Show of HandsShow of Hands

KellyDimples November 6th, 2019 11:40pm

The fake whistleblower's lawyer Tweeted on January 21, 2017 just days after Trump was sworn in: #coup has started. First of many steps. #rebellion. #impeachment will follow ultimately. #lawyers. If you still think this isn't a setup, you need help.

7 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

FLSun Florida
11/08/19 11:17 am

The Dems are The Square Earth Society & Everyone who has read the transcript is the Space Station camera.

Reply
JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 4:56 am

Bullshit. You are anti-American.

Reply
KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 5:26 am

I care that they've been looking for bullshit ways to impeach him since the second he won, and have infiltrated his administration and tried to set him up, and I'm un-American? You really need to take the blinders off and wake the fuck up.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 5:32 am

Sure. Withholding aid for political gain doesn’t merit an investigation. Whatever you say! 😡

KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 5:49 am

Only it didn't happen. We can read the transcript ourselves. They didn't plan on that. You know what does merit an investigation? A sitting Vice President withholding aid unless the prosecutor investigating his son is fired, and then bragging about it.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 6:57 am

The VP doesn’t have the power to withhold aid. And it was also supported by a bipartisan group of senators. Believe me, I don’t like Biden (and I do think things with his son should be explored), but I’m more concerned about the current POTUS.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 6:59 am

Also, the transcript itself is damning. But what is truly incriminating is the context around it.

KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 7:06 am

The Ukrainian president says there was no pressure, and didn't know there was any aid being held up. He's gotten his aid, should be end of story. What about the Democrat Senators that threatened in a letter to withhold aid unless they cooperated with the Mueller investigation? Should they be impeached also?

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 2:05 pm

No, because the Mueller investigation wasn’t just about Trump. It was about interference in general. And they are not the POTUS. Big differences.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 2:05 pm

And the attempt to do so is worthy of impeachment if proven, in my opinion.

KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 2:17 pm

The Mueller investigation was all about Trump. Otherwise Ukrainian attempts to influence the election would have been investigated, Hillary's connections to the Steele dossier would have been looked at, they would have looked into Manafort's ties to the Podesta brothers...
It was like there was a wall put up that nothing outside of Trump could be looked at. Mueller didn't even know what Fusion GPS is.

KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 2:38 pm

But anyway, I'm done with this conversation. I should have never even entered it after you started it by calling me un-American. That is pretty much the worst thing anyone could call me, and couldn't be further from the truth.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 2:38 pm

The Mueller report was about Russian interference in the election. There were many pages on it, if you’ve read the report. The first fifty pages or so make no mention of Trump. The Steele Dossier wasn’t referenced because it was only one of many components utilized to initiate the investigation. If you had worked in intelligence, like I have, you might have more of an understanding of how these investigations work, and how difficult it is to justify a FISA warrant. If my memory serves correctly, a Podesta brother was investigated and indicted.
.

JPA1960 Illinois
11/07/19 2:39 pm

I’m sorry that you’re anti-American, even though you don’t recognize it. Not even considering the impeachment process is as far away from the Constitution as it gets. Disgusting.

KellyDimples NJ
11/07/19 2:46 pm

My problem is that they've been 'considering' it since before he even won the election, and have just been jumping from one thing to the next when it doesn't work. It is all so obvious. I'm about a half-second away from putting you on ignore, and will most likely do that after giving a couple minutes to read this. Have a good life.

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 7:39 am

To anyone reading this who might accuse me of wanting to live in an echo chamber - I welcome disagreement. What I don't welcome are personal attacks and name-calling. I warned (him?) and gave a second chance, and they decided to double-down instead.

FLSun Florida
11/08/19 2:14 pm

Apparently we’re blessed with an intelligence officer - to asplain how the world works- thanksgiving to the almighty!

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 2:34 pm

Apparently, intelligence isn't a prerequisite for the job of intelligence officer.

handsyjoey
11/06/19 6:58 pm

Context is a magical thing.

Reply
handsyjoey
11/06/19 7:01 pm

But then you wouldn't have an excuse to fuel your irrational anger

ArrowFodder ohio
11/06/19 7:14 pm

What is the context that softens the lawyer’s remarks about the coup ? I’d like to hear it.

kscott516 Show Time
11/07/19 4:12 am

🦗🦗🦗

handsyjoey
11/07/19 9:24 am

Did y'all read the link? It was in response to a story about Trump firing Sally Yates. A lot of people had issues with that at the time and was the first hard example people saw of an abuse of power

kscott516 Show Time
11/07/19 9:55 am

This is the same guy that “liked” a bunch of videos about young Disney stars and goes to Disney by himself. He’s a pedophile also.

noqreport.com/2019/11/07/whistleblowers-lawyer-mark-zaids-youtube-channel-liked-young-disney-girl-videos/

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 10:16 am

“Did y'all read the link? It was in response to a story about Trump firing Sally Yates. A lot of people had issues with that at the time and was the first hard example people saw of an abuse of power”

I thought she servers are the pleasure of the President? How is firing someone an abuse of power....if they are appointed by the president to ensure his legally afforded rights and laws are executed?

