The Mueller Hearings were not embarrassing for the Democrats. Republicans simply raked truths (lacking documents/testimonies; withheld witnesses; presidential obstructions) into a shallow grave. You will rue the day that truth 'rises up' to speak on its on behalf!
The Mueller Hearings were not embarrassing for the Democrats.
Yeah they were. If they weren't, every single Democrat running for office would be crowing about how it drove them to start impeachment hearings. But that didn't happen, did it? A report just like it resulted in the immediate impeachment of Bill Clinton. This time, it was like a balloon deflating.
Instead, we have impeachment hearings because . . . Ukraine! Now that - after two plus years of bullshit Russia conspiracy theories - is a pretty poor substitute.
Republicans simply raked truths (lacking documents/testimonies; withheld witnesses; presidential obstructions) into a shallow grave.
Republicans don't have that power. The power lies with Democrats. Even they chose not to seek impeachment over Russian collusion. That's how you know they're embarrassed.
If they weren't, every single Democrat running for office would be crowing about how it drove them to start impeachment hearings.But that didn't happen, did it? A report just like it resulted in the immediate impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Okay, come for me. Let's rock and roll! (Smile.)
Democrats are 'postponed' in their investigations in the court system due to the brilliance of a practiced Liar-In-Chief who stiff-armed the Special Counsel through use of obfuscation, hiding between a DOD memorandum (cowardice), warning off testimonies, and outright hiding and destruction of factual documents. Postponements end with a "day in Court," nevertheless. Justice delayed is not justice denied.
There is an important distinction between an Independent Counsel (Starr) and a Special Counsel (Mueller). Lastly, Bill Clinton did not have either the luxury, inclination, or personal constitution to deny himself from giving a proper and truthful deposition to Ken Starr.
Donald Trump weakly delivered "paper" answers to his Special Counsel, and those answers were considered insufficient in the official report. However, the Special Counsel opted to move forward without any further obfuscation from Donald J. Trump!
practiced Liar-In-Chief who stiff-armed the Special Counsel through use of obfuscation, hiding between a DOD memorandum (cowardice), warning off testimonies, and outright hiding and destruction of factual document
None of that happened. You should read the mueller report.
If Trump is one thing and one thing only its lawyered up to the gills. (You can always fit in just one more indefinitely with a good-grade of lube.)
If Trump is good at one thing and good at one thing only its knowing how to pick near perfect fall-guys. Republicans contort themselves and continue to "take one for the Trumpster" every time! Disturbingly amazing!
Here's the thing. Mueller didn't allege he committed perjury. You made that up. So there's no reason to rationalize why Mueller didn't charge him with a crime Mueller didn't think he committed.
The Great Bamboozlement is underway on Newstalkers.
Rudy Giuliani SAID on twitter, that his efforts in Ukraine were on behalf of his CLIENT.
I'll give you a hint. His client was not the United States of America. The effort of the unofficial "diplomacy" in Ukraine was to get dirt on Trump's election opponent. Trump not only knew about it, he was behind it. It is an abuse of power, an abuse of his office, and he should resign immediately.
to get dirt on Trump's election opponent. Trump not only knew about it, he was behind it. It is an abuse of power, an abuse of his office, and he should resign immediately.
How so? Since when is anyone prohibited from seeking information about an election opponent?
Seeking evidence is a far cry from manufacturing evidence.
I agree. There's no evidence, though, that the presidents discussed manufacturing anything. Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it." He didn't ask him to make something up.
He's the fucking president of the United States and a candidate running against Biden. He cannot use his present office and powers to have a foreign government investigate his election opponents. [Deleted]
Reading some of these comments, I am embarrassed for this site. Perrie deserves better from her conservatives.
He cannot use his present office and powers to have a foreign government investigate his election opponents.
Why not? He asked the president of Ukraine to look into something the vice president did in his country. Why is that wrong? It's not like he asked another country to look into his private sex life or other personal business.
Imagine President Obama in 2012 going to Bolivia, let's say, and asking the president of Bolivia to investigate one of Mitt Romney's business dealings in that country and find corruption in it. Oh, and, Obama wants the president of Bolivia to announce the opening of this investigation on 60 Minutes. Oh, and, if the investigation is not announced Bolivia won't be getting a trade deal with the U.S.
Imagine that, and what "conservatives" would have said about Obama.
The constant bamboozling that Trumpsters engage in is making many Americans accustomed to lying and cheating, and it is potentially a disaster for our country if it isnt one already.
Imagine President Obama in 2012 going to Bolivia, let's say, and asking the president of Bolivia to investigate one of Mitt Romney's business dealings in that country and find corruption in it.
And . . . stop!
I just got through saying we aren't talking about personal business. We're talking about official public business conducted by the Vice President.
Please tell us about the U.S. Senate investigation that is ongoing into Joe Biden in Ukraine. That would be the proper venue for such an investigation.
Oh yeah, there isnt one and hasnt been one, even though Biden's remarks about the Ukrainian prosecutor being fired took place 23 months ago, and Trump's party has controlled the Senate all that time.
In January 2018, Biden disclosed that during a trip to Kyiv he privately warned Ukraine’s then-president, Petro Poroshenko, and then-prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, that the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if Ukraine failed to deal with corruption and remove Shokin as its prosecutor general.
