DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS of BRIBERY, EXTORTION and QUID PRO QUO
- Thread starter Centerleftfl
- Start date
More important is the Constitutional definition.
The framers were concerned that a president could be bribed to turn his back on our country
and throw in with a new allegiance to another country thus committing treason against America.
Try and study up first next time.
What is a snowflake, I'll take left wing coup for 1000 Alex
That or pussy could be a correct response. Many of them did wear pussy hats while protesting something that hadn't, nor to this day has, happened. The entire protest was nothing more than a way for them to vent frustration about having their asses kicked.
Yeah......its a simple thing to find EVERY INSTANCE in this SHITSHOW were any of the supposed star witnesses have actually provided evidence or even accused the POTUS of any of the BUZZ WORDS. Go ahead produce the words from any (wink, wink) witness. The only ones that are using the words are SHITFORBRAINS, AA NANCY and the mocking bird Marxist fake news puppets.
Reality sucks for democrats....no?
That's hilarious. Trying to warp the Constitution in order to defend a POTUS' breach of that same document. You are aptly surnamed, Ofdonald Stretch.
A D- isn't with flying colors although for you, that's better than what was ever expected.
Yeah.....what constitutional statue has President Donald Trump breached? Even in this SHITSHOW......not one so called witness has charged (might alone offered evidence) that the President has engaged in Quid Pro Que......Extortion.....or BRIBERY. Where's the evidence to back up your accusation? If it exists it would be documented with evidence IN FACT. Like the ACTUAL verbatim transcript of the actual phone call.
The FACTS are.....in over 35 hundred pages of testimony in the SHITSHOW....the only time that BRIBERY was used to describe the conduct of anyone was when that BUZZ WORD (which polled best in a left wing focus group conducted last week...BRIBERY) was used to describe the conduct of JOE BIDEN....not once has the word BRIBERY been used by any witness to accuse Donald J. Trump.
Things that make you go......HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!
Where is the evidence of BRIBERY?
Read the testimony TRANSCRIPTS.....there is no such accusation ever made, no such accusation proven via an introduction of FACTS in EVIDENCE. That's the problem with attempting to CHANGE an ELECTION result through the use of PROGANDA.....only TRUTH can be documented via actual FACTS IN EVIDENCE....propaganda is at best HEARSAY "OPINION" …….its not even considered PRIMA FACIE evidence....might alone.....1st hand factual evidence.
Why use the word for which there is no factual evidence? Its the only word in the Constitution they left could find to use as grounds for impeachment. The problem? No evidence of such.
“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday's afternoon hearing.
Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."
Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."
Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., hit the same notes in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"
"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.
"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"
"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.
Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."
Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."
Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., hit the same notes in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"
"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.
"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"
"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.
Shitforbrains…..proved today....that Vindman is a leaker of sealed classified information. Both Shitforbrains and Vindman have stated that neither KNOW who the whistleblower is...IF they do not know, just how does Shitforbrains conclude that if Vindman answers a simple question about someone he does not know.....will reveal the ID of the whistleblower? Logic and Reason (deductive reasoning)...proves BOTH are lying their ass off. 
It does not take Freak'n Sherlock Holmes to figure this out.
Vindman attempted to edit the phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian President.....he found out that he did not have access to the transcribed document because it was sealed in a classified server. He ASSUMED, since he was on record of being on the phone call....he could make up his own record and accuse TRUMP and then leak it to ERIC CHARLIE...the Clowns in America Spy planted in the Trump white house. Because he assumed that Trump like the leftists he works for.....would never be TRANSPARENTLY HONEST and actually release the VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT. Its blown up in their faces.
FACE PLANT: They have been exposed even with all the soviet style restrictions placed on the republican house representatives.....SHITFORBRAINS simply does not know when to keep his mouth shut, he just self incriminated himself as a material witness.....liar.
Conclusion: "IF".....personally I doubt this will ever pass the house, they vote for impeachment and it goes to the senate. Guess who is going to be called as a material witness......in the lead off position? SHITFORBRAINS.
It does not take Freak'n Sherlock Holmes to figure this out. Vindman attempted to edit the phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian President.....he found out that he did not have access to the transcribed document because it was sealed in a classified server. He ASSUMED, since he was on record of being on the phone call....he could make up his own record and accuse TRUMP and then leak it to ERIC CHARLIE...the Clowns in America Spy planted in the Trump white house. Because he assumed that Trump like the leftists he works for.....would never be TRANSPARENTLY HONEST and actually release the VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT. Its blown up in their faces.
