Sondland Implicates Trump, Giuliani In Quid Pro Quo Scheme

  
By:  john-russell  •  3 weeks ago  •  243 comments

Sondland Implicates Trump, Giuliani In Quid Pro Quo Scheme

In a just released opening statement by Gordon Sondland  he admits , specifically, that there was a quid pro quo set up between the release of aid to Ukraine and investigations of Biden and the DNC. 

He is handing over Trump and Giuliani. 

Get your popcorn. 

Sondland testimony begins in about 10 minutes. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

It will be interesting to watch Nunes and Jordan throw spittle around the room today. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

Another tRump toady who bought his position as ambassador in this swamp of an administration, or should I say cesspool?

 
 
 
PJ
1.2  PJ  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

Let's not leave out Mikey at the State dept.  He's poison over there.  He's another whose legacy will have a big ole black stain on it.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.1  Dulay  replied to  PJ @1.2    3 weeks ago

Pretty sure that put the last nail in his Senate bid in Kansas too...

 
 
 
PJ
1.2.2  PJ  replied to  Dulay @1.2.1    3 weeks ago

Let's hope so.  He has betrayed every oath he's taken. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

Ambassador Sondland just testified under oath that he NEVER heard the president say there were conditions on aid to Ukraine.

That's called CHECKMATE!

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    3 weeks ago

When/where did he say that?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.3.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    3 weeks ago
That's called CHECKMATE!

Irrelevant when the administration is playing pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    3 weeks ago

You think Trump is the equivalent to Abarham Lincoln,  Vic. 

I will look to other interpretations of what Sondland said. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.1    3 weeks ago

Only over & over again.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.3    3 weeks ago
You think Trump is the equivalent to Abarham Lincoln

I do?  Tell me more.


I will look to other interpretations of what Sondland said.

Why not simply go by his own words?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.5    3 weeks ago

Sondland has said this morning that there was a quid pro quo and they were all taking direction from the president. 

There's a checkmate for you. 

Vic, is Trump throwing Giuliani under the bus? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.6    3 weeks ago

Ambassador Sondland’s testimony made clear that in one of the few brief phone calls he had with President Trump, the president clearly stated that he ‘wanted nothing’ from Ukraine and repeated ‘no quid pro quo over and over again'"

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.8  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.7    3 weeks ago

Sondland was talking to the 'president' on his unsecured phone and it was overheard tRump saying 'have you said you're going to start the investigations publicly'?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.9  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.8    3 weeks ago
and it was overheard

HAHAHA!

 
 
 
katrix
1.3.10  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.7    3 weeks ago
Ambassador Sondland’s testimony made clear that in one of the few brief phone calls he had with President Trump, the president clearly stated that he ‘wanted nothing’ from Ukraine and repeated ‘no quid pro quo over and over again'"

Haha, you must have seen Trump's handwritten notes he's clinging to today!

 
 
 
lib50
1.3.11  lib50  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.9    3 weeks ago

Overheard by those at the table and surrounding areas, including inside the restaurant and outside on the sidewalk.  And Putin of course. 

(but her emails)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @1.3.11    3 weeks ago

Oh ya, and Sondland had his speaker phone on and everyone recognized Trump's voice and everyone came to the same conclusion as you!

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.13  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.3.10    3 weeks ago
you must have seen Trump's handwritten notes he's clinging to today!

Actually it's already in the record. Aren't you watching or just listening to CNN analysis?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.14  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.7    3 weeks ago

So you think one phone call in the midst of a large scheme is the be-all ?  lol. 

Its not going to work that way Vic. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.15  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    3 weeks ago
'Only over & over again.'

Link?

 
 
 
KDMichigan
1.3.16  KDMichigan  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.13    3 weeks ago
you watching or just listening to CNN analysis?

I'll take CNN for 1,000 Alex.

Isn't the ravings of the left wingers Hillaryious?

The only problem with this dog and pony show is it will be dead on arrival in the Senate.

Schiff was going to file articles of impeachment before the 1st witness ever testified, any one with half a brain knows this.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.17  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.9    3 weeks ago

Everyone present overheard the 'president' ask Sondland if it was going to be announced publicly the bogus investigation into the Bidens

 
 
 
katrix
1.3.18  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.7    3 weeks ago

Don't be so gullible. That call was on Sept 9th after Trump knew he was busted - so he had to cover it up. Sondland also states that Trump was in a very bad mood, which I attribute to the fact that he was given talking points he had to stick to, to get himself out of the hole he had dug - and we know how he hates having to do that.

But it didn't work in the long run, and here we are.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.3.19  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  katrix @1.3.18    3 weeks ago
Sondland also states that Trump was in a very bad mood, which I attribute to the fact that he was given talking points he had to stick to, to get himself out of the hole he had dug

Congrats on the Internet Psychology degree.............

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.20  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.3.18    3 weeks ago
Don't be so gullible. That call was on Sept 9th after Trump knew he was busted - so he had to cover it up. Sondland also states that Trump was in a very bad mood, which I attribute to the fact that he was given talking points he had to stick to, to get himself out of the hole he had dug - and we know how he hates having to do that.

