President's phone call transcript

wing2000 · Sep 27, 2019

Ok. This was a private, classified conversation that was never going to see the light of day, right?

So where is the overt threat that Trump was going to stop aid, or arms deals?

"I would like you to do us a favor" Is this it? This is the threat?[/QUOTE]

No threat. Trump's remark came immediately after the Ukraine PResident noted they were ready for the missles.....

P.S. Watch "The Godfather" or "Goodfellows"....that will give you a clue as to Trump's communication style.

Johan_1988 · Sep 27, 2019

childeye 2 said:
I listened to some of it. The difference I see is that when Trump says corruption he's talking about investigating his own political opponent. When Biden talked about corruption it was about actual corruption.
I Wrote About the Bidens and Ukraine Years Ago. Then the Right-Wing Spin Machine Turned the Story Upside Down.

Like he said it depends on your view of President Trump.You can interpret it that way if you have a natural bias against Trump and the thing is what if Biden did something wrong there by withholding a 1 billion dollar loan to fire a prosecutor whom was apparently corrupt ,but coincidentally was investigating his son's company. It might not have been a the right thing to do, but he simply cannot be impeached by that fact since he did not pressure Ukraine. That is what they call the quid quo pro which if he did it he would be most probably impeached.

essentialsaltes · Sep 27, 2019

hislegacy said:
You judge for yourself

Let's ask a former judge and current Fox News correspondent.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: In Ukraine call, Trump apparently personally and directly committed a crime

The Constitution is quite clear that "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" shall constitute a basis for impeachment.

Was Trump offering to bribe the Ukrainian president? The circumstantial evidence is: Yes. The transcript of Trump's critical conversation with the Ukrainian president shows he asked his counterpart to coordinate with American authorities to prosecute the son of his likely political opponent in 2020. That is the solicitation of something of value from a foreign government -- a felony.

Johan_1988 · Sep 27, 2019

KCfromNC said:
Putting 2 and 2 together, the answer is that the memo is judged bad enough for Donald that it is time to being up both Obama AND Hillary as an excuse. That's pretty bad, even by the low standard normally applied to him.

Well let me put it this way, if you judge him by that standard, it can be used to impeach the others on the same grounds, that is how presidents in law work. A court makes a ruling that can be referenced later in another case to apply the law in that manner. The media makes things look bad more than what they are that's they only difference between him and the others.

childeye 2 · Sep 27, 2019

Johan_1988 said:
Like he said it depends on your view of President Trump.You can interpret it that way if you have a natural bias against Trump and the thing is what if Biden did something wrong there by withholding a 1 billion dollar loan to fire a prosecutor whom was apparently corrupt ,but coincidentally was investigating his son's company. It might not have been a the right thing to do, but he simply cannot be impeached by that fact since he did not pressure Ukraine. That is what they call the quid quo pro which if he did it he would be most probably impeached.

I study semantics. It doesn't have anything to do with how I look at President Trump. It has to do with what Trump says and whether his reasoning ends in a contradiction.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
Ok. This was a private, classified conversation that was never going to see the light of day, right?

So where is the overt threat that Trump was going to stop aid, or arms deals?

"I would like you to do us a favor" Is this it? This is the threat?

No threat. Trump's remark came immediately after the Ukraine PResident noted they were ready for the missles.....

P.S. Watch "The Godfather" or "Goodfellows"....that will give you a clue as to Trump's communication style.

Those are movies. Hollywood fiction. The type of fiction MSM is pushing. If you are suggesting he is implying, then there is nothing that will stand in the court of law. What he said wasn't even a veiled threat.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

essentialsaltes said:
Let's ask a former judge and current Fox News correspondent.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: In Ukraine call, Trump apparently personally and directly committed a crime

The Constitution is quite clear that "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" shall constitute a basis for impeachment.

Was Trump offering to bribe the Ukrainian president? The circumstantial evidence is: Yes. The transcript of Trump's critical conversation with the Ukrainian president shows he asked his counterpart to coordinate with American authorities to prosecute the son of his likely political opponent in 2020. That is the solicitation of something of value from a foreign government -- a felony.

Run with it then. See where it goes. I will remind you tho that Napolitano is a huge Trump critic. To the point of where he would not have been able to preside over a case concerning Trump, extreme bias, and is often referred to as the opposition. Napolitano is also anti-Kavanaugh and jumped on that bandwagon as well. Also pro-muller, and wanted Trump charged for obstruction.

childeye 2 · Sep 27, 2019

childeye 2 said:
I study semantics. It doesn't have anything to do with how I look at President Trump. It has to do with what Trump says and whether his reasoning ends in a contradiction.

