Nunes reads statement completely ignoring the allegations

[Colorforms]

Your dodging is pitiful.

I’m sure you know that.

What I know is that you support hardened liars and the worst sort of corrupt swamp creatures I'm sure you know that too.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

What I know is that you support hardened liars and the worst sort of corrupt swamp creatures I'm sure you know that too.

You’re good at screeching “Liar!”

You’re terrible at making the case that Schiff lied in his opening statement.

 

[Colorforms]

You’re good at screeching “Liar!”

You’re terrible at making the case that Schiff lied in his opening statement.

First of all his entire schitk about Mulvaney is a lie. Completely taken out of context.
Secondly, Schiff's mouth was moving.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

First of all his entire schitk about Mulvey is a lie. Completely taken out of context.
Secondly, Schiff's mouth was moving.

Very lame.

Quote something that Schiff said that you claim to be a lie. Your “rewrites” of what he said are themselves lies.

Good luck.

 

[Colorforms]

Very lame.

Quote something that Schiff said that you claim to be a lie. Your “rewrites” of what he said are themselves lies.

Good luck.

The President’s chief of staff confirmed Trump’s efforts to coerce Ukraine by withholding aid. When Mick Mulvaney was asked publicly about it, his answer was breathtaking: "We do that all the time with foreign policy . . . I have news for everybody: get over it. There's going to be political influence in foreign policy. That is going to happen.” The video of that confession is plain for all to see.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

The President’s chief of staff confirmed Trump’s efforts to coerce Ukraine by withholding aid. When Mick Mulvaney was asked publicly about it, his answer was breathtaking: "We do that all the time with foreign policy . . . I have news for everybody: get over it. There's going to be political influence in foreign policy. That is going to happen.” The video of that confession is plain for all to see.

That’s precisely what Mulvaney said. Schiff even quoted Mulvaney. What Mulvaney said was on tape. We all saw it.

That lame effort was the best you can do to meet the challenge?

 

[Colorforms]

That’s precisely what Mulvaney said. Schiff even quoted Mulvaney. What Mulvaney said was on tape. We all saw it.

That lame effort was the best you can do to meet the challenge?

That is not what he said, that is part of what he said. Mulvaney not only did NOT confirm that Trump was withholding aid to coerce the Ukraine, but just the opposite, he denied it in 2 different press conferences.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

That is not what he said, that is part of what he said. Mulvaney not only did NOT confirm that Trump was withholding aid to coerce the Ukraine, but just the opposite, he denied it in 2 different press conferences.

Nah, you’re talking about his “walk back” pressers AFTER Trump took Mulvaney to the woodshed for saying exactly what Schiff quoted him as saying. And Mulvaney said exactly what Schiff quoted him as saying. Saying Schiff “lied” for directly quoting Mulvaney is daffy.

 

[Boca]

Unless you can point to something Schiff said that’s false?

He doesn't know who the whistle-blower is and never met him for starters.

And Bug-Eyes refuses to allow any questioning of him? Supposedly to protect his identity when everyone knows who he is. The only person he's protecting is himself

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

He doesn't know who the whistle-blower is and never met him for starters.

And Bug-Eyes refuses to allow any questioning of him? Supposedly to protect his identity when everyone knows who he is. The only person he's protecting is himself

FYI, lies are not established simply because you say so. You have to establish that factually. And that you cannot do.

That’s the sane person’s take anyway.

 

[Boca]

FYI, lies are not established simply because you say so. You have to establish that factually. And that you cannot do.

That’s the sane person’s take anyway.

Of course I can't. Neither can anyone else since the piece of Schiff will not allow anyone to ask him any questions under oath.

That's a duh, and only half clever of you...make that a quarter.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Of course I can't. Neither can anyone else since the piece of Schiff will not allow anyone to ask him any questions under oath.

That's a duh, and only half clever of you...make that a quarter.

As you concede, you people routinely throw around allegations of “lying” without having a shred of evidence to back it up. That’s deplorable.

 

[Nutty Cortez]

Of course I can't. Neither can anyone else since the piece of Schiff will not allow anyone to ask him any questions under oath.

