‘It’s All Over’ — Donald Trump Cites Gordon Sondland’s Testimony as Impeachment Exoneration

[GOD Shines Forth!]

Way to ignore an important adjective DECISIVELY makes a difference. Trump won on a last minute field goal or Hail Mary pass. He DID NOT win decisively no matter how poor the memory of his followers become.

Your point is moot in the reality we live in.

 

[AACJ]

But that one is SO easy and entirely within his own control...

Not necessarily easy in the wider sense, but yes, you have a point.

I need more knowledge on the the tax return situation. As I understand it from secondary sources, he did make the promise with the qualification concerning the supposed audit, but then did not release them when that excuse did not seem to apply anymore.

 

[stevil]

There is little to no chance of President Trump being removed based on the available evidence. So they are in fact misusing the impeachment process.

I find the available evidence very compelling.
I think the impeachment process is appropriate and it would be negligent if it weren't be used right now.

 

[cow451]

That intended purpose of the impeachment process is largely conditioned on the fact that its use should be supported by the real possibility that a President could be removed for some supposed wrongdoing. There is little to no chance of President Trump being removed based on the available evidence. So they are in fact misusing the impeachment process.

It is a political process as well. Millions of voters said they wanted the President held accountable.

 

[stevil]

If Trump's request of the Ukrainian President concerning Biden was motivated not by the prospect of politically damaging Biden, but only or primarily to pursue possible political corruption by Biden, then such request is entirely appropriate. Should Biden get a pass just because Trump may politically benefit?

1. There is no evidence at all that Joe or Hunter did anything corrupt. So no justification for the President of USA to pressure the President of Ukraine to investigated the Bidens.
2. Of all the supposed corruption going on in the Ukraine why is Burisma the only priority for Trump to pressure Ukraine on?
3. Why according to Sondland's testimony, was it only important that a public announcement be made regarding the investigation, rather than actually performing an investigation?
4. By law a certification was required before the aid could be released to Ukraine. That certification was issued by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood, who informed lawmakers that he "certified that the Government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability." - The appropriate due diligence had already been done by the appropriate people and had be passed.
Pentagon Letter Undercuts Trump Assertion On Delaying Aid To Ukraine Over Corruption

 

[Go Braves]

This embarrassing process is dead in the water. Along with Nancy and Adam's credibility...

Not to anybody who wasn't lazy and actually bothered to watch the process with a thinking cap on instead of listening to the nonsense farted out about it on right wing sites, lol.

Eta - lol, this post wasn't directed to the fellow writing what he did personally, or anybody else personally

 

[Yttrium]

A vain gesture is just that, a gesture and little more. Using the process like they are using it is in vain according to its intended purpose. That violates the purpose and spirit of the impeachment mechanism. The Dems have a duty to the intended purpose of the mechanism, not just a duty to use the mechanism when required.

That intended purpose is largely base on the fact that its use is supported by the real possibility that a President could be removed for supposed wrongdoing. There is little to no chance of President Trump being removed based on the available evidence. So they are in fact misusing the impeachment process.

You do realize that this same argument could be used against the Republicans in the Bill Clinton impeachment, right?

It's not the fault of the House that the Senate majority refuses to take the charges seriously.

 

[AACJ]

You do realize that this same argument could be used against the Republicans in the Bill Clinton impeachment, right?

It's not the fault of the House that the Senate majority refuses to take the charges seriously.

Hey, if the shoe fits...

But does the shoe fit?

 

[Belk]

That intended purpose of the impeachment process is largely conditioned on the fact that its use should be supported by the real possibility that a President could be removed for some supposed wrongdoing. There is little to no chance of President Trump being removed based on the available evidence. So they are in fact misusing the impeachment process.

According to whom?

 

[Go Braves]

Liars and traitors and thieves, oh my! Follow the yellow grift road to see the Wizard of Frauds! "You know, when you pull back the curtain and it’s a really small dude.”

The Wizard of Fraud.

Lol, that is golden.

 

[S.ilvio]

Not to anybody who wasn't lazy and actually bothered to watch the process with a thinking cap on instead of listening to the nonsense farted out about it on right wing sites, lol.

