But in any case, Mitt is a weak and pathetic creature. But maybe, perhaps, he has always been this way.
And perhaps he always dreamed to be a Dem, but he was too weak to make team Dem.
He’s gotten a lot more right than most of the media. Certainly more than you.
That is a one sided review that treats everything the Democrats said as gospel and only “checks” what Solomon said. It would have been better if they checked their own sources and questioned the Democrats they used because there is a huge conflict of interest.
Specifically, the columns raised questions about Hunter Biden working on the board of a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma. When Hunter Biden joined Burisma, Joe Biden was the vice president and point person for U.S. policies on Ukraine. Joe Biden is currently a candidate for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nomination.
Yes, and the Hill leaves out the context of Biden bragging about withholding aid to get a prosecutor fired. One of the very things the Hill says is a major failing for Solomon, leaving out important context, is something the Hill does on their review. Another example, Biden wasn’t running for President when this happened.
President Trump seized on this issue, commenting on it on many occasions. The president asked the government of Ukraine to investigate the Bidens as his administration delayed $391 million of U.S. military aid to the country. Trump has said he was interested in rooting out corruption and that he did not expect nor request any quid pro quo.
Again, the Hill leaves out the context of the call. Trump asked about two things, the firing of the prosecutor and the role Ukraine played in Hurrican Crossfire. The media always leaves out the second part. This same media will claim Ukraine played no role in the election while also bragging about Manafort going to jail.
Contradicting assertions in Solomon’s columns, in Politico and in some other media reports, State Department officials, U.S. national security agencies and the Senate Intelligence Committee have concluded that Ukraine did not meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Did they talk to Manafort about that? Ukraine prosecuted people for meddling in the 2016 election.
Russian government officials, who have denied meddling in the 2016 election, have pushed the narrative that Ukraine interfered in that U.S. election.
According to who? The same people that spied on Trump and said he was working with Russia? Where is the source they cite?
The Hill just parrots Democrat propaganda without looking critically at what their Democrat sources are telling them. They continue pushing the thoroughly debunked Russian Collusion Delusion. They assert truths without providing any links to their sources and they don’t analyze their sources for credibility.
The Hill just parrots Democrat propaganda without looking critically at what their Democrat sources are telling them.
Shocking, I know, be we may have at least one commenter who does the same thing.
The best response, probably made numerous times by many many people, is what didn’t Romney take his stand against politically motivated investigations when something serious was at stake, like the removal of a President?
Consistency, schemsistency, Mr. Romney has his “legacy” to uphold.
So Rand, about your follow-on “Never mind!”, what do the Repubs have on Senator Romney?
Maybe the Dems have stole his magical underwear.
https://darylcagle.com/2012/09/24/mitt-romney-and-his-mormon-garmets/
But in any case, Mitt is a weak and pathetic creature. But maybe, perhaps, he has always been this way.
And perhaps he always dreamed to be a Dem, but he was too weak to make team Dem.
His son is involved in Bursima.
Gee dose John Soloman get anything right?
Seems like he more a tool of a disinformation campaign.
He’s gotten a lot more right than most of the media. Certainly more than you.
That is a one sided review that treats everything the Democrats said as gospel and only “checks” what Solomon said. It would have been better if they checked their own sources and questioned the Democrats they used because there is a huge conflict of interest.
Yes, and the Hill leaves out the context of Biden bragging about withholding aid to get a prosecutor fired. One of the very things the Hill says is a major failing for Solomon, leaving out important context, is something the Hill does on their review. Another example, Biden wasn’t running for President when this happened.
Again, the Hill leaves out the context of the call. Trump asked about two things, the firing of the prosecutor and the role Ukraine played in Hurrican Crossfire. The media always leaves out the second part. This same media will claim Ukraine played no role in the election while also bragging about Manafort going to jail.
Did they talk to Manafort about that? Ukraine prosecuted people for meddling in the 2016 election.
According to who? The same people that spied on Trump and said he was working with Russia? Where is the source they cite?
The Hill just parrots Democrat propaganda without looking critically at what their Democrat sources are telling them. They continue pushing the thoroughly debunked Russian Collusion Delusion. They assert truths without providing any links to their sources and they don’t analyze their sources for credibility.
The Hill just parrots Democrat propaganda without looking critically at what their Democrat sources are telling them.
Shocking, I know, be we may have at least one commenter who does the same thing.
The best response, probably made numerous times by many many people, is what didn’t Romney take his stand against politically motivated investigations when something serious was at stake, like the removal of a President?
Consistency, schemsistency, Mr. Romney has his “legacy” to uphold.
So Rand, about your follow-on “Never mind!”, what do the Repubs have on Senator Romney?