For 23 months it has been public that Biden said something about the Ukrainian prosecutor. Trump waited to ask Ukraine for an investigation until Biden announced he was a candidate for president.
If Biden did something so damaging to US interests the Senate could have been investigating all along. And up until this past January, so could have the House. But there was nothing.
I don't think you are as naive as you act, so there is something else going on.
Why not? He asked the president of Ukraine to look into something the vice president did in his country. Why is that wrong?
Come on Tacos!, you're taking your 'devil's advocate' bit too far.
IMHO, Trump didn't actually give a fuck if any investigation took place. ALL Trump wanted was 'the deliverable', the public statement that would and could be used by Solomon and Hannity ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
The reason it's WRONG is because it is ONLY in the interest of Trump. Both of the witnesses, who are subject matter experts on Ukraine, stated as much today.
Trump waited to ask Ukraine for an investigation until Biden announced he was a candidate for president.
Or he waited until there was a president of Ukraine who might be receptive to rooting out corruption in his country. Remember the more generic purpose of the call - to congratulate the new president.
Also, Biden announced his candidacy on April 25, and Trump and Giuliani have been chasing this story longer than that.
And all of this happened before Biden announced he was running for president. So it's not just something he decided to pursue only because Biden was running. I don't think it was even primarily about torpedoing Biden's campaign or potential campaign, as much as it was about fighting back against the Mueller investigation and going after Hillary Clinton.
Or he waited until there was a president of Ukraine who might be receptive to rooting out corruption in his country.
Well as the GOP tried so desperately to pound home today, corruption has been 'endemic' in Ukraine for a long time.
So maybe you can explain why Trump asked for $250 million in military aid for Ukraine in his 2019 Budget released in February 2018 if he was so fucking worried about Ukrainian corruption?
Or how about taking a crack at explaining why Trump signed the bill that included that $250 million in October 2018?
Then could you move on to why Trump didn't file a rescission of that $250 million before the DOJ wasted all that time certifying the aid? Hell, He could have ripped off $250 million less from the DOJ by 'reprogramming' that funding. Why didn't he do any of that?
Then could you address Trump's failure to follow the legal process for requesting legal assistance in investigations from Ukraine?
It's about the same - the economy that Obama got going is still working for me, although Trump's tariffs will probably hurt me before long. The ACA that Obama implemented was a huge money saver when I had to quit working for a while to take care of my elderly mother; luckily, now that Trump's doing his best to destroy it, I'm back to work and have health benefits, so Trump can't currently hurt me in that regard.
However, I'm not selfish enough to only care how things impact ME. When I see what a laughingstock Deranged Donnie has made of our country and our constitution, how he sucks up to our enemies and alienates our allies, how his childish impulses are hurting real people and hurting our diplomacy, how he is tearing this country apart and dividing us so much, how he's destroying environmental protections, how he's making all these idiots accept his lies as truth and making honesty and ethics something that half of all Americans no longer give a shit about ... makes me glad I don't have kids.
t's about the same - the economy that Obama got going is still working for me
So...."Dipshit" hasn't hurt you one bit, but you're willing to put that on the auction block for an "Anything" ?
That's just GREAT !
" However, I'm not selfish enough to only care how things impact ME. When I see what a laughingstock Deranged Donnie has made of our country and our constitution."
So by the 'media' you mean Solomon and Hannity who just got fired by the Hill. Got ya.
BTFW, the Newsweek article supports the testimony that Yovanovitch WAS outspoken about corruption in Ukraine. Guess that pissed off Trump and Kent was right, you can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people.
This is essentially "he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue " defense, which seeks to separate Trump from his actual behavior.
Is "Your" life better or worse right now
I have a funny feeling that not too many people who were already predisposed to back Trump answer that affirmatively. Trump policies in specific simply havent had that much effect on everyone. And of course, to wholeheartedly accept trump as an economic savior you have to assume that Hillary Clinton would have destroyed the recovery Obama started, which is simply absurd.
For a proper good deed nobody blames President Donald Trump.
For having a long-term strategy of inviting our radical enemies on the world stage into our bosom without challenging them to drastically improve their national and political behavior;
for paling around with terrorist-leaders (men who justify rank murder of their enemies);
for attempting to enforce the pushing out of DACA youth into a 'no-man's land' between nations;
for not protecting and granting unlimited rights and freedom of expression (and national service) for transgendered people in the federal system;
for being an dishonest 'broker' of the American tax dollar; and,
for three years of tampering to change this country's ethos into a cult-like following unified under a dictatorial ("One-man rule"), I, we, have an A BIG PROBLEM OF NOT BEING BETTER OFF right now!
Pretty sure he was hanging out with the president of Turkey because the two came out for a press conference immediately following the hearing. But if you have other information, by all means . . .
That was embarrassing. The best, first witnesses in this "crisis" offered hearsay testimony of third-hand rumors of things that they thought could happen but never actually happened. Congress has set aside real business for this nonsense all so they can declare a scandal around Trump leading into the election.
e best, first witnesses in this "crisis" offered hearsay testimony of third-hand rumors of things
I can't believe that was the opening witness. They needed to start with a bang to develop momentum and they went with a witness who Jordan leveled in two minutes.