You see Kat, impeaching a President is not a minor thing. Assumptions are not good enough. Facts are required. So far nobody has a direct statement from the President linking aid to investigations, despite the fake banner on CNN!

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.21  Tessylo  replied to  katrix @1.3.10    3 weeks ago

920x920.jpg

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.22  Vic Eldred  replied to  KDMichigan @1.3.16    3 weeks ago

They are losing and they sense it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.23  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.21    3 weeks ago

ASS COVERED!

 
 
 
katrix
1.3.24  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.23    3 weeks ago

Writing a bunch of notes months after the fact doesn't cover his ass. You are not dumb enough to fall for that; I don't think you're dumb in the least, so coming from you that comment is rather astonishing.

I really don't care if he gets impeached - since the Senate will never remove him from office, it's a moot point - but it is good that all this is coming to light, so ethical voters will realize how unfit Trump is. The low-information voters won't be swayed since they never bother researching anything, but nothing was going to change their mind anyway.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.25  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.20    3 weeks ago

Trump himself asked Zelensky, on a phone call, to investigate Joe Biden and "Crowdstrike" (the DNC). Frankly, in itself that should get him impeached. In itself.  He wanted dirt to use in the 2020 election. 

Since that story broke and the hearings and depositions have begun much more evidence has come out that indicates it was a wider scheme than just the one phone call. 

The one phone call led to looking deeper, and when looked at deeper things were found. 

If this were a trial it would be a slam dunk that he abused his power to get Ukraine to do something for his personal benefit. 

But because it is not a trial we hear all this crap about "he didnt use the word bribe."

The right assumes all their followers are idiots.  Sometimes it works.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.26  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.3.24    3 weeks ago
I really don't care if he gets impeached - since the Senate will never remove him from office, it's a moot point

Not for the radical left.

but it is good that all this is coming to light, so ethical voters will realize how unfit Trump is.

What is unethical about someone who endured numerous fraudulent investigations for 3 years wanting to find out how it began? Let's face it, any president would want to know. 

In the end the only facts that count will be these:

The Ukraine once worked with democratic operatives to defeat candidate Trump.
Trump won a major upset election in 2016.
The Ukrainians got a call from the President.
The Ukrainians got a meeting with the President.
The Ukrainians got security assistance from the President.

What did the President get in return?

Nothing. 

 
 
 
Ender
1.3.27  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.26    3 weeks ago
What is unethical about someone who endured numerous fraudulent investigations for 3 years wanting to find out how it began?

Ask Hillary.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.28  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.26    3 weeks ago
.The Ukrainians got a meeting with the President.The Ukrainians got security assistance from the President. What did the President get in return?

The Ukrainians got a call from the President

Where Trump told them they were not doing enough to suit him, and he asked for a "favor". 

.The Ukrainians got a meeting with the President.

The meeting was being planned for the White House. There has been no meeting for Ukraine at the White House, to this day. 

The Ukrainians got security assistance from the President.

After the scandal broke and congressional investigations had been announced.

What did the President get in return? 

He deserved nothing. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.29  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.25    3 weeks ago
Trump himself asked Zelensky, on a phone call, to investigate Joe Biden and "Crowdstrike" (the DNC). Frankly, in itself that should get him impeached.

Why?

He wanted dirt to use in the 2020 election.

Like Hillary did with the dossier?
I don't think so. I think he wanted the dems investigated & punished. He made that phone call only days after the Mueller Report finally died in the House. That might just happen.

Since that story broke and the hearings and depositions have begun much more evidence has come out that indicates it was a wider scheme than just the one phone call. 

Does it rise to the level of his IRS denying Conservative groups non-profit status at the start of an election?

If this were a trial it would be a slam dunk that he abused his power to get Ukraine to do something for his personal benefit. 

It's better than a trial. Schiff makes up the rules as he goes along and dirties up the President before an election. The President gets nothing done and maybe you win the lottery!

 
 
 
katrix
1.3.30  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.29    3 weeks ago

You demand proof for any allegations against anyone in the GOP, and make wild assumptions and declarations when it's anyone on the left.

I call that partisan hypocrisy, just as your comment 1.3.24. Hillary investigations - good and justified. Trump investigations- hoaxes and harassment.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.31  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.22    3 weeks ago

Yup the 'president' and his administration and the gop are losing it and THEY  KNOW IT.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.32  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.23    3 weeks ago

It takes a circus tent to cover his big fat stinky ass.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.33  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.29    3 weeks ago

You struggle to get anywhere in these discussions. I mean really struggle. It is good for you that you have right wing media to help you feel successful at this.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.34  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.3.30    3 weeks ago
I call that partisan hypocrisy, just as your comment 1.3.24. Hillary investigations - good and justified. Trump investigations- hoaxes and harassment.