FACE PLANT: They have been exposed even with all the soviet style restrictions placed on the republican house representatives.....SHITFORBRAINS simply does not know when to keep his mouth shut, he just self incriminated himself as a material witness.....liar.
Conclusion: "IF".....personally I doubt this will ever pass the house, they vote for impeachment and it goes to the senate. Guess who is going to be called as a material witness......in the lead off position? SHITFORBRAINS.
Last edited:
Centerleftfl
Verified User
Shitforbrains…..proved today....that Vindman is a leaker of sealed classified information. Both Shitforbrains and Vindman have stated that neither KNOW who the whistleblower is...IF they do not know, just how does Shitforbrains conclude that if Vindman answers a simple question about someone he does not know.....will reveal the ID of the whistleblower? Logic and Reason (deductive reasoning)...proves BOTH are lying their ass off.
Vindman attempted to edit the phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian President.....he found out that he did not have access to the transcribed document because it was sealed in a classified server. He ASSUMED, since he was on record of being on the phone call....he could make up his own record and accuse TRUMP and then leak it to ERIC CHARLIE...the Clowns in America Spy planted in the Trump white house. Because he assumed that Trump like the leftists he works for.....would never be TRANSPARENTLY HONEST and actually release the VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT. Its blown up in their faces.
FACE PLANT: They have been exposed even with all the soviet style restrictions placed on the republican house representatives.....SHITFORBRAINS simply does not know when to keep his mouth shut, he just self incriminated himself as a material witness.....liar.
Conclusion: "IF".....personally I doubt this will ever pass the house, they vote for impeachment and it goes to the senate. Guess who is going to be called as a material witness......in the lead off position? SHITFORBRAINS.
SCUMFORBRAINS Trump is PATIENT 1 spreading the DISEASE of criminal corruption faster than ebola spread on the African continent awhile back. He is infecting everyone he is near and can even INFECT people by phone--even 4000 miles away.
He has to go before he diseases the WORLD.
“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday's afternoon hearing.
Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."
Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."
Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., hit the same notes in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"
"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.
"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"
"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.
Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."
Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."
Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., hit the same notes in asking the witnesses about Trump's fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: "Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"
"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.
"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"
"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.
Centerleftfl
Verified User
The JOHN GOTTI defense. No one said I DID IT. Others did it for me. Trump learned a thing or 2 from GOTTI'S attorney--Roy Cohn.
Yeah.....what constitutional statue has President Donald Trump breached? Even in this SHITSHOW......not one so called witness has charged (might alone offered evidence) that the President has engaged in Quid Pro Que......Extortion.....or BRIBERY. Where's the evidence to back up your accusation? If it exists it would be documented with evidence IN FACT. Like the ACTUAL verbatim transcript of the actual phone call.
The FACTS are.....in over 35 hundred pages of testimony in the SHITSHOW....the only time that BRIBERY was used to describe the conduct of anyone was when that BUZZ WORD (which polled best in a left wing focus group conducted last week...BRIBERY) was used to describe the conduct of JOE BIDEN....not once has the word BRIBERY been used by any witness to accuse Donald J. Trump.
Things that make you go......HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!
Where is the evidence of BRIBERY?
That's the problem with attempting to CHANGE an ELECTION result through the use of PROGANDA.....only TRUTH can be documented via actual FACTS IN EVIDENCE....propaganda is at best HEARSAY "OPINION" …….its not even considered PRIMA FACIE evidence....might alone.....1st hand factual evidence.
Why use the word for which there is no factual evidence? Its the only word in the Constitution they left could find to use as grounds for impeachment. The problem? No evidence of such.
The conscience of the right, Linsey will explain it to you.https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article230483449.html It does not require a crime. But Trump is a crime wave.
You people have become irrational.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello ziggy,
Disingenuous - because it singles out the phone call only, without considering the rest of the evidence.
It's a trick designed to placate partisan Republicans who are operating under the false premise that Trump is innocent, and trying to fit everything else around that immovable object. Gives the partisan Republicans something to cling to, even if it is false due to omission.
Disingenuous - because it singles out the phone call only, without considering the rest of the evidence.
It's a trick designed to placate partisan Republicans who are operating under the false premise that Trump is innocent, and trying to fit everything else around that immovable object. Gives the partisan Republicans something to cling to, even if it is false due to omission.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
what did he give Trump?......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
dude.....none of what you claim has EVER been backed up......you are delusional......
So with this little tantrum, you are saying we are correct, and now you have your man panties in a bunch, because you fell for leftist lies got it