Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, November 27, 2019

Chairman Jerry Nadler sent a letter to the White House on Tuesday notifying the Trump administration that his committee had scheduled its first impeachment hearing for next Wednesday, December 4.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Old news...

drudge.com

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-11-27 12:54 AM | Reply

BenGazi!!

#2 | Posted by bored at 2019-11-27 01:10 AM | Reply

This time they are going to really nail him. Sharp as a ball bearing Jerry Nadler is on the case - the guy with a body resembling a weeble-wooble. He has been thoroughly embarrassed in all his public hearings to date but this one is going to be different. Like Trump, we want this clownshow to continue.

#3 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 05:45 PM | Reply

Like Trump, we want this clownshow to continue.
#3 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

Yes! Let everyone testify. Bidens, Bolton, Mulvaney, et al.

We want this clown show to not only continue, but evolve in to an actual fact finding mission with those who were in the know. You should support that, right?

Maybe not. Maybe you are far more interested in the WH keeping all of us in the dark. That would benefit Trump. So I'm guessing you actually don't want the truth. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

#4 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:07 PM | Reply

"Yes! Let everyone testify.
#4 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11 "

Yes EVERYONE - not Schiff or Nadler say over the witness list or line of questioning. But we both know that is not what you want. You don't want the truth, you want your truth.

#5 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 07:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"Yes EVERYONE..."

Kewl. Trump first.

#6 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"You don't want the truth, you want your truth."

Once again...Rube projects.

#7 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Kewl. Trump first.
#6 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

That will be his choice. I think he gave his answers already.

#8 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 07:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

But we both know that is not what you want. You don't want the truth, you want your truth.
#5 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

False.

Keep your projection to yourself. I just called for everyone!

You're the one who is hesitating. Unlike you, I'm not a political hack.

Have at Schiff and co. Just be sure to include those who have gotten hand knowledge of this situation. Waiting for you to agree. But not holding my breath, Trumper.

#9 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:27 PM | Reply

Hand = first hand

#10 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:28 PM | Reply

I think he gave his answers already.
#8 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

Not under oath.

Again, false, charlatan.

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:29 PM | Reply

"Have at Schiff and co. Just be sure to include those who have gotten hand knowledge of this situation. Waiting for you to agree. But not holding my breath, Trumper.
#9 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11"

I think they should have everyone to testify. This is a nothingburger outside of exposing the soft-corruption of politicians kids enriching themselves off of their parent's office.

#12 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 07:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#11 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

So have the Dems vote to impeach and send it to a trial in the Senate. I am okay with that. Seems the Dems are the ones changing their minds.

#13 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 07:32 PM | Reply

" I think (Trump) gave his answers already."

Even you don't believe that.

#14 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:35 PM | Reply

So have the Dems vote to impeach and send it to a trial in the Senate. I am okay with that. Seems the Dems are the ones changing their minds.
#13 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

Have you been paying any fccking attention?!

That's what I've been calling for since the realease of the Mueller report, just like JEFFY and ROC.

You don't want the truth, you want your truth.
#5 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

Fcck you, IRA.

#15 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:36 PM | Reply

"I think they should have everyone to testify."

Except Trump.

At least be honest as far as we can throw you.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:37 PM | Reply

"You don't want the truth, you want your truth."

Posts the guy who has repeatedly proven he can't handle the truth.

Tell us, Rube...have you finally found the part in Dr. Hill's testimony where she calls Vindman's judgment into question, as you claimed multiple times, yet could never seem to find?

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:38 PM | Reply

"Tell us, Rube...have you finally found the part in Dr. Hill's testimony where she calls Vindman's judgment into question, as you claimed multiple times, yet could never seem to find?
#17 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

Yes, I read all 400 pages. You have as well or your mental capacity is limited to key word search?

#18 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 07:45 PM | Reply

"Yes, I read all 400 pages"

Yet you couldn't produce what you claimed.

Are you ready to admit you were in error, or should I just conclude you're a purposeful liar?

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 07:46 PM | Reply

Are you ready to admit you were in error, or should I just conclude you're a purposeful liar?
#19 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

He's admitted error recently, wondering why he refuses to now.

#20 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-27 07:52 PM | Reply

"He's admitted error recently, wondering why he refuses to now.
#20 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11"

If I make a mistake, I always admit it.
Luckily, that happens about once a year.

