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.
Trump released aid within the time allotted. end of story.
Obama sends blankets and food, drops them off in Poland to avoid annoying Putin, Feona hill write an op ed sending arms to Ukraine will aggravate Russia. Media is fine with Obama's tip of the hat to putin. Dems see no problem. All the while a hot war is taking place.
Trump send weaponry directly to Ukraine and other aid within the allowed time frame and dems and media claim US security in danger. the Ukraine is the threshold to Europe and because of Trump Europe has been endangered.
See the absurdity of the dems position and absolute distortion of laws, lies, false headlines and rumors to remove him from office????? the rest of the country does. And voters just can't wait for Nov 2020.
What is absurd are the foregoing rationalizations for bad behavior. Releasing aid months after it should have been is like your teenager putting the $100 bill back in your wallet a week later - "see, dad, I didn't steal it after all." What moron would their kid get away with a stunt like that?
Last edited by Ariadne22; 11-27-2019 at 01:18 PM..
Yes, and most damning of all - it could all be PUT TO REST - if Trump would allow witnesses to testify.
But, of course, he can't - because they would be perjuring themselves. So, the time-worn tactic of delay, stall, delay, don't comply with subpeonas is the fallback defense. Because he HAS NO DEFENSE.
Even Sen. Kennedy (Rep., Louisiana) no longer attempts to maintain there was no a quid pro quo on military aid. He called that a "red herring" or distraction on Chris Wallace last Sunday. An inquiry should not be focused on what Trump did but must first investigate Hunter Biden. Not even Joe Biden, but Hunter.
Here we have a POTUS accusing a former VPOTUS of an action that in turn leads to allegations made against the POTUS. What should the United States do to address a matter so serious that it itself is a political crisis?
Go off to investigate a private U.S. citizen who has no direct connection to either individual except that he is the excuse being used by the former because he is related to the latter.
I think we should withhold all foreign aid to everybody. Balance the budget, pay off the debt, and then take another look at giving 10% of what these countries were getting before.
American taxpayers shouldn't have to finance everyone with their hands out.
I think we should withhold all foreign aid to everybody. Balance the budget, pay off the debt, and then take another look at giving 10% of what these countries were getting before.
American taxpayers shouldn't have to finance everyone with their hands out.
Sen. Graham finally started an inquiry where he asked for transcripts of Biden calls to then-president Poroshenko - with the dates beginning two months after the trip described in that video. John Solomon had the timeline wrong.
There are major flaws with the Shokin comments (not the least of which they are being solicited for specific reasons years after the fact about a man involved in firing him for corruption). Shokin leaves out that Zlochevsky is alleged to have been bribing the prosecutor general before Shokin ($7m) ... that President Poroshenko had deep ties to Zlochevsky ... that even according to Shokin it was Poroshenko who did not want Burisma investigated ... that when Shokin finally prepared his Affidavit it was to be kept confidential and was filed in a Firtash (an oligarch with ties to the Russian mafia) pleading, who thru attorneys working with Giuliani and Parnas approached the DOJ in an attempt to avoid U.S. extradition.
The larger problem is how did Shokin know what he alleged. Joe told him. I only skimmed the document but here it looks like he intimated the then U.S. ambassador (Pyatt) told him in July 2015 that Burisma should be handled with 'white gloves'. But then that same ambassador turned around and criticized Shokin in September 2015 for not investigating Burisma. How much sense does that make? So we have Shokin's guess about a comment that a third party made.
The reality is that Burisma was a highly sensitive issue since someone in the General Prosecutors Office in 2014 torpedoed the UK money laundering investigation into Zlochevsky. And there are allegations the UK prosecutor's office may have wanted certain facts handled carefully (UK prosecutorial malfeasance, corrupt Ukrainians sponsored by the US/IMF?). At that point my eyes begin to glaze over - but whatever those charges may be they have absolutely nothing to do with Hunter Biden.
The Biden video is only an anecdote in response to a question - that does not begin to capture the complexity of how Shokin was removed. But it made a nice sound bite. Trump's mistake was to attempt to turn it into more than that. This is a Giuliani sh*it show. Trump now appears to be trying to distance himself from him - I didn't tell Rudy to go to Ukraine (the other day). Unfortunately, the July 25th transcripts puts Rudy front and center this time in Trump's own words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
52 minute mark of the video. Then read the Ukrainian prosecutors statements about Burisma and the Bidens. The link to the document is there... go to page 61 of the PDF. You get it from Biden and the prosecutors.
Yes, and most damning of all - it could all be PUT TO REST - if Trump would allow witnesses to testify.
But, of course, he can't - because they would be perjuring themselves. So, the time-worn tactic of delay, stall, delay, don't comply with subpeonas is the fallback defense. Because he HAS NO DEFENSE.
Just a deposition from Mulvaney would go a long ways towards clearing this up but here they are attempting to dig up morsels in a failed attempt to explain a rational reason for the delay. Trump wants to drag this out until next summer, he has no interest in establishing the truth.
Just a deposition from Mulvaney would go a long ways towards clearing this up but here they are attempting to dig up morsels in a failed attempt to explain a rational reason for the delay. Trump wants to drag this out until next summer, he has no interest in establishing the truth.
Mulvaney and Bolton will be called to testify at the trial. Trump can no longer claim executive privilege at that point. They will either exonerate Trump or sink his ship. I am fine with either outcome, I just want the truth to come out.
I guess the answer is... only if it's a Republican.
When the special counsel's exhaustive investigation into purported Trump-Russia collusion found no such crime, the fallback claim of obstruction arose. Trump allegedly wanted to curtail Mueller's parameters of inquiry into something that was proven not to be a crime.
Mueller found no grounds for a criminal referral on obstruction of justice. But he repeatedly hinted that Trump had thought about obstructing the non-crime of collusion.
Well that didn't work... remix it and try it again.
In the Ukrainian melodrama, Trump is accused of the thought crime of considering the withholding of military assistance unless Ukraine investigated possible Ukrainian tampering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and also former Vice President Joe Biden's intervention in Ukrainian politics on behalf of his son.
...
Trump is accused of thinking about cutting off aid as a lever to force Ukrainian investigations.
...
Trump is also accused of the thought crime of contemplating bribery. Critics allege that Trump wanted Ukraine to do him a "favor" of inestimable value by launching those investigations.
...
Trump has been accused of thought crimes, not actual crimes. Trump can be indiscreet, even crude, in his speech. But alleged bad thoughts are not crimes -- at least not outside George Orwell's dystopian novel "1984."
Solicitation of a bribe violates Art. II Sec. 4 of the constitution. QPQ, done for personal benefit, violates Art. II Sec. 4
3 people admitted QPQ happened, Mulvaney, Trump and Sondland
Trump violated his oath and the Constitution.
Impeachment is warranted. Impeachment the right way to go.
Then you need to let your girl pelosi know.....because she does not agree with you....she clearly understands what the law and or what she has the ability to accomplish...which you clearly don't....unlike trump supporters.
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.
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.
I only skimmed the document but here it looks like he intimated the then U.S. ambassador (Pyatt) told him in July 2015 that Burisma should be handled with 'white gloves'. But then that same ambassador turned around and criticized Shokin in September 2015 for not investigating Burisma. How much sense does that make? 
So we have Shokin's guess about a comment that a third party made. 
