Democrats don't want origins of Ukraine probe revealed, just as they didn't want Russia probe known

essentialsaltes · Nov 18, 2019

NightHawkeye said:
Meh, Hunter Biden was

Fine, have SEALS roast him alive and pardon them afterwards. Nobody cares.

It is an abuse of office to ask for personal favors in exchange for military aid paid for by We the People.

GodLovesCats · Nov 18, 2019

NightHawkeye said:
Meh, Hunter Biden was clearly getting paid off in exchange for political favors from his daddy ... to the tune of a billion dollars in aid. Trump had every right to ask for that to be investigated.

It's not even arguable otherwise. Joe Biden was caught on tape demanding a QUID PRO QUO.

Trump had no right to withhold security aid 51 days. Even if it was not quid pro quo, delaying it that long (6 days past the deadline) makes it a crime. Of course, everyone participating in the investigations knows it is QPQ because they have seen and heard it.

Kentonio · Nov 19, 2019

NightHawkeye said:
Meh, Hunter Biden was clearly getting paid off in exchange for political favors from his daddy ... to the tune of a billion dollars in aid. Trump had every right to ask for that to be investigated.

It's not even arguable otherwise. Joe Biden was caught on tape demanding a QUID PRO QUO.

I think if you're going to make wild and extremely slanderous accusations against people, you should actually provide some actual evidence.

Oh and that Biden tape is not evidence, and you've been told why at least a dozen times now. Perhaps engaging with people instead of ignoring them and just repeating the same things over and over might avoid you making this mistake in future?

LostMarbels · Nov 19, 2019

NightHawkeye said:
There is nothing illegal about asking for a favor. Presidents make requests all the time

It is illegal for this President.

NightHawkeye said:
Joe Biden was caught on tape demanding a QUID PRO QUO.

Again, it wasn't Trump. Therefor, it is permissible. To suggest anything else is just wild conspiracy.

Kentonio · Nov 19, 2019

LostMarbels said:
It is illegal for this President.

Again, it wasn't Trump. Therefor, it is permissible. To suggest anything else is just wild conspiracy.

You're usually more reasonable than this. There is a very logical reason why the two things are totally different, and countless people now have explained exactly what that difference is. Why is this just ignored?

LostMarbels · Nov 19, 2019

Kentonio said:
You're usually more reasonable than this. There is a very logical reason why the two things are totally different, and countless people now have explained exactly what that difference is. Why is this just ignored?

It has been explained countless times. The current issues surrounding Ukraine happened during the Obama admin. People are going to be arrested, stand trial, and even possibly be sentenced to capital punishment for treason/sedition. Believe it or not, but that tends to scare some people and they are willing to lie to get out of trouble. Even break the law further in an attempt of a hasty getaway.

Case in point, a bank robber with cops on their tail is not worried about speed limits, traffic laws, and stoplights. They will break more laws, and even get more heinous as they get more desperate to flee. Likewise, the current individuals in question want nothing more than to remain free, and escape prosecution. In the process they will commit shocking acts in an attempt to free themselves.

Kentonio · Nov 19, 2019

LostMarbels said:
It has been explained countless times. The current issues surrounding Ukraine happened during the Obama admin. People are going to be arrested, stand trial, and even possibly be sentenced to capital punishment for treason/sedition. Believe it or not, but that tends to scare some people and they are willing to lie to get out of trouble. Even break the law further in an attempt of a hasty getaway.

Case in point, a bank robber with cops on their tail is not worried about speed limits, traffic laws, and stoplights. They will break more laws, and even get more heinous as they get more desperate to flee. Likewise, the current individuals in question want nothing more than to remain free, and escape prosecution. In the process they will commit shocking acts in an attempt to free themselves.

You're claiming that the Obama policy towards Ukraine was corrupt or even treasonous right?

Can you explain why then that this policy was not in any way controversial until it was dragged up in the Trump investigation? It was a policy carried out in front of the world completely openly, Biden talked about it publicly, Republicans supported it, the international community supported it, Ukrainian reformers supported it. Yet apparently now its some heinous act that you think warrants capital punishment?

wing2000 · Nov 19, 2019

FreeinChrist said:
I am anxious to hear what Col. Vindman and Williams say tomorrow.

For week 2, it appears the GOP will step up their "attack the witness" strategy.