The best, first witnesses in this "crisis" offered hearsay testimony of third-hand rumors of things that they thought could happen but never actually happened.
I think my favorite moment so far was when - after allowing blatant hearsay testimony for like 45 minutes - Schiff interrupts the Republican examination to caution the witnesses against answering questions based on facts not in evidence. i.e., he's objecting. As if we were in a trial. And the Republican asking questions is like, "Oh, now we're using the Federal Rules of Evidence?"
And apparently the answer is yes, we are, but only when Republicans are asking questions. What a joke these proceedings are!
[Deleted.] I come into your seeds to discuss the topic. Never once have I come into your seeds to attack you personally, but that's all you want to do with me. And apparently, you're proud of it.
I think someone who apparently has never read a fact in his life, but spouts off in here all the time claiming to know what's going on (anything to support the most despicable person ever elected as president) is an embarrassment to this forum. And to our country.
Instead of constantly demanding proof which you never read, and posting utter bullshit, why not try doing some actual research before you post?
Both you and Wally have been spouting the same BS for a few years, and none of your claims have yet to come true.
But keep pretending you have some kind of inside scoop and know what's going to happen before it happens; your credibility is already shot.
Rather hilarious that your TDS makes you think that expecting people to actually read facts is somehow "being triggered" - and that utter bullshit is "truthful observations." Actually it's not hilarious - it's pathetic and despicable.
What got me was one ass kept asking questions then wouldn't let the witness answer. Kept talking over him. Then asking a different question before he was allowed to answer the first. Then saying, Ok, that was not a question. Then ramble on about something else.
He did the same in the depositions. The only time he put his foot down was when they tried to out the whistleblower. The only time he paused their bullshit today was when Castor threw out a loaded question and tried to slip in a DNC conspiracy, Schiff warned Taylor not to assume that facts not in evidence are truthful. That was for Taylor's own protection.
It would take an intelligent person, at the most, 15 or 20 minutes to understand why Trump wanted Ukraine to get involved with his demands.
Trump has been led to believe, through conservative media conspiracy theories, that Ukraine was behind all the interference in the 2016 election. These conservative conspiracy theories have been almost entirely disproven. This nonsense appeals to Trump though, because it makes him believe that he would have won the popular vote in 2016 if not for ..... Ukraine.
Then there is the desire to have Biden called corrupt. This is the Trump playbook - accuse others of being what you are yourself. He is easily the most corrupt national politician in the lifetime of anyone alive today. Rather than face that reality, he wants to shift attention to someone else, in this case Joe Biden.
His devotion to ridiculous conspiracies was relatively harmless to him until he tried to get the new government of Ukraine involved in his insanity.
She seems to have painted the Democrats into a corner.
With her declaration that the President committed bribery, what else is there for Dems to do BUT impeach him? Why go through with the sham of "inquiries" when the facts have been decided by Dems already?
If by some miracle enough Dems come to their senses and vote against impeachment, whatever will happen to poor old Nancy? She will have lost all credibility -- even among her own.
With her declaration that the President committed bribery, what else is there for Dems to do BUT impeach him?
Yeah, she's hilarious the way she has been accusing the president for almost three years and then yesterday she's simultaneously continuing to accuse while claiming we have to wait for the process to see what the facts reveal. Meanwhile, the press dutifully nods, uncritically takes notes, and obediently repeats her nonsense.
Yeah, you kinda missed the point. My point was that those people are willing to say that anything is improper whether it actually is or not. That's why we have so many bullshit scandals in the news.
Trump isn't even the only victim of this madness. The Left does it to their own all the time. Every day somebody is outraged over something that is totally ordinary because it boosts their self esteem to judge others.
I'm not trying to say anything about Trump or Biden. But you demand "evidence" for Biden that you have never needed for Trump.
Yeah, you kinda missed the point. My point was that those people are willing to say that anything is improper whether it actually is or not.
Well if that was your point, you failed to make it.
Trump isn't even the only victim of this madness.
Trump is a victim? Hilarious!
The Left does it to their own all the time. Every day somebody is outraged over something that is totally ordinary because it boosts their self esteem to judge others.
I'm not trying to say anything about Trump or Biden.
You may not be 'trying' but you HAVE. You claimed that Biden's 'own words' just might implicate him yet Trump is somehow a victim. Two statements that DO say 'something'.
But you demand "evidence" for Biden that you have never needed for Trump.
Thanks for bringing that up. I asked for ONE iota of evidence against Biden and neither you nor anyone else has provide any.
As for evidence against Trump, unlike you and your fellow travelers, I have actually READ ALL of the documents that have been released about this issue along with tons of subject matter documentation.
So it's pretty fucking clear that I'm not the one who doesn't need evidence, I am not the one that fails to acknowledge evidence and I am not the one that fails to answer questions about evidence.
The text messages were their opinion of what was supposedly happening. Were any of the text exchanges to or from Mr. Trump? NOPE.
So let me get this straight. Is your posit that Perry, Mulvaney, Sondland, Volker, Pence and Giuliani were ALL working against the wishes of Donald Trump?