I happen to believe that. I firmly believe that Hillary Clinton skated from Whitewater and with FBI help survived the e-mail scandal. Most people don't get away with anything. She got away with a lot.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.35  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.34    3 weeks ago
"I happen to believe that. I firmly believe that Hillary Clinton skated from Whitewater and with FBI help survived the e-mail scandal. Most people don't get away with anything. She got away with a lot."
jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_44_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_25_smiley_image.gif
Of course you believe that and the 'president' is as pure as the driven snow
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.36  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.33    3 weeks ago
You struggle to get anywhere in these discussions

Is it because the rational mind no longer prevails?

It is good for you that you have right wing media to help you feel successful at this.

I'm on a gallant crusade - against progressive ideology!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.37  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.35    3 weeks ago
Of course you believe that and the 'president' is as pure as the driven snow

He is a key figure in the war against the radical left!

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.3.38  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.32    3 weeks ago
his big fat stinky ass.

Butts, Butts, Butts. (Facepalm) :-)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.39  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.37    3 weeks ago

Rep Stefanik: "You testified, 'President Trump never told me directly that the aid was conditioned on the investigations?'"

Ambassador Sondland: "That's correct."

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.40  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.39    3 weeks ago

Sondland: “No one on this planet” told him aid was tied to investigations. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.41  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.40    3 weeks ago

Now Maloney is trying to bully Sondland to be followed by miss fucking Demings

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.42  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.41    3 weeks ago

Lindsey Graham: "I Will Call Adam Schiff to testify in the Senate."

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.3.43  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  katrix @1.3.24    3 weeks ago

He went from "I want a favor." to "I WANT NOTHING!"  Like omg, he is now trying to cover his ass because he know he is busted.  It would take a GP Large to cover his fat ass.

 
 
 
Ender
1.3.44  Ender  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.3.43    3 weeks ago

Amazes me. Even Mulvaney admitted it on a national stage. Yet they still deny.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.3.45  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.42    3 weeks ago
Lindsey Graham: "I Will Call Adam Schiff to testify in the Senate."

Let it be. When the House impeaches, it will be up to the Senate to decide.

Let it all come out, call whomever you desire, hear the testimony, ultimately cast the vote for all posterity, and let the chips fall where they may. Here's hoping they have the gumption to do so. 

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.3.46  gooseisgone  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.14    3 weeks ago
So you think one phone call in the midst of a large scheme is the be-all 

Yes.....John....hear it and weep. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/20/gordon-sondland-trump-never-told-me-aid-was-conditioned-on-investigations/

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.3.47  gooseisgone  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.8    3 weeks ago
Sondland was talking to the 'president' on his unsecured phone and it was overheard tRump saying

If you're talking to someone on the phone.......how do you overhear something from the person your talking to?????????

 
 
 
KDMichigan
1.3.48  KDMichigan  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.42    3 weeks ago
Lindsey Graham: "I Will Call Adam Schiff to testify in the Senate."

lmao that would be awesome. Wouldn't be hard to get him lying under oath.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.49  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    3 weeks ago

Ambassador Sondland testified under oath that the president demand for an investigation into the server [Clinton] and Burisma [Biden] were conditions on the WH meeting with Zelensky.

BRIBERY!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.50  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @1.3.49    3 weeks ago

For a White House meeting?  You'll never get bipartisan or public support to impeach for that.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.51  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @1.3.45    3 weeks ago
Here's hoping they have the gumption to do so. 

So they said during the Clinton Senate trial.

 
 
 
JBB
1.3.52  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.50    3 weeks ago

A White House meeting and $400,000,000.00...

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.54  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.50    3 weeks ago
For a White House meeting?

A WH meeting is an official act. Trump is using his office for a corrupt purpose. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.3.55  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @1.3.27    3 weeks ago

Hillary was never POTUS so your comparison is a fail.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.3.56  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Dulay @1.3.49    3 weeks ago

That can’t be taken seriously well least I would never take that seriously I don’t know why anybody would unless they were desperate to justify a reason to stage a de facto coup in support of a dreadfully corrupt government reinforced by their  desire to put some left wing fuck wad an office.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.57  Dulay  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.3.56    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
1.3.58  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.7    3 weeks ago

920x920.jpg

Circular reasoning?

Donald Trump simply confirms his own words to Ambassador Sondland in a phone call. What are the actions involved and what have his lieutenants executed on the orders of this president?

Think of it this way:

original

Say what you will Mr. President. They're just mere words. What did you have done up to this point?

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.3.59  gooseisgone  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.25    3 weeks ago
He wanted dirt to use in the 2020 election.

When was that said John.........point out who testified that they heard that.  FYI feelings, assumptions and hearsay don't count here or in a court of law.

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.3.60  gooseisgone  replied to  Dulay @1.3.49    3 weeks ago
Sondland testified under oath that the president demand for an investigation

Please point out where Sondland testified he actually "heard" the President say this.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.61  Dulay  replied to  gooseisgone @1.3.60    3 weeks ago

Where did I say that he did? 

 
 
 
Heartland American
1.3.62  Heartland American  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.42    3 weeks ago

I can’t wait for that! 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.63  Vic Eldred  replied to  Heartland American @1.3.62    3 weeks ago

They may hold a trial with many witnesses, right around the time the Durham investigation starts to bear fruit! And it will be election season!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.3.64  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.3    2 weeks ago

We all know what happened to Lincoln.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.4  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

256

Yeah - let's watch that spittle fly and totally ignore the "Former VP of the U.S." doing Quid pro quo - and announcing it on National TV.