Yesterday, Trump Jr referred to the three State Department witnesses from last week as “career government bureaucrats and nothing more."

And for Vindman, the deep state defense makes another appearance:

[Sen Ron] Johnson wrote without evidence that Vindman may be a member of a rebellious “deep state” that “never accepted President Trump as legitimate” and is working in secret to end his presidency.

“I believe a significant number of bureaucrats . . . resent [Trump’s] unorthodox style and his intrusion on their ‘turf,’ ” Johnson wrote to the top Republicans on the House Oversight and Intelligence committees. “They react by leaking to the press and participating in the ongoing effort to sabotage his policies and, if possible, remove him from office. It is entirely possible that Vindman fits this profile.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d8e660-07e1-11ea-8ac0-0810ed197c7e_story.html

Bobber · Nov 19, 2019

essentialsaltes said:
Fine, have SEALS roast him alive and pardon them afterwards. Nobody cares.

It is an abuse of office to ask for personal favors in exchange for military aid paid for by We the People.

Your assertion that it was personal doesn't mean it was. Here's what Rand Paul had to say,

Paul said on NBC's "Meet The Press" on Sunday. "If you're not allowed to give aid to people who are corrupt, there's always contingencies on aid. Presidents since the beginning of time have resisted Congress and there's been this sort of back and forth jockeying over what is sent. But also, presidents have withheld aid before for corruption. I think it's a mistake to say, 'Oh, he withheld aid until he got what he wanted.' "

"Well, if it's corruption and he believes there to be corruption, he has every right to withhold aid," Paul added.

Rand Paul says Trump has 'every right' to withhold Ukraine aid over corruption

And here's what the President actually said, "I would like you to do us a favor though..." He said US meaning the nation of the United States, not me as an individual.

LostMarbels · Nov 19, 2019

Kentonio said:
You're claiming that the Obama policy towards Ukraine was corrupt or even treasonous right?

Can you explain why then that this policy was not in any way controversial until it was dragged up in the Trump investigation? It was a policy carried out in front of the world completely openly, Biden talked about it publicly, Republicans supported it, the international community supported it, Ukrainian reformers supported it. Yet apparently now its some heinous act that you think warrants capital punishment?

The thing most people opposed to Trump do not realize is this fight began decades ago. Nothing has been 'just dredged up'. Except an attempt to get back into the shadows.

For Trump to have ran on a platform of : "Drain the swamp" and "Lock her up" there had to be publicly known incidents that the public wanted a President to address.

He ran on that platform for a reason. So this whole notion that this is out of the blue is just silly. Truth of it is some are unaware of why a President who ran on such a platform was elected.

wing2000 · Nov 19, 2019

Bobber said:
Your assertion that it was personal doesn't mean it was. Here's what Rand Paul had to say,

Paul said on NBC's "Meet The Press" on Sunday. "If you're not allowed to give aid to people who are corrupt, there's always contingencies on aid. Presidents since the beginning of time have resisted Congress and there's been this sort of back and forth jockeying over what is sent. But also, presidents have withheld aid before for corruption. I think it's a mistake to say, 'Oh, he withheld aid until he got what he wanted.' "

"Well, if it's corruption and he believes there to be corruption, he has every right to withhold aid," Paul added.

Rand Paul says Trump has 'every right' to withhold Ukraine aid over corruption

And here's what the President actually said, "I would like you to do us a favor though..." He said US meaning the nation of the United States, not me as an individual.

Mr Paul is insulting our intelligence. Read the transcript (err call summary).

Bobber · Nov 19, 2019

wing2000 said:
For week 2, it appears the GOP will step up their "attack the witness" strategy.

Yeah so Republicans are pretty mean wanting to do everything possible to test the stories of witnesses and make sure they add up. Don't they know they should just sit back and not raise any genuine concerns? Who cares if the nation insists a hearing to impeach the President is done fair and right? What's fair and right....perhaps not meaning that it's tested and challenged from every way possible?

wing2000 · Nov 19, 2019

Bobber said:
Yeah so Republicans are pretty mean wanting to do everything possible to test the stories of witnesses and make sure they add up. Don't they know they should just sit back and not raise any genuine concerns? Who cares if the nation insists a hearing to impeach the President is done fair and right? What's fair and right....perhaps not meaning that it's tested and challenged from every way possible?

I have yet to see any Republican "test the stories of witnesses" by challenging what he or she said.