Perhaps you could point to a statement, a tweet, a note written in crayon by Trump that lead you to that conclusion?
Well if that was your point, you failed to make it.
Geez what a stupid response! OK, you're right. I didn't dumb it down enough so you could understand it. Now I have rephrased it for clarification. Do you finally get it now? Or do you need it explained to you a third way?
You may not be 'trying' but you HAVE.
You really have a hard time letting people speak for themselves, don't you? You seem to have an obsession with telling other people what they think and what they are really saying. That's pretty arrogant.
I asked for ONE iota of evidence against Biden and neither you nor anyone else has provide any.
We have his confession. That's an iota of evidence. Once again you make a claim that fails. Fail. Fail. Fail.
unlike you and your fellow travelers
You have no idea what I have done or read. You don't even know that I'm not traveling. Another Fail!
I am not the one that fails to acknowledge evidence and I am not the one that fails to answer questions about evidence
If we try to put the best possible spin on the thoughts of some of these "conservatives" , we could ne kind and say they are confused. I don't see many of them trying to unconfuse themselves though, so all we can do is wait and see.
Biden did not "confess" to anything. He recounted that he had carried out the policies of the US government at the time and what was also the policy of much of Europe.
When Trump asked for a quid pro quo in terms of investigating the Bidens , what US policy or European policy was he carrying out? It was for himself.
I'm still waiting for one of these people here to point out any other instance where Trump has ever been concerned about corruption.
As Bill Maher said a couple weeks ago, "the only time Trump is concerned about corruption is when he's not in on it".
If we try to put the best possible spin on the thoughts of some of these "conservatives" , we could ne kind and say they are confused.
Some are and some are hell bent on keeping them so. As I have said before, the ones that piss me off or those that intentionally gaslight their brethren.
I don't see many of them trying to unconfuse themselves though, so all we can do is wait and see.
IMHO, most of them are lost causes. Yet I have hopes that a large enough number WILL become 'enlightened' and decide that enough is enough.
Biden did not "confess" to anything. He recounted that he had carried out the policies of the US government at the time and what was also the policy of much of Europe.
Yes and unfortunately, all too many of us have become accustom to the RW misrepresentation. The right bitches and whines about the left being 'outraged' all of the time but they forget that there was a time, before they sold their souls, that they would have been equally outraged about outright lies.
When Trump asked for a quid pro quo in terms of investigating the Bidens , what US policy or European policy was he carrying out? It was for himself.
Yes, they have to equivocate and claim that the POTUS gets to pick Ambassadors and make his/her own foreign policy. Of course, while doing so, they're desperate to ignore that NO government official, including the POTUS, can carry out an official action for CORRUPT purposes.
I'm still waiting for one of these people here to point out any other instance where Trump has ever been concerned about corruption.
I'm still waiting for even one of them to give one iota of evidence that he was concerned about corruption in this case.
As Bill Maher said a couple weeks ago, "the only time Trump is concerned about corruption is when he's not in on it".
If it's to Trump's benefit, it's all good as far as he and his sycophants are concerned.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Embarrassing for the Democrats...just like the Mueller and the Kavanaugh hearings.
The Mueller Hearings were not embarrassing for the Democrats. Republicans simply raked truths (lacking documents/testimonies; withheld witnesses; presidential obstructions) into a shallow grave. You will rue the day that truth 'rises up' to speak on its on behalf!
Yeah they were. If they weren't, every single Democrat running for office would be crowing about how it drove them to start impeachment hearings. But that didn't happen, did it? A report just like it resulted in the immediate impeachment of Bill Clinton. This time, it was like a balloon deflating.
Instead, we have impeachment hearings because . . . Ukraine! Now that - after two plus years of bullshit Russia conspiracy theories - is a pretty poor substitute.
Republicans don't have that power. The power lies with Democrats. Even they chose not to seek impeachment over Russian collusion. That's how you know they're embarrassed.
Okay, come for me. Let's rock and roll! (Smile.)
Democrats are 'postponed' in their investigations in the court system due to the brilliance of a practiced Liar-In-Chief who stiff-armed the Special Counsel through use of obfuscation, hiding between a DOD memorandum (cowardice), warning off testimonies, and outright hiding and destruction of factual documents. Postponements end with a "day in Court," nevertheless. Justice delayed is not justice denied.
There is an important distinction between an Independent Counsel (Starr) and a Special Counsel (Mueller). Lastly, Bill Clinton did not have either the luxury, inclination, or personal constitution to deny himself from giving a proper and truthful deposition to Ken Starr.
Donald Trump weakly delivered "paper" answers to his Special Counsel, and those answers were considered insufficient in the official report. However, the Special Counsel opted to move forward without any further obfuscation from Donald J. Trump!
practiced Liar-In-Chief who stiff-armed the Special Counsel through use of obfuscation, hiding between a DOD memorandum (cowardice), warning off testimonies, and outright hiding and destruction of factual document
None of that happened. You should read the mueller report.
Trump lied to Mueller, in writing, about his personal knowledge of Wikileaks releases.
Sean, is Donald Trump an embarrassment to the United States of America, yes or no?
Why wasn't he charged with perjury for lying under oath? Did mueller miss that?