This is such a friggin' joke - and he's running for President???  Oh yeah - he's a Dem/Lib and gets to collect all the "Get outta Jail Free" cards, eh?

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.1  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4    3 weeks ago
This is such a friggin' joke

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/world/europe/political-stability-in-the-balance-as-ukraine-ousts-top-prosecutor.html

The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.
As the problems festered, Kiev drew increasingly sharp criticism from Western diplomats and leaders. In a visit in December, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said corruption was eating Ukraine “like a cancer.” Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, which props up Ukraine financially, said last month that progress was so slow in fighting corruption that “it’s hard to see how the I.M.F.-supported program can continue.”

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.4.2  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @1.4.1    3 weeks ago

Ahhh - so, in YOUR mind, Biden BRIBING the Ukraines, on National TV, is OK??  Got it.

 
 
 
katrix
1.4.3  katrix  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.2    3 weeks ago

Jesus H. Christ. Your comment is beyond ridiculous. If you can't see the difference between pushing Ukraine to stop corruption, as Biden did,  and pushing Ukraine for personal gain, as Trump did ....

Putin would be so proud of you.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.4.4  Freedom Warrior  replied to  katrix @1.4.3    3 weeks ago

Look the Dems have more to do with this than Trump I can’t believe that you take that seriously because you just told us that Biden son doesn’t matter and now you’re telling us that somehow it does matter where the heck are you going to end up on this.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.4.5  It Is ME  replied to  katrix @1.4.3    3 weeks ago
and pushing Ukraine for personal gain, as Trump did ....

We ALL know .... Ukraine were the ones that Actually "Gained".

What did Trump "Gain" Again ?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.4.6  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @1.4.5    3 weeks ago

What is it that the Ukraine 'gained' again?

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.4.7  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @1.4.6    3 weeks ago
What is it that the Ukraine 'gained' again?

WOW ! jrSmiley_103_smiley_image.jpg

could it have been Money and Anti-Tank Missiles ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
1.4.8  CB   replied to  1stwarrior @1.4    3 weeks ago

Please self-inform yourself and self-correct. If you wish watch the entire hour of video.

The relevant timestamp @ 50:50 in the video below continuing to the end of the tape!

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.9  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.2    3 weeks ago
Ahhh - so, in YOUR mind, Biden BRIBING the Ukraines, on National TV, is OK??  Got it.

Since the Counsel of Foreign Relations video was filmed in Jan. 2018, please explain how the hell you came the ridiculous conclusion that Biden 'BRIBED' the Ukrainians on National TV? 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.10  Dulay  replied to  CB @1.4.8    3 weeks ago

NO CB, they will NOT watch the pertinent part of the video to the end. They don't want context, they don't want any form of reality to burst their bubble. They'll keep posting the 'clip' and spewing the bullshit about this video no matter how many times it's bee debunked. It's what they DO. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/c-span-video-joe-biden-ukraine/

512

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.4.11  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @1.4.9    3 weeks ago

Are you really that arrogant that you argue against what has already been proven????

" In 2016, and with the support of other world leaders, Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion of U.S. aid unless Ukraine’s leaders fired the country’s top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, for being too soft on corruption⁠⁠—which they did. "

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2019/09/25/heres-what-happened-with-the-bidens-and-ukraine/#4eea60b39387

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.12  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.11    3 weeks ago
Are you really that arrogant that you argue against what has already been proven????

Are YOU really that arrogant that YOU claim that members can't recognize that neither YOU nor your link prove that Biden bribed the Ukrainians? 

You insist in your comments that Biden did a 'quid pro quo' and bribed the Ukrainians right 1st? 

Here is the first statement in YOUR link:

President Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, repeatedly claimed that Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corruption while the two had dealings in Ukraine.  But no evidence of corruption has ever been found⁠—here’s what actually happened:

It then goes on to debunk the bullshit comments you've posted here.

Great link 1st. Well done. 

 
 
 
katrix
1.4.13  katrix  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.11    3 weeks ago

Here's the difference. Biden was pressuring Ukraine to stop corruption, which was rampant. Trump was pressuring Ukraine to do things to personally benefit himself and to harm his political opponent.

What the righties don't seem to understand is that while quid pro pro is common in diplomacy, as has been pointed out - what Trump did is not normal diplomatic quid pro pro, and is likely going to result in his impeachment.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.4.14  1stwarrior  replied to  katrix @1.4.13    3 weeks ago

Don't remember seeing anything in the Constitution that states our political leaders can tell other country's political leaders how to run their countries OR ELSE WE WON'T GIVE YOU $1B IN AID THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED.

Ukraine is NOT part of the U.S. and Obama/Biden had absolutely NO AUTHORITY to tell them what to do.

Trump - "Could you do me a favor".

Biden - "You don't fire the S.O.B. then I won't give you the $1B Congress has already agreed to pay you."

Gee - can you see the difference????