....

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 10:16 am

His laws = Executive orders and the such, not that he unilaterally creates new laws.

think4yourself Not a safe space
11/06/19 6:40 pm

True but as usual they claim their evil deeds have “good intentions”.

Reply
Ebola007 Florida
11/06/19 5:26 pm

Even a blind man could see it’s a setup.

Reply
TA7 American
11/06/19 5:05 pm

👏👏👏👍

Reply
chickencookie
11/06/19 4:44 pm

True true true true true. Snap.

Reply
KellyDimples NJ
11/06/19 4:42 pm

And if you complain this poll is biased, I don't care. It is. And it's true. Get over it.

Reply
GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 4:53 pm

Fine, but I think this is the first time I’ve seen you post a poll with no way to vote against the premise.

KellyDimples NJ
11/06/19 4:57 pm

I know, and it was on purpose. I can no longer contain my anger over what the Democrats have done, and continue to do, to tear apart this country, all in the name of trying to erase an election they don't agree with. I am livid.

KellyDimples NJ
11/06/19 5:01 pm

If this poll makes you or other people angry, it is infinitesimal to what I feel.

FLSun Florida
11/06/19 5:10 pm

We need an organized resistance against those that are attempting this coup...this can never happen to another President.

Think Lovin Life
11/06/19 5:53 pm

GMA ... if the tables were turned, you’d say that this was a conspiracy, wouldn’t you!?

macro
11/06/19 5:58 pm

no opinion here, but one’s degree of anger over something is rarely correlated with the truth of the matter.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/06/19 7:00 pm

I don’t understand the anger. Whether or not you believe President Trump has violated his oath of office and has abused the power of his position, there is credible and corroborated evidence to justify an investigation. And the story put forth by the whistleblower has been supported by the testimony of several other credible witnesses.

Other than some kind of personal attack, what purpose is served By violating the anonymity of the whistleblower?

GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 7:15 pm

Hold on a second, all of you.

I am AGAINST the impeachment. I don’t think we have grounds for an impeachment. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

I agree with what I believe is the premise of the poll. That is, the Democrats have been trying to pin something on Trump since he was elected.

I can see why that makes Trump supporters angry. This process is not good for our country. So what is my problem then, if so far, I agree with all of you?

My entire objection to this poll is not the content, but the answer choices. Why not make the statement (admittedly biased, which is ok) and give answer choices Agree/Disagree or True/False?

And the poll absolutely does NOT make me angry. I am simply expressing an opinion about the poll.

.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/06/19 7:23 pm

Thank you for your comments Grandma Alice. If I remember correctly you usually vote Democrat? Is that right? In any case , I very much appreciate your honesty and fairness. I don’t think there are many Democrats like you left out there . Kim Strassel has a new book out titles “Resistance (at all costs) , How Trump haters are breaking America” . The thesis of the book is very close to your remarks above . I highly recommend the book . Peace

KellyDimples NJ
11/06/19 7:23 pm

You're right to have an issue with the poll. I violated my own rule in creating it. Purposely, for effect. I hate polls that don't allow for disagreement. This was my way of saying that I see no room for disagreement, and am not interested in hearing from those who disagree with me on this.

GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 7:24 pm

That was mostly to Kelly and think, who appear to believe I favor the impeachment. I do not. I think it is disruptive and divisive.

I hope I clarified my position.

Think Lovin Life
11/06/19 7:32 pm

GMA ... thank you for clarifying! I am sorry for jumping on you. I hope you can see that the VAST majority of Democrats have swallowed the shampeachment without question, and are pushing the silly conspiracies that never happened.

GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 7:32 pm

Arrow, thanks! But no, I don’t usually vote Democrat. There was a time when I did, but that was many years ago.

Now, I am an independent, with Republican leanings. I can vote either way, but these days, it’s more likely to be Republican.

In Ohio, you don’t “register” for a party. We do express a preference every four years, when there is a primary election. We can vote in the Republican primary, the Democratic primary or no primary at all. But, that’s as simple as requesting whichever ballot you prefer. We cab easily change it every four years.

.

.

GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 7:33 pm

Fair enough, Kelly and think! Apology accepted, think!

