Day two

[RocksInMyHead]

Cite sources showing an inquiry is one sided

The House votes to set procedure for the impeachment inquiry. They can choose to set those procedures however they want. The House has voted - the procedures have been set.

You are the one claiming that both sides must be presented - so far the only evidence you have provided for this assertion is the dictionary definition of "inquiry," which is both irrelevant (because we're talking about a constitutional process, not the meaning of a word) and does not say what you claim it says.

 

[LostMarbels]

This is an investigation into Trump’s wrong doing.

This investigation into Trump is an attempt to hide wrongdoing. This will be apparent soon enough. For now this has to play out.

A president can’t bribe with American tax dollars a foreign government

Neither can a Vice President. Whereas in this current inquiry we have many off hand (as in not first hand) accusations of quid pro quo, yet an admitted extortion is being hidden by this process. Biden literally states he said if you do not do, you will not get. That sort of duress or coercion is extortive. A litteral, you will or else.

There are many facets going on where it is attempted to hide such incidents behind the impeachment inquiry, and are being presented as Trump going after rivals to thwart justice. That is a very purposely placed perception. Make Trump look guilty for investigations on going from years ago, by presenting them as attacks from a guilty party.

A president can’t bribe.... to announce an investigation into the family member of a political rival.

There is nothing to say Bidens bid to run for President, was not an attempt to create that perception. That having been said, just because you are running for President, you are not immune to the law. Neither is your family. Especially concerning an investigation that began before the individual even ran.

 

[Yarddog]

It's all a dog and pony show. Neither side has the moral high ground, both sides are guilty of treason. This is what the road to the antichrist looks like.

Just how is either side guilty of treason?

 

[wing2000]

Typical leftist thoughts. Only feelings matter.

I sure heard a lot hurt feelings expressed from Jim Jordan and company today...

 

[Kentonio]

There is nothing to say Bidens bid to run for President was not an attempt to create that perception. That having been said, just because you are running for President, you are not immune to the law. Neither is your family. Especially concerning an investigation that began before the individual even ran.

Biden ran for president to shield himself from an investigation that hasn’t even started at the time? Impressive mental gymnastics! I suppose him being the immediate clear front runner was just a happy coincidence too?

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

This investigation into Trump is an attempt to hide wrongdoing. This will be apparent soon enough. For now this has to play out.



Neither can a Vice President. Whereas in this current inquiry we have many off hand (as in not first hand) accusations of quid pro quo, yet an admitted extortion is being hidden by this process. Biden literally states he said if you do not do, you will not get. That sort of duress or coercion is extortive. A litteral, you will or else.

There are many facets going on where it is attempted to hide such incidents behind the impeachment inquiry, and being presented as Trump going after rivals to thwart justice. That is a very purposely placed perception. Make Trump look guilty for investigations on going from years ago, by presenting them as attacks from a guilty party.



There is nothing to say Bidens bid to run for President was not an attempt to create that perception. That having been said, just because you are running for President, you are not immune to the law. Neither is your family. Especially concerning an investigation that began before the individual even ran.

Why isn’t the DOJ opening an investigation into the Bidens? Burn them to the ground if you want. I really don’t like Biden as a presidential candidate anyway. This investigation in the House is about Trump. The Republicans trying to derail this investigation into Trump by attempting to investigate someone else is pathetic. If Trump is so innocent I would think the Republicans would have no problem with the investigation because it would clearly exonerate Trump. For some reason though they want to derail it.

 

[Hank77]

Thanks for asking. Here's a good place to start:
'The Democrats' Hydra': Here are the FACTS about the impeachment inquiry, Soros, Ukraine

A page search on Yovanovitch will provide enlightening information.

Glenn Beck....
I'm sorry but Glenn Beck has for many years believed crazy things that were later debunked. I finally just quit listening to him.

Oh and one of the people on that list of conservatives that were supposedly being surveilled is Michael McFaul, the Stanford professor who's article was posted here by another member. He knows both Taylor and Yovanovitch personally.
Seeing that there are probably few who have read the article I'll just quote Mr. McFaul about these two people and link to the longer article.

At different times, I have visited both Bill and Masha at the ambassador’s office in Kyiv, where they were both beloved by their staffs as energetic, engaged, effective COMs (Chief of Missions, in the parlance) in one of America’s most important diplomatic assignments in the world. Both always have struck me as first-rate government servants, singularly focused on advancing American national interests. Both have served Republican and Democratic presidents, and even after decades of interacting with them both, I could not guess how either of them votes. State Department officials, who doubtless have their own ideas about foreign policy, are trained to respect the outcomes of the democratic process. Given their loyalty to this ethic, it could not have been easy for either Yovanovitch or Taylor to push back on a White House initiative.

But that loyalty is ultimately to their oath of office and the republic, and not to any particular incumbent of the White House. To their great credit, Yovanovitch and Taylor both recognized when private electoral interests were being pursued at the expense of American national interests, and tried to stop that abuse of power.
The Deeply Dedicated State

 

[Hank77]

Was she checking Trump's tweets while testifying? I didn't see her doing that. However, good ole Schiff took the time to grandstand by pointing out during the hearing in front of the TV camera what Trump tweeted. It sure looked like Schiff was really trying hard to make a mountain out of a molehill. If "witness intimidation" is such a bad thing, then why did Schiff take the time to point out to the witness what Trump had written? She wouldn't even have known about it if he hadn't done that, and therefore "intimidation" couldn't be alleged. But Schiff couldn't let an opportunity go to waste!