Probably not.

 
 
 
katrix
1.4.15  katrix  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.14    3 weeks ago

Oh, I see the difference, all right. Too bad you refuse to see the truth. Maybe you forget that Mulhaney said we use quid pro pro all the time and that we should get over it? What Biden did was acceptable; what Trump did was not. It's all about whether it benefited the country or was for personal gain.

Favor, my ass, by the way. Trump's weasel words don't change the quid pro pro; but they sure seem to fool a lot of gullible people.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.16  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.14    3 weeks ago
Don't remember seeing anything in the Constitution that states our political leaders can tell other country's political leaders how to run their countries OR ELSE WE WON'T GIVE YOU $1B IN AID THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED.

Yet you don't seem to have an issue with Trump doing just that...

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.4.17  gooseisgone  replied to  Dulay @1.4.9    3 weeks ago
please explain how the hell you came the ridiculous conclusion that Trump 'BRIBED' the Ukrainians

Please explain and don't point to some transcript.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.18  Dulay  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.17    3 weeks ago
Please explain and don't point to some transcript.

I understand, some people need pictures. 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4832768/adam-schiff-closing-statement

 
 
 
CB
1.4.19  CB   replied to  Dulay @1.4.10    3 weeks ago

Indeed. It is shameless, do as we say and not as we do.

Here we have conservatives who will 'short-sheet' and criticize Joe Biden's comments, while never mentioning the words Ivanka Trump has patents that are "golden" in Xi' China, Donald Trump likely sold out the Kurds to keep in good-standing with in Erdogan' Turkey, and Now Ukraine can' feel secure and safe, because of Trump's indulgences of Putin' Russia!  You will not hear about from conservatives!

 
 
 
CB
1.4.20  CB   replied to  1stwarrior @1.4.14    3 weeks ago

What proof do you present that the two things are the same? Show it.  You can not simply call them, "The SAME." And that be all to it. You can not ask others to tease out the nuance differences you protest are not there.

Such as evidence or fact that Congress was not informed and backing what Biden planned to say in a crucial moment of negotiating the removal of a corrupt state official for which the government was "backsliding" on its stated commitment to remove. Ukraine has sworn to exercise good and better judgement in fighting corruption. And it was being to 'squelch' on following through.

What being at stake: Keeping Europe sanctioning Russia or else let Europe remove sanctions from Russia and Russia after moving to take down Ukraine's economy (in the tank)!

It in the video at the end, did you watch and listen to it?

 
 
 
CB
1.4.21  CB   replied to  katrix @1.4.15    3 weeks ago

Good calling out the use of  'weasel words.' That's powerful and correct. President Trump multiplies words galore when he speaks.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2  FLYNAVY1    3 weeks ago

Let's just hope Gordon S. tells the truth today.  

His options are:

  • Lie to try to protect his ass and that of Trump.
  • Take the 5th
  • Tell the truth about the phone conversations.

If he does throw Trump and Giuliani under the bus..... there gonna be a whole bunch of Forever Trumper's heads exploding on this site and others.....! 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
2.2  r.t..b...  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago
Let's just hope Gordon S. tells the truth today.

Tick...Tock...Tick...Tock...                    (check out the Watchmen on HBO if you have not done so...remarkably relevant)

 
 
 
r.t..b...
2.3  r.t..b...  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago
Gordon S.

aka John Dean...

 
 
 
PJ
2.4  PJ  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago

Nah - they wouldn't care if Trump shot someone on 5th Ave.  Selling out ones country for ones own self interest doesn't seem to bother them at all as long as trump puts brown/black people and kids in cages, shooting up immigrants and stealing people's land for a silly wall.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.4.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  PJ @2.4    3 weeks ago

I wonder how they feel about him shooting himself in the foot with that bs tirade of "I  WANT NOTHING!"

 
 
 
PJ
2.4.2  PJ  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.4.1    3 weeks ago

The republican politicians do not seem to have any issue with the argument.  It's really rather pathetic that they will condone anything from this president at the cost of the country.  These people are not patriots.

 
 
 
katrix
2.5  katrix  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago
If he does throw Trump and Giuliani under the bus..... there gonna be a whole bunch of Forever Trumper's heads exploding on this site and others.....! 

Nope. The way they work is, if someone defends Trump's lies, they claim he's a hero. If someone tells the truth and it's not flattering to Trump, they call him a traitor and claim he never had any credibility to begin with. It's as though Fox has taken over their brains and they think facts are lies, and vice versa. Their heads can't explode because they won't let any facts in to conflict with what they want to believe.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago
His options are:

He chose save his own ass. Fortunately, for the President he covered himself in private conversations. There is no John Dean connection here. The problem for Schiff is that it looks like the real quid pro quo involved a White House meeting rather than the aid. It would be impossible to make a credible impeachment over a WH meeting. Thus the dems are going to have to go into overdrive in trying to prove the aid was part of the equation and the clock is working against them.

