The Impeachment Thread

Wrong. I'm likely older than you. And just stop it. There's plenty of basis for investigating Trump.

You're not, and it was obviously sarcasm.
No, there was no basis for investigation Trump; the result of the FBI and 'Mueller' probes glaringly speak to that assertion. How can you even say that with a straight face after 3 years of Trump-Russiaaahhh! false narrative.

Pappadopoulos had no inkling of any Russian dirt on Clinton until Joseph Mifsud laid it on him. According to Mueller, Mifsud has fairly extensive ties to Russian intelligence. Game on, right? Well, no, Mifsud is widely known in intel circles as having extremely deep ties to Italisan and Western intel agencies, including OURS. And there is NO alarm that he has ever acted on behalf of or is a Russian asset. Mueller didn't tell the country that. Why do you think?

Besides, Russia likely having Clinton emails has been in the news cycle for months. How can something that flimsy form the basis of an FBI counter-intel investigation into the Trump campaign??

But I'm not finished.
Carter Page was depicted as having deep ties to Russian agents, including a 2013 scenario when approached by Russkies. FBI met to give him a defensive briefing in which they found Page was absolutely NOT working with Russian agents and posed no threat. In fact, Page assisted with the investigation and conviction of those Russians who'd not fled the reach of U.S. law.

Characteristically, FBI used HALF of that history - the shadowy Russia links - while omitting the exculpatory information.
But I'm not finished.
FBI not only omitted that exculpatory information, but disregarding being told by CIA on at least two separate occasions that Page was a CIA asset. And FALSIFIED the FISC applications for warrants on him by stating he was NOT a U.S. intel asset and highlighting the Russia shite. That OGC lead counselor is going to be criminally indicted, having already been referred by Horowitz.

So, there's the genesis of the FBI and Mueller probes; completely bogus. But we knew that by the results.

Further, Barr has concluded that by Jan. 2017, the FBI case had completely collapsed since the dossier's anchor informant to Steele told FBI "Uh, no; not only can I not confirm what the dossier information but I didn't tell Steele that, that, and that....." The FBI investigation should have ended THERE, and never should have been a Mueller investigation.

Wake. Up.
 
No disinformation peddling done by him. All the disinformation was peddled by the Clowns under Obama.
John Solomon published disinformation on the Hill, provided to him by Rudy Giuliani, which Giuliani then used as his own source of information when he was a guest on Fox News. It was a circle jerk.
 
You're not, and it was obviously sarcasm.
No, there was no basis for investigation Trump; the result of the FBI and 'Mueller' probes glaringly speak to that assertion. How can you even say that with a straight face after 3 years of Trump-Russiaaahhh! false narrative.

Pappadopoulos had no inkling of any Russian dirt on Clinton until Joseph Mifsud laid it on him. According to Mueller, Mifsud has fairly extensive ties to Russian intelligence. Game on, right? Well, no, Mifsud is widely known in intel circles as having extremely deep ties to Italisan and Western intel agencies, including OURS. And there is NO alarm that he has ever acted on behalf of or is a Russian asset. Mueller didn't tell the country that. Why do you think?

Besides, Russia likely having Clinton emails has been in the news cycle for months. How can something that flimsy form the basis of an FBI counter-intel investigation into the Trump campaign??

But I'm not finished.
Carter Page was depicted as having deep ties to Russian agents, including a 2013 scenario when approached by Russkies. FBI met to give him a defensive briefing in which they found Page was absolutely NOT working with Russian agents and posed no threat. In fact, Page assisted with the investigation and conviction of those Russians who'd not fled the reach of U.S. law.

Characteristically, FBI used HALF of that history - the shadowy Russia links - while omitting the exculpatory information.
But I'm not finished.
FBI not only omitted that exculpatory information, but disregarding being told by CIA on at least two separate occasions that Page was a CIA asset. And FALSIFIED the FISC applications for warrants on him by stating he was NOT a U.S. intel asset and highlighting the Russia shite. That OGC lead counselor is going to be criminally indicted, having already been referred by Horowitz.

So, there's the genesis of the FBI and Mueller probes; completely bogus. But we knew that by the results.

Further, Barr has concluded that by Jan. 2017, the FBI case had completely collapsed since the dossier's anchor informant to Steele told FBI "Uh, no; not only can I not confirm what the dossier information but I didn't tell Steele that, that, and that....." The FBI investigation should have ended THERE, and never should have been a Mueller investigation.

Wake. Up.
You sure do like to post a lot of long-winded horse $hit. Nobody wants to read through a tome on here.
 
You can read the link Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns … with the facts | John Solomon Reports yourself, I'm posting the first 2/3rds; follow the dates to see how they contradict Reuters:

Fact 1: Hunter Biden was hired in May 2014 by Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company, at a time when his father Joe Biden was Vice President and overseeing US-Ukraine Policy. Here is the announcement. Hunter Biden’s hiring came just a few short weeks after Joe Biden urged Ukraine to expand natural gas production and use Americans to help. You can read his comments to the Ukrainian prime minister here. Hunter Biden’s firm then began receiving monthly payments totaling $166,666. You can see those payments here.

