Comments by "Dorian Shades of gray" (@dorianshadesofgray2981) on "Fiona Hill gives nation and Republicans stark warning" video.

Fiona Hill comes across as non partisan, but she had moved well before the July 25 th conversation and all her testimony is based on her opinions rather than any hard facts.. Holmes on the other hand is not credible and is obviously a partisan anti trump hack
7
Too bad her testimony is only based on body language or perceptions or feelings... as all of it is worthless opinion and no facts.
6
When this goes to the Republican controlled senate, the exact opposite will happen this will hurt the Dems big time.
6
This is purely a political process. The Democrats have the numbers in the house so will probably vote to impeach. This then goes to the senate who are controlled by the Republicans. Now to remove a president they need to have a 2/3 majority vote in the senate . This would mean 20 Republicans would have to vote against their colleagues and vote with the Democrats and the likelihood of that is Zero. So all this is a waste of time as the President will not be removed from office.
5
@P Webb sounds like you’ve watched “ The Minority Report” and believe the thought police should be able to arrest people for thinking the wrong thing. The bottom line is you have no idea of the reasoning for releasing the aid, and like the witnesses so far you are are just assuming without any proof that the aid was released because of knowledge of some complaint. There is no blue dress and there are no tapes and so people can’t see a smoking gun that would justify impeaching a president.
2
@Richard Curren I think you need to take the red pill and step out of the Matrix ..because you are living in a dream world if you think where the world was before Trump was all smooth sailing .
2
@Adam why would trump do anything to legitimise this farce of a kangaroo court?
2
@John Z alternatively his IQ is big enough to know that he should not give any credibility to this sham of an investigation by testifying , as he has already provided the transcript of his phone conversation which is what this whole shame is based on.
2
@Wondrous Glow you’ll find it is the other way around. already 2 Democrats weren’t willing to put their name to the impeachment enquiry . I’m even starting to wonder if you’ll get enough votes to impeach. If you do those Democrats in the senate will not want to put their name to a vote they are going to lose anyway as it will be used against them the next time they go up for election.
1
@P Webb well Clinton and Nixon had great evidence against them , the blue dress for Clinton and Nixon had the tapes, for Trump. Aid was released, Zelensky started no investigations, got the phone call and meeting with Trump that he wanted .. so there is a big difference
1
@Richard Curren you’re obviously an idiot who can’t put together any semblance of an argument to back any of your bullshit claims . So if you’ve got an argument present it or move along.
1
@Richard Curren translation: you haven’t got a clue of any hard evidence of any wrong-doing by Trump.
1
@Ron Tice the onus is on the accuser to prove guilt . The bottom line is the aid was payed, Zelensky did not have have to do anything for it. Zelensky who is also the supposed victim of the Quid pro Quo has said he was never pressured to do anything... So please enlighten us all on what crime was committed
1
@maddoxghost man that’s a pretty low IQ comment
1
@Omat Vargas the full transcript has been released. Even anti Trump witnesses to the call say the transcript is accurate. Even Vindman who listened in on the call said said the call was essentially accurate
1