 
 
 
JBB
2.6.1  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.6    3 weeks ago

Three years in and Trump's own Justice Department has already convicted six of Trump's closest associates. George Papadopoulos, Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort are all now convicted felons thanks to Trump's own government. Rudy Giuliani is now wobbling way out on a frozen ledge with a rope tied around his neck standing on one leg...on a slimy banana peel.

And yet, not evey one ranking Obama campaign or administration officials have ever, EVER, been criminally indicated for official malfeasance in office. Not One! Zero! NADA! ZIP...

Ever wonder if you bat for the dark side?

 
 
 
lady in black
2.6.2  lady in black  replied to  JBB @2.6.1    3 weeks ago
  • 75398184_1338369013004245_69902535055460
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.6.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @2.6.1    3 weeks ago
And yet, not evey one ranking Obama campaign or administration officials have ever, EVER, been criminally indicated for official malfeasance in office. Not One! Zero! NADA! ZIP...

Al Capone was never convicted or murder or racketeering - never EVER. Get it?


Ever wonder if you bat for the dark side?

I'm on the right side and I've known it since the late 60's!

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.6.4  dennis smith  replied to  lady in black @2.6.2    3 weeks ago

Great picture of a drunken Hillary.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.6.5  KDMichigan  replied to  lady in black @2.6.2    3 weeks ago

256

Hillary has to stay drunk otherwise she get the DT shakes.

 
 
 
gooseisgone
2.6.6  gooseisgone  replied to  KDMichigan @2.6.5    3 weeks ago
New "Hillary Bobblehead" great Christmas gift.

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.6.7  Heartland American  replied to  dennis smith @2.6.4    3 weeks ago

Indeed.  We still may be locking her up after the IG and US Attorney are done....

 
 
 
gooseisgone
2.7  gooseisgone  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago
Let's just hope Gordon S. tells the truth today.

He did go to 2:10 of the video.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.8  Freedom Warrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago

Naturally neither one happened

 
 
 
Dulay
2.9  Dulay  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2    3 weeks ago

Well he didn't tell the truth Fly. 

No thinking person can believe that he and Volker didn't know that Burisma meant the Bidens. Giuliani was all over the media, TV, online, print and twitter connecting the Bidens to Burisma in May. Both of them have aids who are connected with the world. Especially Volker was kept up to date with what was going on in the media, US, Ukraine and Russia. It's stretches credulity that they didn't make the connection. Cindy McCain did well to immediately ask for his resignation from the McCain Institute. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Sondland is going to say that whatever was done wrong was fully known and approved by Trump and Giuliani. 

Can that be spun? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
3.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago
whatever was done wrong

Whatever was done wrong? What would that be? You left that pretty wide open. Prepping for an "I told you so" moment?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1    3 weeks ago
Prepping for an "I told you so" moment?

If we can get past those moments and focus on the truth we would all be better served. As Nunes speaks as this is written, the truth is furthest thing from his mind...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1.1    3 weeks ago

Nunes is an embarrassment to this country. He reminds me of a spokesman for a dictator in a totalitarian or banana republic country. Baghdad Bob II. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3.1.3  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

Just out of curiosity John - WHO in this country is not an embarrassment to you?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.3    3 weeks ago

Your time to support Trump is running low. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3.1.5  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    3 weeks ago

So you hate everyone, right?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.5    3 weeks ago

Your attempts to distract from the topic would do well on the Republican side of the committee today. 

 
 
 
PJ
3.1.7  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.3    3 weeks ago

Me.  John's very proud of my service to this country.  jrSmiley_68_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  PJ @3.1.7    3 weeks ago

I am.   You have said you travel around the country running seminars and meetings on behalf of the government agency you work for, and a good federal government  and its agencies are vital to our nation. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3.1.9  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.6    3 weeks ago

Just following the example of one of my favorites :-)

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
3.1.10  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago
Nunes is an embarrassment to this country.

He's attempting to hold his own congressional hearing to investigate the conspiracy theory that Ukraine was behind the 2016 election meddling, which is exactly what Trump was asking Zelensky to do. I wonder what Trump had to refuse Nunes to get him to acquiesce? Perhaps he wouldn't give Nunes his security blanket back or won't let him suck his thumb. It really is embarrassing listening the the Republicans debase themselves on behalf of their dear Leader.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.8    3 weeks ago

I would love to attend one of those seminars.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.12  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.1.10    3 weeks ago
He's attempting to hold his own congressional hearing to investigate the conspiracy theory that Ukraine was behind the 2016 election meddling, which is exactly what Trump was asking Zelensky to do. I wonder what Trump had to refuse Nunes to get him to acquiesce? Perhaps he wouldn't give Nunes his security blanket back or won't let him suck his thumb. It really is embarrassing listening the the Republicans debase themselves on behalf of their dear Leader.

They held the House until January of this year and still hold the Senate. They could have investigated the "plot" between the Democrats and Ukraine all day long if they wanted. Of course they didnt because there is no such plot. A few individual Ukrainians helped an American journalist named Alexandra Chalupa find sources for her research on Paul Manafort's corruption. There were also a couple Ukrainian politicians who publicly said they didnt want Trump to become president, on the theory he was into Russia and vice versa.  This supposedly constitutes some "deep state" plot. 