Fact 2: Burisma was under investigation by British authorities for corruption and soon came under investigation by Ukrainian authorities led by Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

Fact 3: Vice President Joe Biden and his office were alerted by a December 2015 New York Times article that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma and that Hunter Biden’s role at the company was undercutting his father’s anticorruption efforts in Ukraine.

Fact 4: The Biden-Burisma issue created the appearance of a conflict of interest, especially for State Department officials. I especially refer you to State official George Kent’s testimony here. He testified he viewed Burisma as corrupt and the Bidens as creating the perception of a conflict of interest. His concerns both caused him to contact the vice president’s office and to block a project that State’s USAID agency was planning with Burisma in 2016. In addition, Ambassador Yovanovitch testified she, too, saw the Bidens-Burisma connection as creating the appearance of a conflict of interest. You can read her testimony here.

Fact 5: The Obama White House invited Shokin’s prosecutorial team to Washington for meetings in January 2016 to discuss their anticorruption investigations. You can read about that here. Also, here is the official agenda for that meeting in Ukraine and English. I call your attention to the NSC organizer of the meeting.

Fact 6: The Ukraine investigation of Hunter Biden’s employer, Burisma Holdings, escalated in February 2016 when Shokin’s office raided the home of company owner Mykola Zlochevsky and seized his property. Here is the announcement of that court-approved raid.

Fact 7: Shokin was making plans in February 2016 to interview Hunter Biden as part of his investigation. You can read his interview with me here, his sworn deposition to a court here and his interview with ABC News here.

Fact 8: Burisma’s American representatives lobbied the State Department in late February 2016 to help end the corruption allegations against the company, and specifically invoked Hunter Biden’s name as a reason to intervene. You can read State officials’ account of that effort here

Fact 9: Joe Biden boasted in a 2018 videotape that he forced Ukraine’s president to fire Shokin in March 2016 by threatening to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid. You can view his videotape here.

Fact 10: Shokin stated in interviews with me and ABC News that he was told he was fired because Joe Biden was unhappy the Burisma investigation wasn’t shut down. He made that claim anew in this sworn deposition prepared for a court in Europe. You can read that here.

Fact 11: The day Shokin’s firing was announced in March 2016, Burisma’s legal representatives sought an immediate meeting with his temporary replacement to address the ongoing investigation. You can read the text of their emails here.

Fact 12: Burisma’s legal representatives secured that meeting April 6, 2016 and told Ukrainian prosecutors that “false information” had been spread to justify Shokin’s firing, according to a Ukrainian government memo about the meeting. The representatives also offered to arrange for the remaining Ukrainian prosecutors to meet with U.S State and Justice officials. You can read the Ukrainian prosecutors’ summary memo of the meeting here and here and the Burisma lawyers’ invite to Washington here.

Fact 13: Burisma officials eventually settled the Ukraine investigations in late 2016 and early 2017, paying a multimillion dollar fine for tax issues. You can read their lawyer’s February 2017 announcement of the end of the investigations here.

Fact 14: In March 2019, Ukraine authorities reopened an investigation against Burisma and Zlochevsky based on new evidence of money laundering. You can read NABU’s February 2019 recommendation to re-open the case here, the March 2019 notice of suspicion by Ukraine prosecutors here and a May 2019 interview here with a Ukrainian senior law enforcement official stating the investigation was ongoing. And here is an announcement this week that the Zlochevsky/Burisma probe has been expanded to include allegations of theft of Ukrainian state funds.

Fact 15: The Ukraine embassy in Washington issued a statement in April 2019 admitting that a Democratic National Committee contractor named Alexandra Chalupa solicited Ukrainian officials in spring 2016 for dirt on Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort in hopes of staging a congressional hearing close to the 2016 election that would damage Trump’s election chances. You can read the embassy’s statement here and here. Your colleague, Dr. Fiona Hill, confirmed this episode, testifying “Ukraine bet on the wrong horse. They bet on Hillary Clinton winning.” You can read her testimony here.

Fact 16: Chalupa sent an email to top DNC officials in May 2016 acknowledging she was working on the Manafort issue. You can read the email here.

Fact 17: Ukraine’s ambassador to Washington, Valeriy Chaly, wrote an OpEd in The Hill in August 2016 slamming GOP nominee Donald Trump for his policies on Russia despite a Geneva Convention requirement that ambassadors not become embroiled in the internal affairs or elections of their host countries. You can read Ambassador Chaly’s OpEd here and the Geneva Convention rules of conduct for foreign diplomats here. And your colleagues Ambassador Yovanovitch and Dr. Hill both confirmed this, with Dr. Hill testifying this week that Chaly’s OpEd was “probably not the most advisable thing to do.”

