The Impeachment Thread

[VolnJC]

He should testify under oath.

Maybe he will.. he doesn't sound like he needs 2 or 3 takes like Sondland did

 

[Orange_Crush]

So, the ambassador initially testified that there was no quid pro quo, then changed course and testified that he told the Ukrainian president that there was "likely" to be a quid pro quo, yet the Ukrainian President keeps saying that there was never a quid pro quo.

That about cover the best they have and what has Monty giddy with the inevitability of what comes next?

 

[MontyPython]

He should testify under oath.

Could he actually complete a single sentence without lying?

 

[volfanjustin]

Attempt is a crime. Only reason he was thwarted is that enough people complained that he'd gone off the rails.

Nope. Keep trying

 

[MontyPython]

Surely you can come up with more than just assumptions. Where's the Biden in all of this? "Statement on public corruption" isn't quite it. Maybe it might eventually get there but that's where it's got to go for most people.

Here ya go. Now granted, this is second hand. So, we'll see what Sondland and Morrison say under oath soon enough.

US diplomat directly ties Trump to Ukraine quid pro quo

(CNN)The top US diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified Tuesday that he had been told President Donald Trump would withhold military aid to the country until it publicly declared investigations would be launched that could help his reelection chances — including into former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a copy of Taylor's opening statement obtained by CNN.

Taylor said he was told that "everything" Ukraine wanted — from a one-on-one meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to hundreds of millions in security aid — was dependent on publicly announcing an investigation that included Burisma, the company that hired Biden's son Hunter, and Ukraine's alleged involvement in the 2016 election.

 

[37L1]

Here ya go. Now granted, this is second hand. So, we'll see what Sondland and Morrison say under oath soon enough.

US diplomat directly ties Trump to Ukraine quid pro quo

(CNN)The top US diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified Tuesday that he had been told President Donald Trump would withhold military aid to the country until it publicly declared investigations would be launched that could help his reelection chances — including into former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a copy of Taylor's opening statement obtained by CNN.

Taylor said he was told that "everything" Ukraine wanted — from a one-on-one meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to hundreds of millions in security aid — was dependent on publicly announcing an investigation that included Burisma, the company that hired Biden's son Hunter, and Ukraine's alleged involvement in the 2016 election.

Well, Burisma does start with a "B" so you're getting warmer.

 

[BigOrangeD]

WHISTLING IN THE DARK
JASON CHAFFETZ: Why nobody – not even Dems - believes Adam Schiff

 

[Orange_Crush]

Here ya go. Now granted, this is second hand. So, we'll see what Sondland and Morrison say under oath soon enough.

US diplomat directly ties Trump to Ukraine quid pro quo

(CNN)The top US diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified Tuesday that he had been told President Donald Trump would withhold military aid to the country until it publicly declared investigations would be launched that could help his reelection chances — including into former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a copy of Taylor's opening statement obtained by CNN.

Taylor said he was told that "everything" Ukraine wanted — from a one-on-one meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to hundreds of millions in security aid — was dependent on publicly announcing an investigation that included Burisma, the company that hired Biden's son Hunter, and Ukraine's alleged involvement in the 2016 election.

Photo of his source:

 

[hog88]

He should testify under oath.

I'd like to see Schiff subpoena a foreign minister.

 

[hUTch2002]

There’s nothing contradictory in my post.

Talk about moving goalposts... if you just take them down, nobody can score.

All your “evidence” is hearsay and conjecture. There’s absolutely no direct evidence of a crime.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Well, Burisma does start with a "B" so you're getting warmer.

Burisma,
Ukraine,
Let's
Levy
Some
Hearsay
Into
This

 

[MontyPython]

Well, Burisma does start with a "B" so you're getting warmer.

Rudy brings it altogether though...

WaPo

May 11, 2019

"...Giuliani admitted he was going to Ukraine in his capacity as Trump’s personal lawyer to push for investigations that could help Trump.

"We’re not meddling in an election; we’re meddling in an investigation, which we have a right to do,” Giuliani told Vogel."

 

[VolnJC]

Here ya go. Now granted, this is second hand. So, we'll see what Sondland and Morrison say under oath soon enough.