Hooray for live TV.

I agree with you, I don't think it was appropriate and certainly not necessary. In fact, I think it was an unkind thing to do to the Ambassador.

 

[LostMarbels]

If you want to have Congress pass a law that sons or daughters of high ranking government officials can't serve on the Board of Directors for any company, be my guest

Again, I am talking about investigations into criminal actions. Sons or daughters of high ranking government officials, on the Board of Directors, of companies implicated in crimes, is a big deal. When you add in the fact that all parties considered, are implicated in the same known actions concerning HRC/DNC, the Ukraine, and 2016 elections meddling as well as spying... Now you are getting one large cabal that ties all of them, into the same crimes concerning the steele dossier, Podesa, Wiener, Huma Abedin, so on.....

What becomes apparent, is these companies were the offshore funding of this operation. Just like five eyes in a foreign country was used to spy on US citizens. It would have to be done offshore, because you cannot do these things in America. But you can have an alley spy on an American for you. And having a son or daughter in a company is not suspicious. Its a front. Seemingly innocuous until inside information is revealed.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Typical leftist thoughts. Only feelings matter.

Witness intimidation is an actual crime.

 

[Hank77]

He represents part of the corruption Trump was actualy asking to be looked into. 4 sons of 4 democratic politicians, all working in the ukrainian energy sector that had dealings with Barisma, received enormous sums of money, at the same time when the same parties in ukraine were involved with the DNC/HRC scandals concerning Trump and 2016 election meddling.

Then why don't they ask to have the other American to testify seeing he wouldn't have any reason to protect Hunter or Joe Biden? That's who I'd want to question if I thought that the Bidens were corrupt.

 

[Hank77]

Typical leftist thoughts. Only feelings matter.

Just a reminder, I think that calling someone a leftist, especially when meant as on insult, is against the new goading rules. You might want to check it out.

 

[LostMarbels]

Why isn’t the DOJ opening an investigation into the Bidens?

This gets back into what is deemed conspiracy theories like the one concerning the FBI and DOJ, filling up a 757 in Little Rock Arkansas, in relation to the Clinton Foundation. Again, it's not that it didn't happen. People absolutely refuse to listen, so it has been marching on, all these years, without them even knowing it was ongoing. It was dismissed and forgotten, but something that is completely ignored doesn't just end because no one will pay attention to it. Im mean do people think the investigation had it's feelings hurt, and it slunk away because people debunked it online? Or other issues for that matter?

 

[LostMarbels]

Then why don't they ask to have the other American to testify seeing he wouldn't have any reason to protect Hunter or Joe Biden? That's who I'd want to question if I thought that the Bidens were corrupt.

I am of the mindset this is a game being played to tiptoe around double jeopardy. The goal or the aim is not to save face. There is no need to waste good info in a sham proceeding that can be presented in a criminal court resulting in an actual conviction. I think there are certain facts, witnesses, and such aren't being brought forth because this inquiry is not going to accomplish anything harmful. And Trump has no obligation to prove his innocence. It is the obligation of those seeking to impeach to prove his guilt.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Sondland … responded that Trump cares only about "big stuff." When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland responded, " 'Big stuff' that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing," Holmes said.

 

[Hank77]

I am of the mindset this is a game being played to tiptoe around double jeopardy. The goal or the aim is not to save face. There is no need to waste good info in a sham proceeding that can be presented in a criminal court resulting in an actual conviction. I think there are certain facts, witnesses, and such aren't being brought forth because this inquiry is not going to accomplish anything harmful. And Trump has no obligation to prove his innocence. It is the obligation of those seeking to impeach to prove his guilt.

But they are asking for Hunter Biden to testify.

 

[LostMarbels]

But they are asking for Hunter Biden to testify.

Of course. This is one big public deposition. What information can be gleaned under oath in this proceeding? I have no doubt that individuals that might be involved in the defense of certain individuals, are speaking on recoded in this proceeding.

 

[Hank77]

Of course. This is one big public deposition. What information can be gleaned under oath in this proceeding? I have no doubt that individuals that might be involved in the defense of certain individuals, are speaking on recoded in this proceeding.

I can't seem to get my point across, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[LostMarbels]

I can't seem to get my point across, so I'll just leave it at that.

You are still stuck on Hunter Biden not being able to attest to Trump. It doesn't matter. Trump will not be removed from office no matter how much people believe him to have been besmirched. I think it is universally recognized that, that attempt has failed. Trump will remain in office.

What you are not considering, is the DOJ has opened criminal investigations into the Russia probe, that have direct ties to the Ukraine and the topics at hand that are being discussed. What has been achieved here, is providing the Republicans with a large (fully transparent to the public) interrogation room; where those who seek to impeach trump will willingly offer more, and more information. All the while making sworn testimony on record. All of which, will be admissible in a court of law.

As they saying goes... you have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law.

Why?... would we not want Hunter Biden speaking in that room?

 

[wing2000]

Sondland … responded that Trump cares only about "big stuff." When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland responded, " 'Big stuff' that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing," Holmes said.

...yes, in Trump's mind, a conflict with Russia isn't "big stuff" -- investigating Biden iden is really big!

The line to the President gets bolder with each witness....