Bobber · Nov 19, 2019

wing2000 said:
Mr Paul is insulting our intelligence. Read the transcript (err call summary).

I quoted from the transcript.....Trump did not ask for a personal favor. He said do US a favor!

"I would like you to do us a favor though..." (US meaning the United States of America)

wing2000 · Nov 19, 2019

Bobber said:
I quoted from the transcript.....Trump did not ask for a personal favor. He said do US a favor!

"I would like you to do us a favor though..." (US meaning the United States of America)

In the preceding sentence, the Ukrainian President asked about those Javelin missiles, Trump responds as you noted...and then went on to mention the Bidens by name. Asking a foreign leader to investigate a potential political opponent is a favor for personal political gain.

LostMarbels · Nov 19, 2019

wing2000 said:
I have yet to see any Republican "test the stories of witnesses" by challenging what he or she said.

(Thus far), we have heard from 3 (individuals). none of those three individuals have met or spoken with president Trump in the last year. None of them were on the July 25th call in question. None of them have first-hand information of that call, and none of them are aware of any criminal activity or impeachable offense.
John Ratcliffe

So why do people keep calling them witnesses? What have they witnessed?

Kentonio · Nov 19, 2019

LostMarbels said:
The thing most people opposed to Trump do not realize is this fight began decades ago. Nothing has been 'just dredged up'. Except an attempt to get back into the shadows.

For Trump to have ran on a platform of : "Drain the swamp" and "Lock her up" there had to be publicly known incidents that the public wanted a President to address.

He ran on that platform for a reason. So this whole notion that this is out of the blue is just silly. Truth of it is some are unaware of why a President who ran on such a platform was elected.

And yet even with a GOP White House, congress and senate they still didn’t ‘lock her up’ did they? Because despite years of smears, propaganda and political dark arts aimed at Republicans enemies, when it comes to the tricky part of having to actually provide evidence to prove a crime, there is nothing there.

But no, they can’t admit that because they’ve spent far too long lying to you all. So now they have to invent this shadowy ‘deep state’ who apparently are so powerful that they can prevent an entire Republican controlled government and DoJ from prosecuting crimes, but weren’t powerful enough to have their side win the election.

All sounds a bit silly doesn’t it?

A_Thinker · Nov 19, 2019

NightHawkeye said:
Meh, Hunter Biden was clearly getting paid off in exchange for political favors from his daddy ... to the tune of a billion dollars in aid. Trump had every right to ask for that to be investigated.

It's not even arguable otherwise. Joe Biden was caught on tape demanding a QUID PRO QUO.

Where's the transcript ?

Where are the witnesses ?

Where are his self-incriminating tweets ?

Where are his jailed former compatriots ?

When we get through with the mess that is currently in the White House, then you can go after Joe Biden because his son had a high-paying job ...

wing2000 · Nov 19, 2019

LostMarbels said:
(Thus far), we have heard from 3 (individuals). none of those three individuals have met or spoken with president Trump in the last year. None of them were on the July 25th call in question. None of them have first-hand information of that call, and none of them are aware of any criminal activity or impeachable offense.
John Ratcliffe

So why do people keep calling them witnesses? What have they witnessed?

You can refute my statement:
"I have yet to see any Republican "test the stories of witnesses" by challenging what he or she said."

...by citing a Republican who has challenged the public testimony of the witnesses.

LostMarbels · Nov 19, 2019

Kentonio said:
And yet even with a GOP White House, congress and senate they still didn’t ‘lock her up’ did they? Because despite years of smears, propaganda and political dark arts aimed at Republicans enemies, when it comes to the tricky part of having to actually provide evidence to prove a crime, there is nothing there.

You are going to be shocked once this IG report surfaces. I assume around the 28th. For the first time we have a administration that is going to remove them.

Kentonio said:
So now they have to invent this shadowy ‘deep state’ who apparently are so powerful that they can prevent an entire Republican controlled government and DoJ from prosecuting crimes, but weren’t powerful enough to have their side win the election.

That is what you are currently witnessing. The first President that actually defeated the deep state. This is history in the making.

Democrats don't want origins of Ukraine probe revealed, just as they didn't want Russia probe known

Stranger in a Strange Land

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

All-Lives-Matter

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

All-Lives-Matter

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

All-Lives-Matter

Similar threads