Ok. Insult me.

That's about the level progressives can rise to these days...

 

[Go Braves]

Ok. Insult me.

That's about the level progressives can rise to these days...

The post wasn't written about you, or anybody in particular. But apparently you think it's describing you?

I'm a Republican, btw.

eta
So........ did you actually watch the hearings for yourself?

 

[Go Braves]

1. There is no evidence at all that Joe or Hunter did anything corrupt. So no justification for the President of USA to pressure the President of Ukraine to investigated the Bidens.
2. Of all the supposed corruption going on in the Ukraine why is Burisma the only priority for Trump to pressure Ukraine on?
3. Why according to Sondland's testimony, was it only important that a public announcement be made regarding the investigation, rather than actually performing an investigation?
4. By law a certification was required before the aid could be released to Ukraine. That certification was issued by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood, who informed lawmakers that he "certified that the Government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability." - The appropriate due diligence had already been done by the appropriate people and had be passed.
Pentagon Letter Undercuts Trump Assertion On Delaying Aid To Ukraine Over Corruption

I see that you're in NZ. I appreciate that you know the facts better than a lot of Americans do. You put effort in, clearly. Cheers to you for that.

 

[S.ilvio]

The post wasn't written about you, or anybody in particular. But apparently you think it's describing you?

I'm a Republican, btw.

eta
So........ did you actually watch the hearings for yourself?

If you're a Republican, if, then please dont use Progressive insult tactics.

Yes I watched most of the hearings . I do have a job to do you understand.

No direct or sufficient indirect evidence to show a Trump inspired quid pro quo. Nothing.

Not even close. But then again that must make me lazy or not bothered. Try again dude...

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Ok. Insult me.

That's about the level progressives can rise to these days...

The level of the President of the United States?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Despite CNN headlines today and Schiff's statements today ... there is still no evidence for that.

From the OP...

"Sondland testified Trump told him twice that he wanted nothing from Ukraine, other than President Zelensky to do the right thing."

Sooooo....what's "the right thing" in the context of this conversation?

 

[S.ilvio]

From the OP...

"Sondland testified Trump told him twice that he wanted nothing from Ukraine, other than President Zelensky to do the right thing."

Sooooo....what's "the right thing" in the context of this conversation?

Fight corruption as he promised in his election campaign...

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Fight corruption as he promised in his election campaign...

Why is the President of the United States concerned with corruption in Ukraine?

 

[stevil]

I see that you're in NZ. I appreciate that you know the facts better than a lot of Americans do. You put effort in, clearly. Cheers to you for that.

Thank you. Yes I'm not part of USA, not a Democrat or Republican supporter.
Perhaps I'm paying too much attention to what is going on in USA. But I am finding it all really fascinating.
I think I have learnt a lot lately. I know more about the USA system than I otherwise would have. I'm fascinated how the USA system is built in order to provide checks and balances, I'm fascinated how it reacts to being tested so hard. I'm fascinated how polarised USA seems to be.

In some ways I think the USA system is quite good, and in someways I think your system is really cumbersome and dysfunctional. I think there is a lot of misinformation and distrust going on. I'm shocked to see media outlets being so very biased. I think your parties are somewhat held to ransom by their elected leaders.

Because of your two party system it is very hard to get things done. For example it appears the Republican party have moderate centre right people and some extremely far right people. So it is really hard even when the party controls the house and the senate to get their policies through.

I find it really strange what Trump is doing, how he seems so very pro-Russian, very friendly to historical enemies and so abrasive to allies, so weird how he calls people names, mocks people, makes weird claims to know better than anyone else about almost everything. And I find it so weird how many Republican supporters have gone down that path of defending the guy and they seem to now be pro-Russian, and willing to attack the national heroes just because Trump attacks them.

You say that you are a Republican supporter. I really respect how you are able to go beyond your party affiliation and criticise some of the things Trump does. It seems to be rare if the polls are true, which often shows around 90% of Republican supporters approve of Trump.

 

[S.ilvio]

Why is the President of the United States concerned with corruption in Ukraine?

Did you actually ask that question?

I realize after 8 years of Obama, having a President who does his job makes a change. But really???