Fact 18: A Ukrainian district court ruled in December 2018 that the summer 2016 release of information by Ukrainian Parliamentary member Sergey Leschenko and NABU director Artem Sytnyk about an ongoing investigation of Manafort amounted to an improper interference by Ukraine’s government in the 2016 U.S. election. You can read the court ruling here. Leschenko and Sytnyk deny the allegations, and have won an appeal to suspend that ruling on a jurisdictional technicality.

Again, U.S. media, congressional Democrats, FBI, CIA, and Rosenstein's DOJ have shown NO interest in the scope of Ukraine meddling in 2016, and the DNC and Clinton's "coordination and conspiracy" of it, just like they ignored the utter foundation of the FBI and Mueller probes; the Clinton/DNC funded Steele dossier.

Now, at least, you have ten times the information to digest than you had before.

Thank you. I am glad someone put a timeline on the events. Very detailed and footnoted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
John Solomon published disinformation on the Hill, provided to him by Rudy Giuliani, which Giuliani then used as his own source of information when he was a guest on Fox News. It was a circle jerk.
That is spin but that is exactly what happened with the FBI and the Media against Trump.
 
You're not, and it was obviously sarcasm.
No, there was no basis for investigation Trump; the result of the FBI and 'Mueller' probes glaringly speak to that assertion. How can you even say that with a straight face after 3 years of Trump-Russiaaahhh! false narrative.

Pappadopoulos had no inkling of any Russian dirt on Clinton until Joseph Mifsud laid it on him. According to Mueller, Mifsud has fairly extensive ties to Russian intelligence. Game on, right? Well, no, Mifsud is widely known in intel circles as having extremely deep ties to Italisan and Western intel agencies, including OURS. And there is NO alarm that he has ever acted on behalf of or is a Russian asset. Mueller didn't tell the country that. Why do you think?

Besides, Russia likely having Clinton emails has been in the news cycle for months. How can something that flimsy form the basis of an FBI counter-intel investigation into the Trump campaign??

But I'm not finished.
Carter Page was depicted as having deep ties to Russian agents, including a 2013 scenario when approached by Russkies. FBI met to give him a defensive briefing in which they found Page was absolutely NOT working with Russian agents and posed no threat. In fact, Page assisted with the investigation and conviction of those Russians who'd not fled the reach of U.S. law.

Characteristically, FBI used HALF of that history - the shadowy Russia links - while omitting the exculpatory information.
But I'm not finished.
FBI not only omitted that exculpatory information, but disregarding being told by CIA on at least two separate occasions that Page was a CIA asset. And FALSIFIED the FISC applications for warrants on him by stating he was NOT a U.S. intel asset and highlighting the Russia shite. That OGC lead counselor is going to be criminally indicted, having already been referred by Horowitz.

So, there's the genesis of the FBI and Mueller probes; completely bogus. But we knew that by the results.

Further, Barr has concluded that by Jan. 2017, the FBI case had completely collapsed since the dossier's anchor informant to Steele told FBI "Uh, no; not only can I not confirm what the dossier information but I didn't tell Steele that, that, and that....." The FBI investigation should have ended THERE, and never should have been a Mueller investigation.

Wake. Up.

You older than 56?
 
That nonsense from John Solomon? He has no credibility left. He made himself a part of the story itself with his lack of professionalism.
Go ahead bring your facts that refute what NCFisher posted. Or you can go on with your tl,dr and dismissal based upon who reported it. Show that what he posted is "garbage" by proving that it is with facts that clearly indicate that is so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
I dont understand the layers of this debate. It is simply beyond question that Trump held up the aid to get a political favor. Any argument otherwise has been soundly disproved.

The only debate is the consequence. Removal or not. That's it.
 
Go ahead bring your facts that refute what NCFisher posted. Or you can go on with your tl,dr and dismissal based upon who reported it. Show that what he posted is "garbage" by proving that it is with facts that clearly indicate that is so.
What NCFisher posted, is what John Solomon wrote. It's not worth the trouble to respond to someone who has already been roundly discredited. The Hill has disavowed his columns. Find a better source and I will.
 
I dont understand the layers of this debate. It is simply beyond question that Trump held up the aid to get a political favor. Any argument otherwise has been soundly disproved.

The only debate is the consequence. Removal or not. That's it.
Just move along LG. Your late for your Antifa Rally protesting Christmas anyway, right.?:)
 
What NCFisher posted, is what John Solomon wrote. It's not worth the trouble to respond to someone who has already been roundly discredited. The Hill has disavowed his columns. Find a better source and I will.
You chicken? If he's so discredited and what he writes is so biased and false, one would think it would be relatively simple to prove all that, wouldn't one?
 
I believe it was a Lib reporter that did not support his statements. No proof of anything as to being incorrect.
One of John Solomon's most significant accusations was that Marie Yovanovitch provided a "do not prosecute" list to Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuri Lutsenko. Lutsenko now says that did not happen.
 
You’ve said several times that you love this country. Do you believe that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms and that our citizens are afforded those rights unconditionally?
Yes, I believe in the 2nd amendment. Not any citizen is afforded those rights unconditionally though.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top