#21 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 08:44 PM | Reply

"If I make a mistake, I always admit it. "

Then either produce what you claimed, or admit you made a mistake. You claimed Dr. Hill questioned Vindman's judgement in her October 14th testimony.

I've called you a liar, and asked for proof. You've blamed me, and given no proof.

You're just a liar.

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 08:47 PM | Reply

"Then either produce what you claimed, or admit you made a mistake. You claimed Dr. Hill questioned Vindman's judgement in her October 14th testimony.
#22 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

She did question his judgement and asked him not to attend meetings as a result. Jordan's characterization was correct although she did not state the word 'judgement' outright, her actions clearly implied it. Did you actually read the report? Again, we both know that you didn't.

#23 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 08:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

although she did not state the word 'judgement' outright, her actions clearly implied it.

Sounds like Sondland's testimony.

#24 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-11-27 09:11 PM | Reply

I'm pleasantly surprised hpw so many important people like Sondland, who appear to be Trumpers, put their oath of office first.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-27 09:19 PM | Reply

"Sondland, who appear to be Trumpers, put their oath of office first.
#25 | POSTED BY SNOOFY"

Sondland is an opportunist, not a Trumpet. He was/is a Dem but knew he could buy a position in the State Department as is tradition. Not that he was a bad guy, just not the best or brightest.

#26 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-27 09:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"She did question his judgement and asked him not to attend meetings as a result."

You've now referred three times to something, somehow...vague. YOU FAIL.

Quote the exact salient phrases from the actual testimony, or admit your error.

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-27 11:25 PM | Reply

"You've now referred three times to something, somehow...vague. YOU FAIL.
#27 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

It is vague because you refuse to actually read it. Go read and then we can discuss. Hell, ask Corky to read it to you while you snuggle.

#28 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-28 04:13 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"It is vague because you refuse to actually read it."

You didn't read it, you ------- liar. If you had, you would have brought the salient phrase and posted it. You've now whiffed four times in a row. You're a lying putz, bitch.

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-28 09:55 AM | Reply

Of course they need more as they still have not found [or created] an impeachable crime.

#30 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-11-28 11:51 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"You're a lying putz, bitch.
#29 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

That is that epic 'gangsta' tagline I have been waiting for. Nothing is quite as edgy and cool is a 60 year old white guy calling a 45 year old white guy a 'bitch'....so amazingly epic.

To the point, I have read the report. You made a claim that the statements were not in the report without actually reading it and now stubbornly stick to you argument despite still never having read it.

So, you can continue to whine about it and wait for me to spoon feed you the relevant page numbers or you can actually read the damn transcript. However, only one will give you any credibility in the eyes of others. Your choice how you want to proceed but your comments remind me of a child with a full diaper screaming to be changed. As you present yourself as an adult, I have no obligation to change you or spoon feed you. My prediction is that you will just sit in your spoiled diaper and wail for the next few days.

#31 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-29 01:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"To the point, I have read the report."

To the point, you lying again. We both know if you found what you claimed, you'd be posting it, and rubbing my nose in it. How do we know that? Because you were rubbing my nose in it when you were lying about it, before you got exposed.

Now, you've had 4-5 opportunities to post the quote from Dr. Hill's Oct 14 testimony, and you've failed each time. Clearly you're not only a liar, but a shameless one, who can't even admit it when he's been called out.

And now, you're still pretending YOU proving YOUR claim is on me. No one is falling for your lie. And you're proving again and again you can't debate me without being dishonest. That makes you a lying bitch. MY lying bitch...bitch.

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 12:18 PM | Reply

- MY lying bitch.

In the spirit of the holidays, Dan, you should prolly share. By now, he's pretty much everyone here's lyin' bitch.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2019-11-29 12:40 PM | Reply

--That makes you a lying bitch. MY lying bitch...bitch.

#32 | Posted by Danforth

Amgry Joe and Angry JPW, meet Angry Dan.

#34 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-11-29 12:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

Amgry Joe and Angry JPW, meet Angry Dan.
#34 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

LOL ..

See now Danforth thinks hes woke, that means he can be misogynistic and get away with it...

In the spirit of the holidays, Dan, you should prolly share. By now, he's pretty much everyone here's lyin' bitch.
#33 | POSTED BY CORKY

And Corky would like to share in the misogyny, like its some sort "gang" ... you know.