SHIPPY1944 Tn.
11/06/19 7:47 pm

An old ranchers saying, “it all depends on whose bull’s getting gored” which determines whose accused of being at fault, & whose “really at fault” in other words it still all comes down to separating made up bellicose🐂💩❗️Or accepting real facts & truth‼️

chickencookie
11/06/19 9:05 pm

Grandma is always fair❤️

GrandmaALiCE
11/06/19 9:29 pm

Thanks, cookie!

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 10:22 am

“And the story put forth by the whistleblower has been supported by the testimony of several other credible witnesses. “

There is also a lot of information out there that says the whistleblower is partisan, he contact Schiff before the IG and didn’t INFORM the IG of that (which is realllly close to being if not illegal). Then there is new evidence that a staffer from Schiffs office contacted Yovanovitch BEFORE the whistleblower “came forward” - which she appears to lie under oath. Try to prove any of that I just said wrong.

Then ask yourself if things are odd about that.

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 10:27 am

Is this evidence you talk about brought up as testimony or just something you heard from one of the Fox talking heads?

Regardless, why attack the whistleblower when they’ve been independently corroborated? There were others who participated on the call who also reported concerns.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 10:34 am

As long as you want to trade questions to ponder, who do you find more credible, Lt. Col. Vindman or Pres. Trump?

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 10:45 am

So we're talking about removing a duly elected leader over someone's 'perception' of a phone call that we can all read and decide for ourselves? Is that what we've come to? We can just go ahead and impeach every president if that's the standard. How about "tell Vladimir I'll have more flexibility after the election"? Where are the transcripts of the calls about delivering pallets of cash to Iran? Can we see them too? Or the call where 5 Taliban prisoners were traded for an Army deserter? Where is that transcript? Let's see them all.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:16 am

“As long as you want to trade questions to ponder, who do you find more credible, Lt. Col. Vindman or Pres. Trump?”

Neither - Vindman has secondhand knowledge and is interpreting what he has heard as “bad.” That is hearsay and in a courtroom could not be used as actual evidence of a crime. You must prove intent.

Trump has not answered questions under oath so can’t weigh in on that.

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 11:21 am

Why are none of my questions getting answers?

No, we are at a point where we will INVESTIGATE a world leader for whom probable cause exists showing his abuse of power and violation of his oath of office.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:23 am

“Is this evidence you talk about brought up as testimony or just something you heard from one of the Fox talking heads?”

Are you suggesting that Fox News lied about the emails they have a copy of to and from Marie and the staffer? That’s a NEW one - Fox certainly spins things but they don’t outright lie about factual data points.

Here she was asked under oath:


www.scribd.com/document/433409580/Read-Yovanovitch-deposition-transcript#from_embed

Here is the issue:


thefederalist.com/2019/11/08/yovanovitch-emailed-with-dem-staffer-after-whistleblower-complaint-contradicting-under-oath-testimony/

“””””

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:24 am

“”I’m writing to see if you would have time to meet up for a chat – in particular, I’m hoping to discuss some Ukraine-related oversight questions we are exploring. I’d appreciate the chance to ground-truth a few pieces of information with you, some of which are quite delicate/time-sensitive and, thus, we want to make sure we get them right.”


The timeline of this email is critical. It is known that the whistleblower contacted Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Cal.) before filing his complaint.”

“it is a breach of normal procedure for congressional staff to reach out to a current State Department employee at their personal email address for official business.”

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 11:27 am

ConservativeD-you’re dodging the question. Both men have made statements. Both men have some level of credibility, correct? Who has greater credibility?

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:28 am

www.foxnews.com/politics/marie-yovanovitch-ukraine-emails-house-democrat-staffer-delicate-issue

“Asked directly whether she responded to Carey's overtures, Yovanovitch testified only that someone in the "Legislative Affairs Office" at the State Department had responded to Carey, to the best of her knowledge.

Yovanovitch did not indicate that she had responded to Carey's first email in any way, and testified explicitly that she did not reply to Carey's follow-up email concerning whom she should contact at the State Department.”

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 11:29 am

You’re spinning beyond the topic rather than answer simple questions with straight forward answers.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:29 am

Credibility is most certainly not a measure of truth!

I say they both have equal credibility as of right now I have no reason to believe either persons are lying.

....

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:30 am

How am I spinning this?

She was asked - DID YOU RESPOND.

She answered - NO

The emails show that she did......

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:32 am

The problem is if I being straightforward responses to people like you (unwilling to look at all aspects of this), I’m called a conspiracy theory pusher. However when you ask me to HUNT for a crime in this democrat circle jerk - I’m called blind.

It’s totally moronic, disingenuous and hypocritical.

...

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 11:42 am

Also you didn’t even TRY to prove any of what I said wrong.....

The staffer conversation gives credence to the argument that Schiff was looking to craft a narrative.