Oh that's right, you and your fellow travelers only recognize when Democrats say 'I don't know/don't recall'
Almost every single written answer from Trump equivocated by starting with 'To the best of my recollection'...
Let's start here. Have you read the Mueller Report? Because, we can do this!
Yes, you obviously haven’t.
Because a DOJ memo makes charging a sitting president with a crime of little immediate value; the correct remedy is IMPEACHMENT.
Don't doublespeak. Have you read the Mueller Report?
Yeah boy!
Here's the thing. Mueller didn't allege he committed perjury. You made that up. So there's no reason to rationalize why Mueller didn't charge him with a crime Mueller didn't think he committed.
I'm bringing out my megaphone: Have you read the Mueller Report?
Democrats really fucked up in letting this go to the public realm of "As-Seen-On-TV" !
They sound more idiotic than they did in "Private".
All "Schifty" could be was a "Smirky wide eyed Smiley Smurf", and he then moves on to his next "Cooperating Idiot" House member !
"Castro (D)" was Great in this "Open Mic" Involvement!
His bestest of all question was ….. "Is "Murder" Illegal".
Rolls eyes. How did the Democrats sound in private? Take your time explaining.
During Private "Formal Enquiry" !
"Earlier this month, Schiff said he would hold public hearings, but would not say when.
He compared the impeachment probe to a “grand jury,” but ultimately acknowledged that the analogy is “imperfect. ”
Idiotic enough for you ?
I have no clue what you are getting at here. Mostly, it seems a waste of time and just a form of detraction. So have at it . . . go hunt!
Did you hear Taylor talk about his own quid pro quo? Something to the tune of "You're going to need bi-partisan support for........................"
The Great Bamboozlement is underway on Newstalkers.
Rudy Giuliani SAID on twitter, that his efforts in Ukraine were on behalf of his CLIENT.
I'll give you a hint. His client was not the United States of America. The effort of the unofficial "diplomacy" in Ukraine was to get dirt on Trump's election opponent. Trump not only knew about it, he was behind it. It is an abuse of power, an abuse of his office, and he should resign immediately.
…...In these hearings !
Wonder when "Schifty" is gonna release his "Unrefutably" IMPEACHABLE Evidence he's had since 2017.
So far....all he's given is a "smiley smurf" barf PARODY !
How so? Since when is anyone prohibited from seeking information about an election opponent?
Seeking evidence is a far cry from manufacturing fake evidence using blackmail.
I agree. There's no evidence, though, that the presidents discussed manufacturing anything. Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it." He didn't ask him to make something up.
Please tell me that you are not that naïve.
He's the fucking president of the United States and a candidate running against Biden. He cannot use his present office and powers to have a foreign government investigate his election opponents. [Deleted]
Reading some of these comments, I am embarrassed for this site. Perrie deserves better from her conservatives.
Because I rely on factual evidence to make judgments instead of partisan cynicism? Yes, I guess I am that naive.
Why not? He asked the president of Ukraine to look into something the vice president did in his country. Why is that wrong? It's not like he asked another country to look into his private sex life or other personal business.
Imagine President Obama in 2012 going to Bolivia, let's say, and asking the president of Bolivia to investigate one of Mitt Romney's business dealings in that country and find corruption in it. Oh, and, Obama wants the president of Bolivia to announce the opening of this investigation on 60 Minutes. Oh, and, if the investigation is not announced Bolivia won't be getting a trade deal with the U.S.
Imagine that, and what "conservatives" would have said about Obama.
The constant bamboozling that Trumpsters engage in is making many Americans accustomed to lying and cheating, and it is potentially a disaster for our country if it isnt one already.
And . . . stop!
I just got through saying we aren't talking about personal business. We're talking about official public business conducted by the Vice President.
Please tell us about the U.S. Senate investigation that is ongoing into Joe Biden in Ukraine. That would be the proper venue for such an investigation.
Oh yeah, there isnt one and hasnt been one, even though Biden's remarks about the Ukrainian prosecutor being fired took place 23 months ago, and Trump's party has controlled the Senate all that time.
For 23 months it has been public that Biden said something about the Ukrainian prosecutor. Trump waited to ask Ukraine for an investigation until Biden announced he was a candidate for president.
If Biden did something so damaging to US interests the Senate could have been investigating all along. And up until this past January, so could have the House. But there was nothing.
I don't think you are as naive as you act, so there is something else going on.
Come on Tacos!, you're taking your 'devil's advocate' bit too far.
IMHO, Trump didn't actually give a fuck if any investigation took place. ALL Trump wanted was 'the deliverable', the public statement that would and could be used by Solomon and Hannity ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
The reason it's WRONG is because it is ONLY in the interest of Trump. Both of the witnesses, who are subject matter experts on Ukraine, stated as much today.
Or he waited until there was a president of Ukraine who might be receptive to rooting out corruption in his country. Remember the more generic purpose of the call - to congratulate the new president.
Also, Biden announced his candidacy on April 25, and Trump and Giuliani have been chasing this story longer than that.
On March 20, Trump tweeted about it :
And the media was starting to cover it.
