The Impeachment Thread

#29,126
#29,126
McDad said:
Does that quote lend credence to what justin posted earlier (aid delayed due to corruption concerns)?
Click to expand...
Only to the degree that Trump's corruption concerns began and ended with a public statement about investigating Biden.
 
#29,129
#29,129
McDad said:
You think Justin's post about corruption or a qpq for biden dirt are equally likely?
Click to expand...

I think the Obama administration wanted them to do something and strong armed them into doing it with money . I think Trump want them to do something and did the same thing . They are all dirty . Where their kids work to me is of no consequence . People in power have always gotten their families jobs . The more power , the better the job . I don’t know if hat answers your question .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill and McDad
#29,132
#29,132
If you believe Trump wanted to investigate corruption, then why did he want the Biden investigation to be announced publicly? Why wouldn’t he just ask the President of Ukraine to investigate it and keep him updated?
 
#29,137
#29,137
McDad said:
Thank you.

Uh guys, Sondland denied any evidence of qpq under cross examination. He was asked directly yes or no and he answered.
Click to expand...
Uh guys, he did not deny that there was quid pro quo, he said there was.
He denied he had any evidence of qpq.
Question the 4 he named....the fact witnesses Trump has silenced.
 
#29,142
#29,142
luthervol said:
Uh guys, he did not deny that there was quid pro quo, he said there was.
He denied he had any evidence of qpq.
Question the 4 he named....the fact witnesses Trump has silenced.
Click to expand...

He said he "perceived" there was a quid pro quo. No one told him there was and the one time he asked POTUS he was told there wasn't one.

His testimony that the only thing he heard from Trump directly was that there wasn't a qpq is a critical fact you keep omitting. Probably the reason the Dems dropped it as a charge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, volfanjustin, McDad and 1 other person
#29,143
#29,143
luthervol said:
Uh guys, he did not deny that there was quid pro quo, he said there was.
He denied he had any evidence of qpq.
Question the 4 he named....the fact witnesses Trump has silenced.
Click to expand...
In the absence of evidence, then we are left only with his credibility.

I cannot understand why anyone finds him credible based solely on what has been shared with me in the last few pages. Dude is all over the map on testimony and quotes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#29,145
#29,145
McDad said:
Why is Sondland credible to you? He seems to be all over the place?

Also, did you see the clip @Obsessed posted?
Click to expand...
Because he is a Trump guy who didn't want to testify and had to amend his statements as additional info came to light.
He had no desire to implicate Trump, just the opposite. And given all that, he still had to implicate Trump.
 
#29,147
#29,147
luthervol said:
Because he is a Trump guy who didn't want to testify and had to amend his statements as additional info came to light.
He had no desire to implicate Trump, just the opposite. And given all that, he still had to implicate Trump.
Click to expand...

Did you watch the video Luther? He did not implicate Trump he exonerated him.
 
#29,148
#29,148
volinbham said:
He said he "perceived" there was a quid pro quo. No one told him there was and the one time he asked POTUS he was told there wasn't one.

His testimony that the only thing he heard from Trump directly was that there wasn't a qpq is a critical fact you keep omitting. Probably the reason the Dems dropped it as a charge.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Is everything you posted about his testimony factually accurate?
 
#29,149
#29,149
McDad said:
In the absence of evidence, then we are left only with his credibility.

I cannot understand why anyone finds him credible based solely on what has been shared with me in the last few pages. Dude is all over the map on testimony and quotes.
Click to expand...

And he says when he asked Trump he was told directly that there is no qpq. Add that to the fact that his first testimony was that there wasn't qpq but later after "thinking about it" he wanted to amend his testimony he "perceived" there was = no compelling evidence.

There's a reason the Dems dropped a charge of qpq or bribery or extortion - they didn't have the goods and refused to press a court challenge to compel more testimony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill and FLVOL69
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top