US diplomat directly ties Trump to Ukraine quid pro quo

(CNN)The top US diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified Tuesday that he had been told President Donald Trump would withhold military aid to the country until it publicly declared investigations would be launched that could help his reelection chances — including into former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a copy of Taylor's opening statement obtained by CNN.

Taylor said he was told that "everything" Ukraine wanted — from a one-on-one meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to hundreds of millions in security aid — was dependent on publicly announcing an investigation that included Burisma, the company that hired Biden's son Hunter, and Ukraine's alleged involvement in the 2016 election.

Do you think anything will change with this testimony? You guys are really starting to look pathetic
NSC Official Tim Morrison To Schiff: Nothing Illegal In Trump-Zelensky Call

 

[RockyTop85]

All your “evidence” is hearsay and conjecture. There’s absolutely no direct evidence of a crime.

You’ll have to try to sell this ******** to somebody else.

 

[Mick]

All your “evidence” is hearsay and conjecture. There’s absolutely no direct evidence of a crime.

Yes there is despite Trump and Co trying to cover it up like catsh!t. There's not enough Kitty Litter on the planet to mask the stench coming from this Administration.

 

[hUTch2002]

You’ll have to try to sell this ******** to somebody else.

And you’ll have to sell your bs someone else. We will see who is right on the end. If there’s definitive proof then he will be removed from office right?

 

[1972 Grad]

Yes there is despite Trump and Co trying to cover it up like catsh!t. There's not enough Kitty Litter on the planet to mask the stench coming from this Administration.

They have some pretty good cat litter available nowadays.

 

[Mick]

And you’ll have to sell your bs someone else. We will see who is right on the end. If there’s definitive proof then he will be removed from office right?

You went from no proof of a crime straight to removal from office. That goalpost is elusive.

 

[BigOrangeD]

Yes there is despite Trump and Co trying to cover it up like catsh!t. There's not enough Kitty Litter on the planet to mask the stench coming from this Administration.

Those are probably all the Obama left over turds.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Those are probably all the Obama left over turds.

Which explains why he has them in a baking pan, and is gobbling them up with a spatula.

 

[hUTch2002]

Yes there is despite Trump and Co trying to cover it up like catsh!t. There's not enough Kitty Litter on the planet to mask the stench coming from this Administration.

Lovely picture you have there. Obviously, I don’t see it the way you do Mick. Even if you say Trump withheld aid until Ukraine began investigation, which is not shown by anything more than assumptions and hearsay at this point, you’ll never be able to prove the investigation being referenced is about the 2020 election and not the 2016 election.

 

[RockyTop85]

And you’ll have to sell your bs someone else. We will see who is right on the end. If there’s definitive proof then he will be removed from office right?

I’m not the one who keeps saying “lalalala I don’t see any evidence here.” Maybe you could try, ya know, actually addressing the proof, like the other grown ups in this thread are doing, rather than being blatantly and unabashedly dishonest. You’re unhinged. It’s sad.

Also, lol. Maybe Lindsey “I’m not going to read the transcripts” Graham and the “libertarian” from Kentucky who outs whistleblowers are substitutes for your moral compass. Not mine.

 

[37L1]

You went from no proof of a crime straight to removal from office. That goalpost is elusive.

That's where the goal is, correct?


Otherwise what's the point, other than try to have an impact on the 2020 elections.

This is sounding much like the fall out from the Mueller investigation. There's crime but no conviction? So we move on to the final act, impeachment, where there's crime but no removal from office? How about articles of impeachment that include the crimes uncovered by Mueller and the crimes uncovered by Schiff?

 

[MontyPython]

Lovely picture you have there. Obviously, I don’t see it the way you do Mick. Even if you say Trump withheld aid until Ukraine began investigation, which is not shown by anything more than assumptions and hearsay at this point, you’ll never be able to prove the investigation being referenced is about the 2020 election and not the 2016 election.

Not true. Sondland's WRITTEN testimony, as amended, confirms first hand acknowledgement of the quid pro quo.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Not true. Sondland's WRITTEN testimony, as amended, confirms first hand acknowledgement of the quid pro quo.

Can you link? The only documents I've read say that he claims to have told the Ukraine that the money was "likely" to be withheld. And nothing I've seen indicates that he got that impression from Trump.