3/27/19: HOW DONALD TRUMP AND SEAN HANNITY ARE PROMOTING THEORY UKRAINE INTERFERED IN 2016 ELECTION TO HELP HILLARY CLINTON
4/1/19: Joe Biden's 2020 Ukrainian nightmare: A closed probe is revived
4/7/19: Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don't you want our evidence on Democrats?
And all of this happened before Biden announced he was running for president. So it's not just something he decided to pursue only because Biden was running. I don't think it was even primarily about torpedoing Biden's campaign or potential campaign, as much as it was about fighting back against the Mueller investigation and going after Hillary Clinton.
Well as the GOP tried so desperately to pound home today, corruption has been 'endemic' in Ukraine for a long time.
So maybe you can explain why Trump asked for $250 million in military aid for Ukraine in his 2019 Budget released in February 2018 if he was so fucking worried about Ukrainian corruption?
Or how about taking a crack at explaining why Trump signed the bill that included that $250 million in October 2018?
Then could you move on to why Trump didn't file a rescission of that $250 million before the DOJ wasted all that time certifying the aid? Hell, He could have ripped off $250 million less from the DOJ by 'reprogramming' that funding. Why didn't he do any of that?
Then could you address Trump's failure to follow the legal process for requesting legal assistance in investigations from Ukraine?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Please humor me with a theory of the case! In the words of Tina Turner: "What's [Hillary] got to do with it?"
[Deleted]
"Sleepy" Joe Biden is the Democrats Nominee for president ?
Anything is better than Deranged Dipshit Donnie.
Is "Your" life better or worse right now !
It's about the same - the economy that Obama got going is still working for me, although Trump's tariffs will probably hurt me before long. The ACA that Obama implemented was a huge money saver when I had to quit working for a while to take care of my elderly mother; luckily, now that Trump's doing his best to destroy it, I'm back to work and have health benefits, so Trump can't currently hurt me in that regard.
However, I'm not selfish enough to only care how things impact ME. When I see what a laughingstock Deranged Donnie has made of our country and our constitution, how he sucks up to our enemies and alienates our allies, how his childish impulses are hurting real people and hurting our diplomacy, how he is tearing this country apart and dividing us so much, how he's destroying environmental protections, how he's making all these idiots accept his lies as truth and making honesty and ethics something that half of all Americans no longer give a shit about ... makes me glad I don't have kids.
So...."Dipshit" hasn't hurt you one bit, but you're willing to put that on the auction block for an "Anything" ?
That's just GREAT !
" However, I'm not selfish enough to only care how things impact ME. When I see what a laughingstock Deranged Donnie has made of our country and our constitution."
And how has he done that ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By letting other countries skate on their obligations?
No....That can't be it !
By wanting open borders ?
No.....that can't be it !
By wanting to raise taxes on middle class U.S. citizens for Freebies for the few ?
No......that can't be it !
By wanting to pay for "non-Citizens" needs ?
No......that can't be it !
Maybe its taxing legal gun and ammunition sales ?
No....that's not it !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh.....Oh …….Ooooooohhhhhh…… MAYBE IT'S because he doesn't want to do those simple items noted above ?
That's it.....isn't it !
You do know that the Preamble to the constitution says:
To " PROMOTE" the general welfare....not " PROVIDE For " the general welfare ...... Right ?
"PROMOTE" :
To Encourage, Support !
Don't see "Supply" anywhere in that definition.
So by the 'media' you mean Solomon and Hannity who just got fired by the Hill. Got ya.
BTFW, the Newsweek article supports the testimony that Yovanovitch WAS outspoken about corruption in Ukraine. Guess that pissed off Trump and Kent was right, you can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people.
This is essentially "he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue " defense, which seeks to separate Trump from his actual behavior.
I have a funny feeling that not too many people who were already predisposed to back Trump answer that affirmatively. Trump policies in specific simply havent had that much effect on everyone. And of course, to wholeheartedly accept trump as an economic savior you have to assume that Hillary Clinton would have destroyed the recovery Obama started, which is simply absurd.
Solomon joined Fox News, guess he doesn't think much of his 'Independent' prospects.
Now he and Hannity can shovel bullshit to new depths.
Really? When did this happen? Is this some of that info that you are only privy to [deleted]
It's not a 'story', the Hill's REAL journalists sent complaints up the chain and the management got the message and they 'parted ways' with Solomon.
Oh and BTW BF, you make up stories all of the time and we're supposed to pretend it's humor. You can pretend too can't you?
Gee BF, I didn't realize you were holding your breath waiting for my reply.
It's good that I don't care one way or another about yours, I would have suffocated waiting for your replies.
Or what?
What no penis?
After the Steele Dossier. Slink away. Just slink the damn hell away.
How obtuse.
I feel the same way about you as you do.
Do you hear that a lot?
Let's get rid of your specious meme 'right now':
For a proper good deed nobody blames President Donald Trump.
For having a long-term strategy of inviting our radical enemies on the world stage into our bosom without challenging them to drastically improve their national and political behavior;
for paling around with terrorist-leaders (men who justify rank murder of their enemies);
for attempting to enforce the pushing out of DACA youth into a 'no-man's land' between nations;
for not protecting and granting unlimited rights and freedom of expression (and national service) for transgendered people in the federal system;
for being an dishonest 'broker' of the American tax dollar; and,
for three years of tampering to change this country's ethos into a cult-like following unified under a dictatorial ("One-man rule"), I, we, have an A BIG PROBLEM OF NOT BEING BETTER OFF right now!