That's a duh, and only half clever of you...make that a quarter.

"You can call anyone you want as a witness- as long as I Adam Schiff approve"

yesterdays snooze fest show backfired on my leftist brethren.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

You’re good at screeching “Liar!”

You’re terrible at making the case that Schiff lied in his opening statement.

Of course Schiff lied. No rational person would argue otherwise.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Of course Schiff lied. No rational person would argue otherwise.

The little girlish “Liar!” routine is boring.

If you want to act like an honest adult, quote the part of Schiff’s opening statement you say is a “lie,” and prove it to be a lie.

Good luck.

 

[Nutty Cortez]

The little girlish “Liar!” routine is boring.

If you want to act like an honest adult, quote the part of Schiff’s opening statement you say is a “lie,” and prove it to be a lie.

Good luck.

"I do not know the identity of the whistleblower," Schiff said, lying through his teeth on national television.


Schiff says he doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, despite his staff being in contact with the whistleblower.

Ok, but if he doesn't know the identity, how can he as the Intel Chairman stop the whistleblower being named?

And how is the name being redacted in docs?

Schiff's claims seem to clash with past statements he made about his staff having contact with the whistleblower and his admission that he should have been more transparent about the private encounter.

 

[Boca]

As you concede, you people routinely throw around allegations of “lying” without having a shred of evidence to back it up. That’s deplorable.

I can't imagine conceding anything to you. But, it could possibly happen if you'll concede that Adam Schiff is on record saying the whistle-blower will not be allowed to answer any questions from anybody. You don't find that suspicious coming from the Chairman of a committee that is ostensibly seeking the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

That's rhetorical. To you it's not suspicious at all. It's what he has to do to pull this off.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

"I do not know the identity of the whistleblower," Schiff said, lying through his teeth on national television.


Schiff says he doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, despite his staff being in contact with the whistleblower.

Ok, but if he doesn't know the identity, how can he as the Intel Chairman stop the whistleblower being named?

And how is the name being redacted in docs?

Schiff's claims seem to clash with past statements he made about his staff having contact with the whistleblower and his admission that he should have been more transparent about the private encounter.

Such idiocy. I hope your brain has not been destroyed to the point you think that is evidence that Schiff lied. It’s just another idiotic winger conspiracy theory.

Example: Your post asks how Schiff can prevent the whistleblower’s name from being released if he doesn’t know it. He obviously can’t. But he has done what he can do, which is prevent the House GOP jackals from asking witnesses questions designed to reveal the ID of the whistleblower.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I can't imagine conceding anything to you. But, it could possibly happen if you'll concede that Adam Schiff is on record saying the whistle-blower will not be allowed to answer any questions from anybody. You don't find that suspicious coming from the Chairman of a committee that is ostensibly seeking the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Not at all. The whistleblower has no first hand knowledge of Trump’s shakedown call, or any other relevant events. The actual witnesses do. They have been questioned. There’s no legitimate reason to ID or question the whistleblower. Trump wants him ID’d to imperil him, and to deter other whistleblowers. Trump’s GOP congressional co-conspirators and his rabble are deplorable enough to support Trump in this endeavor.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with the baseless winger claim that Schiff lied during the Wednesday hearing.

 

[Nutty Cortez]

Such idiocy. I hope your brain has not been destroyed to the point you think that is evidence that Schiff lied. It’s just another idiotic winger conspiracy theory.

Example: Your post asks how Schiff can prevent the whistleblower’s name from being released if he doesn’t know it. He obviously can’t. But he has done what he can do, which is prevent the House GOP jackals from asking witnesses questions designed to reveal the ID of the whistleblower.

Interesting.

So thinking a supposed whistleblower, contacting the House Intel Committee in which Schiff heads is SO off the reservation ? LOL


Even our leftist Washington Post gave it 4 Pinocchios


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/04/schiffs-false-claim-his-committee-had-not-spoken-whistleblower/


The explanation that Schiff was not sure it was the same whistleblower especially strains credulity.

Schiff earns Four Pinocchios.

Four Pinocchios