This is what passes for deep thought on the right these days. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.13  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

He is the monkey and Trump is the organ grinder.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.1.10    3 weeks ago

Have you seen the report that Lindsey is opening his own investigation. It's a wonder that Trump can walk with so many of the GOP lip locked on his ass.  

 
 
 
CB
3.1.15  CB   replied to  Dulay @3.1.14    3 weeks ago

This is why the rank and file part ways, and walks away from politics and participating in the voter franchise . This 'white-collar crime' with its high-priced lawyers is utter BS. Our jails are stuffed with everyday people who make crooked, bone-head mistakes. But the primming and well-positioned routinely get some expensive lawyers and a stacked court/jury to support them.

I can see why the public walks away, throwing up its hands!

 
 
 
Heartland American
3.1.16  Heartland American  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

BAGHDAD Bob II?   That would be same day different Schiff. 💩

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

I've been watching him testify.  No wonder Trump didn't want him to come forward.  Hey Trump!  How does it feel for someone else to be driving the bus for once.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.2.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.2    3 weeks ago
driving the bus for once.

...don't mind that bump, that's only rudy we just ran over. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.2.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.1    3 weeks ago

my cable box went dead the day thse hearings began last week.

i am unable to watch this climatic change in whether oeople are 

again too ignorant to face the reality of reality,  as i'm again facing the real life reality of the death of about my closest buddy who'm i , like Paul, will have to bear Saturday

been Hell upon other hell this last week

.

hopefully the bringing down of the orange clown will bring me a small life raft of haven in this cauldron of boiling oil, as there is another one i'm not saving,

all leaving me ain't not misbehaving

continue to spread the truth good posters, i'm emboiled in a sea of turmoil, 

in a little life boat with out an inner you tube to float me through,

so i guess 

i'm swimmin

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.2.3  r.t..b...  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.2.2    3 weeks ago
as i'm again facing the real life reality of the death of about my closest buddy who'm i , like Paul, will have to bear Saturday

So sorry for your loss. If asked to speak in remembrance of your friend, I am sure you will do so so with the eloquence and sincerity you have at your command. Truth and Peace, rulz...my thoughts are with you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Nunes opening statement contains exactly nothing relevant to the charges at hand. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

800

 
 
 
Tessylo
6  Tessylo    3 weeks ago

Gordon Sondland Blames Ukraine Scandal on Trump

The efforts to push Ukraine into opening investigations came at the president’s “express direction,” he’ll tell the impeachment probe.

News and Engagement Editor Bio   |   Follow
20191120-sondland.png?w=974

Tom Williams/ZUMA

Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, plans to directly blame Donald Trump for efforts to coerce Ukraine into launching investigations against the president’s political enemies. Sondland’s prepared testimony, which you can read below, makes crystal clear that he has no intention of being the administration’s fall guy in the Ukraine scandal.

“First, Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker, and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States,” Sondland will say at his public hearing on Wednesday in the impeachment inquiry. 

“As I testified previously, Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky…Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.”

Sondland is now moments away from testifying.   Follow along here   as we continue to cover the fourth day of hearings

 
 
 
lib50
6.1  lib50  replied to  Tessylo @6    3 weeks ago

BOOM!  Sondland has directly implicated Trump in the quid pro quo - extortion and bribery to get Ukraine to say they were opening an investigation into Hunter Biden and his work with Burisma.

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.2  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @6    3 weeks ago

Sondland’s testimony was coerced by progressives boycotts and defaming his businesses at the behest of a congressman from Oregon and others outside of government.   

 
 
 
CB
6.2.1  CB   replied to  Heartland American @6.2    3 weeks ago

And why are you standing with Trump? I asked before and it was ignored:

How do you know when President Donald Trump is telling republicans the truth? What's your determiner?

There is an old saying that goes: When the witnesses stack up against somebody, they all can not be telling a lie. I am sure you have heard it.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
7  r.t..b...    3 weeks ago

As Sondland tells us what we all suspected, the GOP cross examination will confirm it. The rhetoric to call the process corrupt will take precedent as trump, giuliani and now pompeo have all been compromised beyond any reasonable doubt in the complicity to extort a foreign entity in undermining a potential candidate, and thus, the entire electoral process. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

So he has no personal knowledge of a quid pro quo for the military aid, just a discussion over a phone call and visit.

 
 
 
PJ
8.1  PJ  replied to  Sean Treacy @8    3 weeks ago

Sean - You will need to either turn on your hearing aids or take out your ear plugs.  jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  PJ @8.1    3 weeks ago

Have you actually read/listened to his testimony? Unless you can prove me wrong, you probably should do the same or pay better attention. 

Lotsa people making all sorts of allegations that don't actually reflect the specifics of his testimony.

There's a difference between withholding Obsessionally authorized aid, and deciding whether to spend personal time on the phone.  

 
 
 
lib50
8.1.2  lib50  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.1    3 weeks ago

Are you watching and listening to Sondland's testimony?   Because he is directly putting Trump right at the top of the decision to hold Ukraine aid and not schedule the meeting with Zelinksy until the fake investigation was announced publicly. Didn't even have to do them, just say they were.

