Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
exactly that, that he wanted Bidens investigated bu Ukraine, doesn't mean it was on a transcribed phone call.
also, trump admitting it, regardless of what he was admitting to, would mean it's additional evidence to whatever was available, so again, you cant prove she ever said the call was sufficient evidence
The fact that Trump wanted an investigation on the Biden's is the evidence on the Trump phone call.
It's not additional evidence of anything new. It's the same evidence. What is missing in Trump's "admission" in his comments to China is 1) was there a quid pro quo and 2) did he think there was real corruption with regards to the Bidens? Actually the China comment goes to "Trump felt the Bidens are really corrupt" which weakens the case for impeachment.also, trump admitting it, regardless of what he was admitting to, would mean it's additional evidence to whatever was available, so again, you cant prove she ever said the call was sufficient evidence
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
nope. his additional mentions that he wanted the investigation is additional evidence.
you're grasping at straws trying to say what Pelosi never said.
you can't admit that Pelosi NEVER EVER said the phone call was sufficient evidence of asking Ukraine to investigate Bidens, nor the phone call itself was sufficient evidence to impeach him.
Nobody has ever been asked "Is this phone call 7/25 sufficient evidence that the president broke the law" so how about you just admit nobody said that?
It's additional, unless you're a liar
1. China isn't Ukraine
2. The phone call didn't say investigate Bidens. so asking for investigation is a new ask.
3. Unless it's an admission of something that never happened, in which case, it's still new evidence, or an admission.
Nobody claims quid pro quo was required to break a law or get impeachedWhat is missing in Trump's "admission" in his comments to China is 1) was there a quid pro quo and
what he felt is irrelevant. he can think he's a child molester for all I care, doesn't make it true or worth making public or private statements about it.2) did he think there was real corruption with regards to the Bidens? Actually the China comment goes to "Trump felt the Bidens are really corrupt" which weakens the case for impeachment.
Please don't waste time responding unless you can cite Pelosi ever once claiming that the 7/25 phone call was sufficient evidence that the President asked for an investigation into Bidens (and for the record, I want the Bidens in prison, that's the difference between me and you, I'm willing to throw the Bidens in prison without a trial, you're not willing to impeach our President even with a trial)
I said it was not additional evidence of anything new. But I suppose I should add new and relevant because you are too stupid to understand that relevant was implied.
Not relevant.1. China isn't Ukraine
Not relevant.2. The phone call didn't say investigate Bidens. so asking for investigation is a new ask.
Not relevant.3. Unless it's an admission of something that never happened, in which case, it's still new evidence, or an admission.
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
Totally relevant : new info is new info.
She NEVER EVER claimed the phone call contained all sufficient evidence that Trump committed a crime or was worth of impeachment. EVER.
Try again when you can prove she said it.
Please don't waste time responding unless you can cite Pelosi ever once claiming that the 7/25 phone call was sufficient evidence that the President asked for an investigation into Bidens (and for the record, I want the Bidens in prison, that's the difference between me and you, I'm willing to throw the Bidens in prison without a trial, you're not willing to impeach our President even with a trial)
Connect With Us