We should investigate if that happened or not - however with Schiffs veto power - congress will never be able to call on Schiff or the whistleblower to get to the bottom of that.

Why do you NOT see that as a problem, but you see the testimony of interpretation of second hand knowledge as valid?!?

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 11:47 am

I asked a question and was flooded with links to a bunch of right pubs that didn’t answer the question. I wasn’t looking to hold some kind of SOH trial with a sea-o-links.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 1:06 pm

And, if you really believe that Trump, with his well documented propensity for lying has the same level I f credibility as a decorated military leader, there is little sense in continuing with any debate.

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 1:08 pm

But General Flynn is a liar though, right?

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 1:19 pm

You mean when he pled guilt in court to lying to the FBI during the Russia investigation? No, I believe his plea was 100% honest.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 1:22 pm

If you’re open minded, we can continue to talk about the merits of the investigation. If, as it seems, you are totally unshakable in you support of Trump then this is a waste of time.

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 1:25 pm

Do you believe the FBI agents who interviewed him and stated they thought he wasn't lying in his interview with them, or Mueller who withheld that info from Flynn and the judge?

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 1:30 pm

If we're only allowed to talk about things CNN has reported on, there's no point in continuing.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 1:30 pm

“I asked a question and was flooded with links to a bunch of right pubs that didn’t answer the question. I wasn’t looking to hold some kind of SOH trial with a sea-o-links.”

I answered why are you perpetuating falsehoods beyond that, are you just complaining because I’m asking you to do some research into the topic that your claiming you know more about? Right wing links? So what is appropriate “links for you?

...

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 1:31 pm

Did I bring up CNN? Or any other media account? I didn’t even spin out into Flynn. You seemed to have trouble addressing the original topic.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 1:36 pm

“And, if you really believe that Trump, with his well documented propensity for lying has the same level I f credibility as a decorated military leader, there is little sense in continuing with any debate.”

I’m talking about this particular event - I am not writing off an allegation of this magnitude to “he has a propensity to lie so there for he is.”

The FACTUAL information is that things are NOT as simple as Democrats and individuals such as yourself are purporting - there is SO much more to this, than a weak ass argument full of interpretations of an event. When you ask people to HUNT for your allegations and your not willing to do the same respects to determine otherwise - your a partisan - clearly cares less about due process and about if he actually did it.

The means justify the end for you if you suggest the “conspiracy theories “ are just that and you don’t give it even a 10th of your time to verify that it’s not total hogwash.

....

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 1:44 pm

I’m not asking to to HUNT for anything. As I said in my original comment, “Whether or not you believe President Trump has violated his oath of office and has abused the power of his position, there is credible and corroborated evidence to justify an investigation. “. That’s it. I haven’t made other claims, made you look at any links, or even said that I think he should be impeached. It’s you two that want to spin the discussion to include a bunch of other crap.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 2:06 pm

Has there been ? You think interpretation of second hand knowledge is “corroborating” evidence? Meanwhile we are not willing to look at the nexus this alleged criminal behavior?

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 2:08 pm

It's because the 'other crap' IS the story, you can't remove it, no matter how much you'd like to.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 2:13 pm

Like I said, if you’re in that camp of supporting Trump no matter what, it will always be a waste of time.

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 2:15 pm

Lol - so because your in camp “Trump did it” are we not at the same impasse??

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 2:17 pm

Also you didn’t answer my question about second hand knowledge interpretation vs the individuals with first hand knowledge who counter those arguments.

...

ConservativeD Libertarian in disguise
11/08/19 2:33 pm

You certainly have been alluding to it - did I misinterpret your position??

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 3:23 pm

Instead of spinning and dumping links, you should read my comments.

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 3:24 pm

Let’s do this a third time:
“Whether or not you believe President Trump has violated his oath of office and has abused the power of his position, there is credible and corroborated evidence to justify an investigation. “

BarryB Was it something I said
11/08/19 4:10 pm

I’ll add this as well: Although I’m 100% in favor of the investigation, I hope that there is no impeachment. An impeachment of the president is not good for the country or something that should be celebrated. I say that as a long time Republican and Republican election judge in the past two presidential elections.

My hope is that Trump is removed from office through the election process. BUT, if he is shown to have abused the power of his office, obstructed justice, and failed to live up to his oath of office, I want to see both the House and Senate do what’s right and remove him from office.

Does that clear up what you believe I might be alluding to?

KellyDimples NJ
11/08/19 4:18 pm

Wow, a federal election judge, and you believe the evidence is credible and corroborated? Wow, I have nothing more to say.

SHIPPY1944 Tn.
11/08/19 6:02 pm

BarryB, I’ve read your comments & now know What BarryB stands for❗️Barry the🐂💩er‼️