You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
People attempting to forum slide and disrupt this board in contravention of Q's call for unity through patriotism may be banned
What is Q related? Anything involving Trump. Politics, Fake news, Censorship, Pizzagate, lluminati, New World Order, Secret Societies, Mk-Ultra, False Flags, Q proofs, etc...
Also, corruption in the following areas...
Government, Entertainment industry, celebrities, charities, corporations, etc...
No Pornographic Material Allowed
Continually harassing users can get your post/comment removed and you possibly banned. Threats of violence against other users or their family members are not allowed on v/GreatAwakening
Those belong in the comment section. If you need help, you can ping a mod, or PM us.
Posts need to be Q related. Not for attacking other users.
GAM is the new place for all things drama/mods/other users pertaining to v/GreatAwakening.
No usernames imitating mods
Misc reasons
Voat Rules
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
[+]Double_D0 points0 points0 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Double_D0 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
I've been posing this question lately:
I was told the house's case was "overwhelming" and "irrefutable". If that's the case, why the need for Bolton to testify? If Bolton's testimony is so integral to their case, how did they pass impeachment in the house without it? Am I to believe that the house passed articles with insufficient evidence?
I then go on to tell them that, considering the GOP was barred from calling witnesses in the house, I'd be happy to see them call some in the senate.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Double_D ago (edited ago)
I've been posing this question lately:
I was told the house's case was "overwhelming" and "irrefutable". If that's the case, why the need for Bolton to testify? If Bolton's testimony is so integral to their case, how did they pass impeachment in the house without it? Am I to believe that the house passed articles with insufficient evidence?
I then go on to tell them that, considering the GOP was barred from calling witnesses in the house, I'd be happy to see them call some in the senate.
Haven't gotten a logical response yet.