The House didn't issue any subpoenas related to the impeachment investigation before October 31st. They don't exist.
Funny how you're unable to respond to all the evidence that's been presented that disproves your "the subpoenas don't exist" nonsense theory other than saying you're not discussing whether or they exist.
No, you are discussing whether Pompeo received a subpoena or not. I am discussing the fact that you can't produce any actual subpoena
Pompeo confirmed he received the subpoena. How about explaining your theory on why he would confirm that he received the subpoena if he didn't. Same with Rudy.
Calling it evidence isn't evidence of anything but your desire to accept information without verification.
Admit:
You haven't read an actual subpoena.
You can't produce a copy of the actual subpoena.
Everything else is irrelevant distraction. Its just one accusation after another always skipping over the facts and documentation. This time I am calling you out. Prove that a subpoena was issued by The House related to the impeachment proceedings prior to October 31st. Failure to do so is 100% proof you believe what you are told based on confirmation bias, not based on facts or documentation. Either it exists and you have read it, and it can be provided, or it doesn't and you can't. Since you can't provide it, you are now insisting a fiction existed simply because you declare it reality. That is not how logic or burden of proof works. Produce the subpoena.
Pompeo says the subpoena exists. This is good enough evidence for anybody willing to be honest about using deductive reasoning. Its not about semantics. Its about you being unable to admit when you are wrong.
Pompeo isn't the magic subpoena machine man. Subpoenas are public court documents. You swear this document exists yet you can not produce it. Admit you have never seen it and you can't prove it ever existed. The burden of proof is yours, and hearsay doesn't count.
I admit I haven't seen it. I believe it exists because the man being subpoenaed referenced its existence several times. Mike Pompeo never said "the subpoena doesn't exist"; you did. Why would Pompeo say he received a subpoena if it doesn't exist?
At least you can admit it is just a belief. Mike Pompeo also never said he has 4 testicles. Does that mean Mike Pompeo doesn't have 4 testicles? Why don't you check while you are busy thinking of new distractions from the point. It doesn't matter why Mike Pompeo didn't say he had 4 testicles. It matters you cant prove the subpoena exists.