You made a claim that the statements were not in the report without actually reading it and now stubbornly stick to you argument despite still never having read it.

Thats how Danforth roles .. he's quick with a quip but long on facts.

Given this thread, I would say Danforth, and Corkys Thanksgiving wasn't very thankful or revlective.

#35 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-11-29 01:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Thats how Danforth roles .. he's quick with a quip but long on facts."

Mackris is so stupid, he doesn't understand what "Long on facts" means.

And tell us, Andy: When someone makes a claim, is it up to them to prove it if called out, or up to the person calling them out to disprove it?

I'm just trying to see if you're even dumber than you seem.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 01:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"now Danforth thinks hes woke, that means he can be misogynistic and get away with it..."

Awww, isn't that cute? A Trump supporter is worried about someone being misogynist. If it weren't so pathetic, it'd be laughable.

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 01:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

--And Corky would like to share in the misogyny, like its some sort "gang" ... you know.

Permanent member of the peanut gallery who lets others do the heavy lifting so his chinos don't get wrinkled, and then piles on.

#38 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-11-29 01:30 PM | Reply

Amgry Joe and Angry JPW, meet Angry Dan.

#34 | Posted by nullifidian

Awww look. I live in your head.

#39 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-29 02:58 PM | Reply

"Awww look. I live in your head.
#39 | POSTED BY JPW "

Not unless his head is a cardboard box or flophouse.

#40 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-29 09:51 PM | Reply

"To the point, you lying again. We both know if you found what you claimed, you'd be posting it, and rubbing my nose in it.
#32 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

Douchefroth, I don't have a need to punch down so I don't have a desire to rub your nose in anything. In your biggest ever liar, you claimed that Bush used the SS Trust Fund to pay for tax cuts and that the bonds in the Trust Fund had no value so you wanted to exchange them for gold. After I wiped the floor with you in that argument, you have now decided it is better to just lie and change your argument.

So, I have no need to debate you or prove anything to you as there is no 'winning' when your opponent is morally bankrupt.

I have read the report, I have stated my opinion based on how Hill acted towards Vindman. I think Jordan was stretching his claim but there was a basis for making it. If you want to read the transcript, please do so and then we can debate. But, your ability is limited to doing a word search on the document before passing judgment. So, put in at least a half-assed effort first and actually read it.

Now, I know that you won't - you will just wail like a child with a dirty diaper. It matters not to me either way.

In fact Vindman, Hill, Volker, etc have already played their role and been tossed aside by the Dems and frankly, impeachment as well for that matter. Like your opinion, their substance is that of a fart in the wind.

Now keep up your edgy 'bitch' tag line...so epic, so awesome!

#41 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-29 10:04 PM | Reply

"I have read the report'

You're lying again, bitch.

"I have stated my opinion based on how Hill acted towards Vindman."

BFD. Unless you can C&P the salient section where your claim is proven, YOU ARE LYING ABOUT THE CLAIM.

"If you want to read the transcript, please do so and then we can debate."

If you had the goods, you'd post it. You don't have ANYTHING.

"Now keep up your edgy 'bitch' tag line."

I will, as long as you keep lying like a dog, bitch. You don't have the proof, and you NEVER had the proof, even when you were trying to rub my nose in the difference between a review and testimony under oath. Since YOU are the one who clearly can't tell the difference, I'll have to keep rubbing your nose in your own schittt, my bitch.

#42 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 10:34 PM | Reply

"You're lying again, bitch."

Yeah...that's the stuff I looking for! Wooooo!

"Unless you can C&P the salient section where your claim is proven, YOU ARE LYING ABOUT THE CLAIM."
#42 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

That is not the way that the world works Douchefroth. You claimed that Jim Jordan was lying but never actually read any of the actual source material. We have confirmation in 3 sources that this was the case - Morrison's testimony, Hill's public testimony, and Hill's transcript. I have read the transcript and it aligns with her public testimony - Vindman was not politically savvy and she kept him out of meetings as a result - BECAUSE SHE QUESTIONED HIS JUDGEMENT. This is included in the transcripts and clarified in her public testimony. Your key word search does not work because you need CONTEXT. While she does not use the word 'judgment', she uses terms like 'political antennae' - she is a good little bureaucrat. So, again, READ THE ---- TRANSCRIPT and stop wailing like a child with a soiled diaper.

