Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The main issue there in our last sentence is that this is not just some person simply having an issue with the president. It is someone who went through a legal process to shine some light on what was going on. The president and his staff that tried to cover that complaint u. So your theory of "if every time, etc. etc. already doesn't hold up because this is basically the first time it has happened. And instead of allowing the complaint to go to Congress, Trump has fought it all the way.
As far as your allegation that the whistleblower is a "peon' maybe you have information on who they are that none of the rest of us do.
Everything that is legal is not always ethical. Adultery is legal, so is burning our flag, it doesn't make it right
“Everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was legal.”
Martin Luther King
Page 1, the whistleblower clearly states this all second hand hearsay. Everything after that is document formatting meant to distract you from the simple fact that entire document is based on hearsay.
The two most direct "witnesses" to the call are Trump and Zelensky, and Zelensky's commentary is pretty clarifying about what he thought, since he is the one doing the thinking. Schiff et al are trying to say Trump "leaned" on him, and the person they are credited with being leaned on denies any such thing happened, agrees that that transcript shows a largely pleasant, congratulatory conversation, and oh by the way, we'd BOTH like to figure out all the meddling crap in 2016.
Got that? The person on the other end of that call is 100% backing up Trump. Who would have a better bead on how Zelensky was to take what Trump was saying than Zelensky himself?
Never forget, part of this whole thing is to also discredit Zelensky, since a bunch of the DC swamp dwellers are pissed off that the puppet they installed (Poroshenko) after their successful coup of Yanukovych had been soundly thrashed by the Ukrainian version of Trump. It took like 3 seconds after the second round of the election to start undermining Zelensky as a puppet of Putin, servant of oligarchs, etc. Poroshenko was the political-media complex chosen guy, hand picked back in 2014, and this hugely popular, "inexperienced" (per Poroshenko's low rent concession tweet) president elect really wrecked the deep state's plans.
There's more to this than just Trump. And remember, Porshenko was chosen by the Obama administration after they ousted Yanukovych, and part of the Biden story is that Poroshenko was in hock to them before he ever got sworn in, and he knew it, and that's why Biden clowned about it. Poroshenko was put there to be their crony, and Biden was bragging on how he reminded him of who the boss was.
Zelensky, Boris Johnson, Trump et al...these are the peoples' choices, and it is pissing off the global political elite something fierce, and this nonsense in our Congress is the latest illustration o their continued frustrations.
Zelensky, Boris Johnson, Trump et al...these are the peoples' choices, and it is pissing off the global political elite something fierce, and this nonsense in our Congress is the latest illustration o their continued frustrations.[/quote]
Trump became President due to the electoral college. He was not the people's choice. He lost by 3 million votes. The people wanted Hillary. They got Trump. Pretty clear the people were right.
I haven't read the report yet myself. But if what is claimed turns out to be true, Trump has broken another law and basically admitted to his actions publicly (although he seems confused as to the legality of his actions, he freely admits doing them).
Let's see how it plays out.
Wow, lets impeach on what the media is telling you - maybe you should read the transcript instead.
You should have offered more choices. This may be what it takes to get rid of him. If it's not, he won't be convicted by a Senate which cares nothing about preserving the rule of law.
This is all about Biden bragging in 2018 to the Council on Foreign Relations about withholding US funds to Ukraine while VP - here is his statement;
Quote:
“I remember going over, convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from [then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko] and from [then-Prime Minister Arseniy] Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor [Shokin]. And they didn’t…They were walking out to a press conference. I said, ‘Nah, … We’re not going to give you the billion dollars.’ They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president.’ … I said, ‘Call him.’ I said, ‘I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars.’ … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b----. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”
BTW the prosecutor he asked to be fired was investigating his son at the time
You should have offered more choices. This may be what it takes to get rid of him. If it's not, he won't be convicted by a Senate which cares nothing about preserving the rule of law.
Not being convicted couldn't possibly be because the Senate does not think he committed an impeachable offence. You are openly showing what a farce this is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.