Because I rely on factual evidence to make judgments instead of partisan cynicism?
Since when?
Proven obstruction of justice outlined in the Muller report wasn't enough for you.
Actual statements by Trump siding with Putin/Russia over American intelligence wasn't enough for you.
Actions against our Kurdish and Ukrainian allies aren't enough for you.
No.... Facts don't matter to you Tacos.... Just the "R" by the name.
[Deleted]
Ooooooohhhhh! Way to counter my points MUVA.
Leave it to you to bring a ping pong ball to a gunfight. Hell guess your response was an improvement over your typical "But Obama....!".
Ditto.
Trump claimed he would not watch and then criticizes the testimonies given. Liar In Chief strikes again.
He gets briefings you know and I am sure someone was watching, if he wasn't, and updating him on the circus.
From FoxNews.
Pretty sure he was hanging out with the president of Turkey because the two came out for a press conference immediately following the hearing. But if you have other information, by all means . . .
His new best buddy. He is in love again...
He also claimed he wanted transparency, while telling all his toadies not to testify and whining now that the hearings are open.
That was embarrassing. The best, first witnesses in this "crisis" offered hearsay testimony of third-hand rumors of things that they thought could happen but never actually happened. Congress has set aside real business for this nonsense all so they can declare a scandal around Trump leading into the election.
I can't believe that was the opening witness.
They needed to start with a bang to develop momentum and they went with a witness who Jordan leveled in two minutes.
While they were eating in a restaurant !
I think my favorite moment so far was when - after allowing blatant hearsay testimony for like 45 minutes - Schiff interrupts the Republican examination to caution the witnesses against answering questions based on facts not in evidence. i.e., he's objecting. As if we were in a trial. And the Republican asking questions is like, "Oh, now we're using the Federal Rules of Evidence?"
And apparently the answer is yes, we are, but only when Republicans are asking questions. What a joke these proceedings are!
Tacos, tell us again how you really dont like and support Trump. I havent had a good laugh in a few minutes.
[Deleted.] I come into your seeds to discuss the topic. Never once have I come into your seeds to attack you personally, but that's all you want to do with me. And apparently, you're proud of it.
I don't appreciate bamboozling on these forums. I guess that is my problem.
[Deleted]
I think someone who apparently has never read a fact in his life, but spouts off in here all the time claiming to know what's going on (anything to support the most despicable person ever elected as president) is an embarrassment to this forum. And to our country.
Instead of constantly demanding proof which you never read, and posting utter bullshit, why not try doing some actual research before you post?
Easily triggered it appears. Wally's truthful observations really seem to set some people off.
Both you and Wally have been spouting the same BS for a few years, and none of your claims have yet to come true.
But keep pretending you have some kind of inside scoop and know what's going to happen before it happens; your credibility is already shot.
Rather hilarious that your TDS makes you think that expecting people to actually read facts is somehow "being triggered" - and that utter bullshit is "truthful observations." Actually it's not hilarious - it's pathetic and despicable.
Wow, that's an utterly delusional version of what was said. Well done.
You might want to review the rambling, multifaceted, conspiracy filled question that Castor asked.
Schiff NEVER objected to one question asked by anyone during the hearing.
Just STOP.
What got me was one ass kept asking questions then wouldn't let the witness answer. Kept talking over him. Then asking a different question before he was allowed to answer the first. Then saying, Ok, that was not a question. Then ramble on about something else.
I felt Schiff gave them a lot of leeway.
He did the same in the depositions. The only time he put his foot down was when they tried to out the whistleblower. The only time he paused their bullshit today was when Castor threw out a loaded question and tried to slip in a DNC conspiracy, Schiff warned Taylor not to assume that facts not in evidence are truthful. That was for Taylor's own protection.
or what?
Oh my bad Tacos!, you just keep on keepin on spewing bullshit comments to your heart's content.
Please proceed.
It was a good call. Ambassador Taylor appeared perplexed as to rather a staff lawyer could give him a 'pig in its own blanket' free! LOL!
Schiff: smart!
When that's all you got, you go for it.
You would know.
No, you would know.
There was a left wing conspiracy going on, and Barr and Durham are right now in the process of getting to the bottom of it.
Yeah, we've been waiting for years for those indictments.
LOL. Hardly a sillier comment could be made. It would be almost impossible.
Supposedly Barr and Durham are looking into the US intelligence agencies . Is it your belief that the CIA is "left wing?"
You are just mouthing ridiculous right wing media talking points.
You know this how? Has the DOJ released the documentation required to lawfully request legal assistance from Ukraine? Got a link to that?
Or did you hear on Hannity that they're doing it extra-judiciously?
BTW, you know that the DOJ put out a press release that stated that Trump hasn't asked Barr to do any kind of investigation into Ukraine right?
It would take an intelligent person, at the most, 15 or 20 minutes to understand why Trump wanted Ukraine to get involved with his demands.