I thought I remembered Trump saying this (about withholding military aid):

"We want to make sure that country is honest"... "It's very important to talk about corruption. If you don't talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?"

wing2000 · Sep 27, 2019

LostMarbels said:
Those are movies. Hollywood fiction. The type of fiction MSM is pushing. If you are suggesting he is implying, then there is nothing that will stand in the court of law. What he said wasn't even a veiled threat.

Any jury evaluating the complete conversation would come to a logical conclusion.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
Any jury evaluating the complete conversation would come to a logical conclusion.

Well sure, but you can get him off without prosecuting in the first place. Besides, no prosecutor is going to run with a supposed implication of a might that may be...

wing2000 · Sep 27, 2019

LostMarbels said:
Well sure, but you can get him off without prosecuting in the first place. Besides, no prosecutor is going to run with a supposed implication of a might that may be...

In any case, the jury in this case would be the US Senate (assuming the House votes to impeach). But since most GOP Senators have betrayed their Constitutional duty to date, you have nothing to worry about. However, their vote in favor of this President's corrupt behavior will be on the record for every voter to consider in 2020.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
In any case, the jury in this case would be the US Senate (assuming the House votes to impeach). But since most GOP Senators have betrayed their Constitutional duty to date, you have nothing to worry about. However, their vote in favor of this President's corrupt behavior will be on the record for every voter to consider in 2020.

This is a delusion based on a desired outcome. I would not even go after HRC with something this flimsy. Trump is not going anywhere. That ship has sailed.

wing2000 · Sep 27, 2019

LostMarbels said:
This is a delusion based on a desired outcome. I would not even go after HRC with something this flimsy. Trump is not going anywhere. That ship has sailed.

My desired income? That both houses of Congress would recognize when a President is abusing his power and take action as prescribed by our Constitution. As it is, the Senate Majority leader is so politically driven that I doubt he will even call for a trial should the House impeach.

Kentonio · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
As it is, the Senate Majority leader is so politically driven that I doubt he will even call for a trial should the House impeach.

He publicly stated he would earlier this year. Tricky for him to try and wind that back now.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
My desired income?

No I said:

LostMarbels said:
based on a desired outcome.

Some people are absolutely desperate to stop this man. They know they will not win in 2020. They have to find a way to get him out of office.

childeye 2 · Sep 27, 2019

double post

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

wing2000 said:
However, their vote in favor of this President's corrupt behavior will be on the record for every voter to consider in 2020.

I think you hit on a key strategy here. Getting "the impeached President Trump" on every news station, and publication across the country during the 2020 election. This is all optics. Even if not found guilty, the MSM and Democrats will have a feeding frenzy with it. The problem is I dont think it will work in their favor. It is more than likely just going to fire up Trumps base, (who already feel marginalised and attacked) and will go down like the Kavanaugh debacle in their point of veiw. Including fake witness, of fake incidents that the alleged victims cannot even recall.

Belk · Sep 27, 2019

LostMarbels said:
I think you hit on a key strategy here. Getting "the impeached President Trump" on every news station, and publication across the country during the 2020 election. This is all optics. Even if not found guilty, the MSM and Democrats will have a feeding frenzy with it. The problem is I dont think it will work in their favor. It is more than likely just going to fire up Trumps base, (who already feel marginalised and attacked) and will go down like the Kavanaugh debacle in their point of veiw. Including fake witness, of fake incidents that the alleged victims cannot even recall.

His base is pretty fired up regardless. The question is how will this affect the swing voters? This is a historically disliked president and a lot of people are tired of his constant presence. The man is exhausting.

wing2000 · Sep 27, 2019

Kentonio said:
He publicly stated he would earlier this year. Tricky for him to try and wind that back now.

...not for a man like McConnell. He's wavered in the political breeze all of his career.

LostMarbels · Sep 27, 2019

Belk said:
His base is pretty fired up regardless. The question is how will this affect the swing voters? This is a historically disliked president and a lot of people are tired of his constant presence. The man is exhausting.

Who exactly do you call swing voters? non-white, Indian Americans perhaps? Here are 50,000 + of them.

You have any doubts watch from 4:28.

President's phone call transcript

E pluribus unum

Active Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Active Member

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

All-Lives-Matter

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

All-Lives-Matter

E pluribus unum

All-Lives-Matter

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

Senior Member

E pluribus unum

All-Lives-Matter

Similar threads