarians. Like Trump and Manchin, for examples.

 

[vegas giants]

Everyone 'cept for progressives know that progressives are totalitarians.
Some liberals aren't totalitarians. Like Trump and Manchin, for example.

This claim is dismissed for lack of evidence

 

[cabse5]

Because then everyone would have to testify under oath. And the accusers did not want that

You've illustrated you penchant, again, to project your feelings and to attribute those feelings to others and not to you where they rightfully reside.