#43 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-29 11:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You're lying again, bitch.

IRASherp is a liar and a troll.

I figured everyone had figured out that sock puppet is a waste of time.

#44 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-11-29 11:07 PM | Reply

"You claimed that Jim Jordan was lying '

No, bitch. YOU claimed Dr. Hill had questioned Vindman's judgement. That puts the onus ON YOU to prove it, especially when called out for the liar you are. If you'd actually read the testimony, and found ANYTHING even resembling proof, you'd post it.

To date, I've maintained you're lying, and have no proof. To date, you've kept lying, and offered NOT ONE WHIT of proof.

If you want to remain a lying bitch, remain a lying bitch. I'll simply keep pointing it out.

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 11:24 PM | Reply

"Vindman's judgement. That puts the onus ON YOU to prove it, especially when called out for the liar you are. If you'd actually read the testimony, and found ANYTHING even resembling proof, you'd post it."

If you say someone lacks a political antennae and keep them from attending meetings as a result, is that questioning someone's judgment?

#46 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-29 11:43 PM | Reply

"If you say someone lacks a political antennae and keep them from attending meetings as a result, is that questioning someone's judgment?"

Feel free to ACTUALLY POST the quote(s) from the transcript of the testimony.

At this point, NOTHING you say can be believed. At this point, you're still nothing more than a lying bitch, without a shred of proof to back up your claim.

#47 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-29 11:51 PM | Reply

MR. MORRISON: I had concerns about Lieutenant Colonel Vindman's
j udgment .
BY MR. CASTOR:
a Judgment with nespect to what?
A Among the discussions I had with Dn. Hill in the tnansition
was oun team, my team, its stnengths and its weaknesses. And Fiona
and othens had raised concenns about Alex's judgment.
intelligence.house.gov

Instead, she testified that she'd made a "very specific point" in a couple of short transition meetings with Morrison in which the pair discussed the strengths and weaknesses of everybody under Hill's supervision.

Hill said she mentioned concerns about the Ukraine director only in the context of the increasingly politicized Ukraine policy, and about Vindman's career in the military.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/fiona-hill-corrects-tim-morrison-testmony-on-alexander-vindman- judgement

Not hard to find ...

#48 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-11-29 11:54 PM | Reply

"And Fiona and othens had raised concenns about Alex's judgment."

Morrison, an admitted Trump supporter, was the new kid. And that part was, at best, hearsay.

"she testified that she'd made a "very specific point" in a couple of short transition meetings with Morrison in which the pair discussed the strengths and weaknesses of everybody under Hill's supervision."

Well, unless that point was specifically calling Vindman's judgement into question, you fail, too.

"Not hard to find ..."

Yet it doesn't support Rube's claim that it was HILL's testimony on October 14th where she brought Vindman's judgement into question.

Now put those goalposts back where you found them.

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-30 12:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

BTW, your incomplete link, when corrected, goes to this headline:
Correcting The Record, Fiona Hill Says She Wasn't Concerned About Vindman's Judgment

Game. Set. Match. Thanks for showing Lieburg up for the lying bitch he really is.

FTW, here's the ACTUAL quote from Dr. Hill's hearing:
The Ukraine director on the National Security Council " a star witness in the impeachment probe " is "excellent" and "highly decorated," his former boss Dr. Fiona Hill said Thursday, denying the testimony of her successor who claimed that Hill had expressed concerns about the director's judgement.
"I did not relate any concerns in general terms about Col. Vindman's judgment," Hill testified Thursday, referring to the Ukraine director Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Hill said she was "somewhat surprised when I heard Mr. Morrison make that assertion."

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-30 12:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Yet it doesn't support Rube's claim that it was HILL's testimony on October 14th where she brought Vindman's judgement into question."

In the 14th transcript she states how she kept him out of meetings. In her public testimony she confirmed that she thought he lacked political savvy. That is known as lacking judgment.

#51 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-30 12:14 AM | Reply

"In the 14th transcript she states how she kept him out of meetings. "

Post it if you're got it.

"In her public testimony..."

STOP RIGHT THERE. Your claim was Oct 14th. No more moving of the goalposts.

You're still a liar, and you still have no proof of your claim. Clearly, you don't believe you can debate me using the truth. That just makes you a lying bitch, bitch.

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-30 12:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort