The Impeachment Thread

#29,003
#29,003
BowlBrother85 said:
Per Politifact:

Trump placed a hold on the military aid just a few days prior to the July 25th phone call with Zelensky. The hold was lifted on September 11th... However, the whistleblower complaint had been filed on August 12th. So, the funds were withheld for about 7 weeks. The Trump White House had been fighting against the complaint being released to the House Oversight Committee, but once they realized that they wouldn't be getting any support from Mitch McConnell and the Senate on withholding the complaint from Congress, they lifted the hold and then submitted the whistleblower's complaint to Congress.
Click to expand...
Once aid is passed is it immediately distributed or is it ever delayed (even for non partisan reasons)?
 
#29,005
#29,005
BowlBrother85 said:
That is not what Gordon Sondland said at all... So, you are wrong.
Click to expand...
It damn sure is, for some reason you stopped watching and listening after your bug eyed boy ran to the cameras. Every single witness said no quid pro quo and no bribery

Facts:
The aid was given in fact even more than the socialists hero Barack Hussein o
No investigation was started into the corrupt Biden crime family
None of that is disputable
 
#29,007
#29,007
volfanjustin said:
It damn sure is, for some reason you stopped watching and listening after your bug eyed boy ran to the cameras. Every single witness said no quid pro quo and no bribery

Facts:
The aid was given in fact even more than the socialists hero Barack Hussein o
No investigation was started into the corrupt Biden crime family
None of that is disputable
Click to expand...
No. That is not what Gordon Sondland testified to before the House Oversight Committee. Sondland said that he "presumed" that there was a quid-pro-quo. Now, some of Trump's supporters pounced on the word "presumed" but it was Sondland's understanding that there was a quid-pro-quo ultimatum being presented from the Trump Administration to the Ukrainian government. Basically, the Ukraine wouldn't get the $391 million in military aid which Congress had authorized, unless President Zelensky went on CNN and announced that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens... and Zelensky had a scheduled appearance on CNN in August. It was going to happen.
 
#29,009
#29,009
volfanjustin said:
55 days I think. Trump wanted to make sure the new leadership wasn’t corrupt like the pervious ones were.
Click to expand...
That is absolutely ridiculous. Trump never even mentioned the word "corruption" on the July 25th phone call with President Zelensky. He only mentioned investigating "the Bidens". And get real, since when has Trump ever shown any concern for rooting out corruption? Trump has kept self-dealing cabinet members such as Scott Pruitt, Ryan Zinke, Tom Price, Wilbur Ross and Elaine Chao around. Trump and Giuliani have both done personal business in the Ukraine in the past. That doesn't wash.
 
#29,010
#29,010
BowlBrother85 said:
No. That is not what Gordon Sondland testified to before the House Oversight Committee. Sondland said that he "presumed" that there was a quid-pro-quo. Now, some of Trump's supporters pounced on the word "presumed" but it was Sondland's understanding that there was a quid-pro-quo ultimatum being presented from the Trump Administration to the Ukrainian government. Basically, the Ukraine wouldn't get the $391 million in military aid which Congress had authorized, unless President Zelensky went on CNN and announced that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens... and Zelensky had a scheduled appearance on CNN in August. It was going to happen.
Click to expand...
Right he presumed that which means nothing. After the break he said he had no evidence of a quid pro quo or bribery. It’s clear you turned it off after bug eyes ran to the dnc media cameras.
when asked if Trump wanted a quid pro quo he said no
Also Zelensky said he was never pressured
 
#29,011
#29,011
BowlBrother85 said:
That is absolutely ridiculous. Trump never even mentioned the word "corruption" on the July 25th phone call with President Zelensky. He only mentioned investigating "the Bidens". And get real, since when has Trump ever shown any concern for rooting out corruption? Trump has kept self-dealing cabinet members such as Scott Pruitt, Ryan Zinke, Tom Price, Wilbur Ross and Elaine Chao around. Trump and Giuliani have both done personal business in the Ukraine in the past. That doesn't wash.
Click to expand...
He also never mentioned a quid pro quo or bribery
 
#29,012
#29,012
#29,014
#29,014
volfanjustin said:
Right he presumed that which means nothing. After the break he said he had no evidence of a quid pro quo or bribery. It’s clear you turned it off after bug eyes ran to the dnc media cameras.
when asked if Trump wanted a quid pro quo he said no
Also Zelensky said he was never pressured
Click to expand...
No, it means that Gordon Sondland's working understanding, was that there was a quid-pro-quo ultimatum being presented from the Trump Administration to the Ukrainian government. President Zelensky would get his White House visit and the $391 million in military aid, AFTER he went on CNN and announced that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens.

For what it is worth, Zelensky never did get the White House visit.
 
#29,015
#29,015
BowlBrother85 said:
Those are Trump's claims after the fact... He has also tried to say that he withheld the military aid because he wanted European countries to share in the burden of supporting the Ukraine but that doesn't wash either because the European countries were never made aware of the hold in the first place.
Click to expand...

Team Trump legal strategy: throw it all at the wall, see what sticks.

 
#29,016
#29,016
BowlBrother85 said:
No, it means that Gordon Sondland's working understanding, was that there was a quid-pro-quo ultimatum being presented from the Trump Administration to the Ukrainian government. President Zelensky would get his White House visit and the $391 million in military aid, AFTER he went on CNN and announced that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens.

For what it is worth, Zelensky never did get the White House visit.
Click to expand...
You simply repeat meaningless talking points from the dnc media and bug eyes. If this had been Barry there would be 0% you would be calling for impeachment
This is the weakest charge for impeachment in our country’s history
You all will regret this as it will come back on your side one day
 
#29,017
#29,017
volfanjustin said:
He also never mentioned a quid pro quo or bribery
Click to expand...
Is that how a person announces a quid-pro-quo offer or a bribe? "Hey, Bob! Let me see if I can bribe you with an offer!"

That is being defensive to the point of being obstinate. Nobody talks that way. A bribe is easily inferred from the text of the July 25th conversation. Juries are instructed that it is acceptable to make such inferences when reaching a verdict.
 
#29,018
#29,018
Septic said:
Fox poll says 50% want impeachment AND removal.

That's a Fox poll. FOX. F.O.X.

Also, 50%, that's awful. Half of 'Murica, that's more than the totality of the Dems, it must include some independents as well.

MW-HW956_0c8221_NS_20191215131701.png
Click to expand...
Uhhh do you think a fox poll just surveys fox viewers 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and volfanjustin
#29,019
#29,019
BowlBrother85 said:
Those are Trump's claims after the fact... He has also tried to say that he withheld the military aid because he wanted European countries to share in the burden of supporting the Ukraine but that doesn't wash either because the European countries were never made aware of the hold in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's all like they had to do on The Apprentice back in the day--Trump would make an inexplicable "firing" and then the producers had to scramble to piece together a story that made sense to support it.
 
#29,020
#29,020
BowlBrother85 said:
Is that how a person announces a quid-pro-quo offer or a bribe? "Hey, Bob! Let me see if I can bribe you with an offer!"

That is being defensive to the point of being obstinate. Nobody talks that way. A bribe is easily inferred from the text of the July 25th conversation. Juries are instructed that it is acceptable to make such inferences when reaching a verdict.
Click to expand...
Good luck on that conviction is the Senate lib. Also don’t be surprised if Manchin votes with the Rs
 
#29,024
#29,024
0nelilreb said:
You were the original one I asked the question to because you said it was a shame for someone to give up their principles just to keep their job . Like everything else , I expected the tap dance routine explaining how one ( the Rs ) was going to be worse than the other ( the Ds) . LG says all should be let go , you say one is worse than the other . Interesting views .
Click to expand...
I gave rationale.
And I'm more than good with voting any of them out that so grossly sacrifice their principles just to keep their job.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top