Trump has been led to believe, through conservative media conspiracy theories, that Ukraine was behind all the interference in the 2016 election. These conservative conspiracy theories have been almost entirely disproven. This nonsense appeals to Trump though, because it makes him believe that he would have won the popular vote in 2016 if not for ..... Ukraine.
Then there is the desire to have Biden called corrupt. This is the Trump playbook - accuse others of being what you are yourself. He is easily the most corrupt national politician in the lifetime of anyone alive today. Rather than face that reality, he wants to shift attention to someone else, in this case Joe Biden.
His devotion to ridiculous conspiracies was relatively harmless to him until he tried to get the new government of Ukraine involved in his insanity.
Saw Pelosi on tv yesterday.
She seems to have painted the Democrats into a corner.
With her declaration that the President committed bribery, what else is there for Dems to do BUT impeach him? Why go through with the sham of "inquiries" when the facts have been decided by Dems already?
If by some miracle enough Dems come to their senses and vote against impeachment, whatever will happen to poor old Nancy? She will have lost all credibility -- even among her own.
Yeah, she's hilarious the way she has been accusing the president for almost three years and then yesterday she's simultaneously continuing to accuse while claiming we have to wait for the process to see what the facts reveal. Meanwhile, the press dutifully nods, uncritically takes notes, and obediently repeats her nonsense.
Wait WHAT? Some here said that it was all good if his 'admitted actions might have been improper'. Let me see if I can find it...
Here it is:
Many have a willingness to say that Trump's admitted actions WERE improper.
In their "opinion"...........and that's IT.
Yeah, you kinda missed the point. My point was that those people are willing to say that anything is improper whether it actually is or not. That's why we have so many bullshit scandals in the news.
Trump isn't even the only victim of this madness. The Left does it to their own all the time. Every day somebody is outraged over something that is totally ordinary because it boosts their self esteem to judge others.
I'm not trying to say anything about Trump or Biden. But you demand "evidence" for Biden that you have never needed for Trump.
So you refuse to review the ACTUAL text messages and address their ACTUAL content. Got ya.
Well if that was your point, you failed to make it.
Trump is a victim? Hilarious!
You may not be 'trying' but you HAVE. You claimed that Biden's 'own words' just might implicate him yet Trump is somehow a victim. Two statements that DO say 'something'.
Thanks for bringing that up. I asked for ONE iota of evidence against Biden and neither you nor anyone else has provide any.
As for evidence against Trump, unlike you and your fellow travelers, I have actually READ ALL of the documents that have been released about this issue along with tons of subject matter documentation.
So it's pretty fucking clear that I'm not the one who doesn't need evidence, I am not the one that fails to acknowledge evidence and I am not the one that fails to answer questions about evidence.
The text messages were their opinion of what was supposedly happening. Were any of the text exchanges to or from Mr. Trump? NOPE.
So let me get this straight. Is your posit that Perry, Mulvaney, Sondland, Volker, Pence and Giuliani were ALL working against the wishes of Donald Trump?
Perhaps you could point to a statement, a tweet, a note written in crayon by Trump that lead you to that conclusion?
Geez what a stupid response! OK, you're right. I didn't dumb it down enough so you could understand it. Now I have rephrased it for clarification. Do you finally get it now? Or do you need it explained to you a third way?
You really have a hard time letting people speak for themselves, don't you? You seem to have an obsession with telling other people what they think and what they are really saying. That's pretty arrogant.
We have his confession. That's an iota of evidence. Once again you make a claim that fails. Fail. Fail. Fail.
You have no idea what I have done or read. You don't even know that I'm not traveling. Another Fail!
What a rich fantasy life.
No, that's not what he said. You completely ignored what he said. Typical.
Does trying to denigrate people make you feel like a big man Tacos!?
Your comment isn't worthy of my time.
Have fun.
If we try to put the best possible spin on the thoughts of some of these "conservatives" , we could ne kind and say they are confused. I don't see many of them trying to unconfuse themselves though, so all we can do is wait and see.
Biden did not "confess" to anything. He recounted that he had carried out the policies of the US government at the time and what was also the policy of much of Europe.
When Trump asked for a quid pro quo in terms of investigating the Bidens , what US policy or European policy was he carrying out? It was for himself.
I'm still waiting for one of these people here to point out any other instance where Trump has ever been concerned about corruption.
As Bill Maher said a couple weeks ago, "the only time Trump is concerned about corruption is when he's not in on it".
Some are and some are hell bent on keeping them so. As I have said before, the ones that piss me off or those that intentionally gaslight their brethren.
IMHO, most of them are lost causes. Yet I have hopes that a large enough number WILL become 'enlightened' and decide that enough is enough.
Yes and unfortunately, all too many of us have become accustom to the RW misrepresentation. The right bitches and whines about the left being 'outraged' all of the time but they forget that there was a time, before they sold their souls, that they would have been equally outraged about outright lies.
Yes, they have to equivocate and claim that the POTUS gets to pick Ambassadors and make his/her own foreign policy. Of course, while doing so, they're desperate to ignore that NO government official, including the POTUS, can carry out an official action for CORRUPT purposes.
I'm still waiting for even one of them to give one iota of evidence that he was concerned about corruption in this case.
If it's to Trump's benefit, it's all good as far as he and his sycophants are concerned.