« Scattershots – 15nov19 | Main | Democrats’ Big Lies #4685, 4686 »

15 November 2019

Comments

Paul Emery

Gosh and Golly Don Schiff had nothing to do with it. That was a direct quote from Mulveney as a response to Jon Karl. Explain to me what Schiff had to do with that exchange.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/mulvaney-lawyer-denies-mick-was-so-heavily-involved-despite-his-white-house-briefing-room-confession/

Don Bessee

The Popes speech writer is way too woak and has a self hating dem kind of vibe going on -

It did not take long for the French themselves to cry foul, reproaching the pontiff both for besmirching one of their most beloved pieces of epic literature and for using a fictional narrative to illustrate a point about how Christians supposedly behave.

“La Chanson de Roland is obviously not a historical chronicle of events, but an epic poem, a chanson de geste, the oldest and most complete manuscript, written in Anglo-Norman, and dates back to the early twelfth century, four centuries after the facts it is supposed to recount,” wrote Vini Ganimara Thursday for the French Catholic news site Riposte Catholique.

The Song of Roland was indeed inspired in part by a historical event, namely Charlemagne’s expedition to Spain in 778, Ganimara observes, but this expedition to Spain was actually undertaken at the request of several Muslim governors of Spain, in rebellion against the Emir of Cordova.

Moreover, the invasion was unsuccessful, and is recounted as such in the poem.

“The memory of Pope Francis evoking the victory of the Franks over Muslims is therefore confused, because the expedition was not a victory,” Ganimara observes.

“The fictitious case of the forced baptism of Muslims supposedly defeated after the capture of Zaragoza — which did not take place — is not historical, but is a pure imagination of the poet,” he adds, noting that contrary to the pope’s account, there is not even a Christian holding a sword in the original work.

https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2019/11/21/pope-francis-cites-fictional-french-epic-to-prove-christians-are-violent/

;-)

Paul Emery


Here's another one George:

"And while Trump and his allies have staunchly denied that the president and his private attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani sought a “quid pro quo” to get Ukraine to investigate Democrats in exchange for a White House meeting, Sondland said he believed it was exactly that."

“Was there a quid pro quo?” he asked near the start of the seven-hour hearing. “The answer is yes.”

Soundland is a Trump appointee who contributed a million dollars to Trumps campaign. Hardly a never Trumper,

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-11-20/sondland-says-he-followed-the-presidents-orders-in-ukraine

Bill Tozer


“Was there a quid pro quo?” he asked near the start of the seven-hour hearing. “The answer is yes.”

A day late on that one. The operative words are “ near the start of the seven-hour hearing.” Important words. Perhaps a look over at Scattershots starting with Bobbie Sue creaming her jeans in glee @7:35 am yesterday (Nov 20) and you might see the story changed by 11:30am our time.....and you might even save yourself some embarrassment. Might. I won’t bet on it. Hope springs eternal.

And yes, I still deny that 17 intel agencies all agreed.

Paul Emery


Thanks for agreeing with me Bill that Soundland stated that there was quid pro quo.

Bill Tozer

Me no know no Soundland. Is that a band or maker of sound machines? Is it a mixer brand?

Paul Emery

Thanks for the correction Bill. Sorry it was confusing for you. this is for Bill

Thanks for agreeing with me Bill that Sondland stated that there was quid pro quo.

Bill Tozer

Oh, Sondland said a lot of things, including denying he was a witness to any such things as a quid pro quo. Go figure.

“No one on this planet told you that aid was tyed to investigations....”

"As the exchange was taking place, the chyron on CNN stated: “SONDLAND: ‘YES’ THERE WAS QUID PRO QUO IN UKRAINE SCANDAL.”

“No one on this planet told you that President Trump was tying aid to investigations, yes or no?”

“Yes,” Sondland responded


http://dlvr.it/RJjrB2
———
Really Puncky, we are way off topic. You really should take all the impeachment observations and comments on such matters over to Scattershots or Ruminations where it can be debated viciously. This is the Sandbox for OTHER topics.

Heck, even Bobbie dropped it like a hot potato by noon
Hope Springs Eternal.

Paul emery

Gosh Bill it was in his written statement. I heard him say it. Are you denying he said it??

George Rebane

Sondland “perceived” the quid pro quo - no direct evidence. Please continue under ‘Ruminations’.

The comments to this entry are closed.