 
 
 
lady in black
8.1.3  lady in black  replied to  lib50 @8.1.2    3 weeks ago

Bad case of TDS, Trump DENIAL Syndrome

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.1    3 weeks ago

Sean, please. 

From the beginning this morning Sondland has said that Giuliani made it completely clear that a meeting for Ukraine in the White House was contingent upon Ukraine investigating the DNC and Burisma (the Bidens). That goes back to the end of May or June.  The quid pro quo was specifically confirmed by Sondland today. That is direct evidence. 

What we also know is that Trump personally asked the president of Ukraine to investigate the Bidens and the DNC. That conversation was just a continuation of the scheme. 

The president's guilt is evident. 

What will republicans do? 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.5  1stwarrior  replied to  lib50 @8.1.2    3 weeks ago

Bad case of "well, I was told" or "I 'think' that's what was meant".

Yup - let's get all that hearsay out in the open - makes for interesting dart throwing fodder.

 
 
 
lady in black
8.1.6  lady in black  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.4    3 weeks ago

Deny, deny, deny, and deny some more, that's all they've got.  And attack the witness

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
8.1.7  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.5    3 weeks ago

Good luck with those thoughts 1st.

Lets get a printout of the testimony shall we, and then we can discuss it with the actual words Sondland spoke. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
8.1.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.4    3 weeks ago

If they were smart (fat chance) they would inflate their water wings and jump the Trump ship before it totally sinks.  In Nunez's case, he doesn't need water wings because shit floats.

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.9  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.1    3 weeks ago
Have you actually read/listened to his testimony? Unless you can prove me wrong, you probably should do the same or pay better attention. 
Lotsa people making all sorts of allegations that don't actually reflect the specifics of his testimony. There's a difference between withholding Obsessionally authorized aid, and deciding whether to spend personal time on the phone.  

You're pretty dismissive of the value that Zelensky put on a WH visit. Multiple witnesses have testified about that value. 

As Sondland admits, and anyone with two braincells to rub together recognizes, a WH visit IS an 'official act'. THAT is bribery.  

https://thelawdictionary.org/bribery/

Black Law's Dictionary:

What is BRIBERY?

In criminal law. The receiving or offering any undue reward by or to any person whomsoever, whose ordinary profession or business relates to the administration of public justice, in order to influence his behavior, and to incline him to act contrary to his duty and the known rules of honesty and integrity. Hall v. Marshall, 80 Ky. 552; Walsh v. People, 05 111. 05, 16 Am. Rep. 509; Com. v. Murray, 135 Mass. 530; Hutchinson v. State, 36 Tex. 294. The term “bribery” now extends further, and includes the offense of giving a bribe to many other classes of officers; it applies both to the actor and receiver, and extends to voters, cabinet ministers, legislators, sheriffs, and other classes. 2 Whart. Crim. Law,,

In the LAW, it doesn't matter WHAT 'official act' Trump was holding in order to get what he wanted from Zelensky. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.1.10  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.4    3 weeks ago

 The quid pro quo was specifically confirmed by Sondland today. That is direct evidence

That is what i said. He testified to a negotiations for  a quid pro quo over a possible meeting/ phone call.

He said in his opening testimony he has no evidence of a quid pro quo condition on the military  aid. 

Still waiting for evidence to prove me wrong. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.4    3 weeks ago
'What will republicans do?'

jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.1.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @8.1.9    3 weeks ago

This isn't a criminal procedure. Remember?

It's political. And the politics over scheduling a phone call are a lot different than with holding military aid.

It's also not bribery.  

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.13  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.10    3 weeks ago
Still waiting for evidence to prove me wrong. 

So is your posit that Trump only held the "official act' of a WH meeting but not the 'official act' of military aid? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.1.14  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @8.1.13    3 weeks ago

 Trump only held the "official act' of a WH meeting but not the 'official act' of military aid? 

That's Sondland's testimony. 

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.15  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.12    3 weeks ago
This isn't a criminal procedure. Remember?

It's an Impeachment inquiry and bribery is one of the impeachable crimes cited in the Constitution. 

It's political. And the politics over scheduling a phone call are a lot different than with holding military aid.

Again, you're intentionally refusing to address the WH meeting. WHY? 

It's also not bribery.  

Did you READ the definition Sean? How is withholding a WH meeting for a PUBLIC statement from Zelensky NOT bribery by definition? Please be specific. 

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.16  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.14    3 weeks ago
That's Sondland's testimony. 

So Sondland testified that Trump solicited a bribe. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.1.17  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Dulay @8.1.15    3 weeks ago
How is withholding a WH meeting for a PUBLIC statement from Zelensky NOT bribery by definition?

You sure put a LOT of stock in a White House Meeting.............................Bribery?jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

"You can't come to my house unless you............"

What a fucking joke. Be careful not to overstretch. 

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.18  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.17    3 weeks ago
You sure put a LOT of stock in a White House Meeting.............................Bribery?
"You can't come to my house unless you............" What a fucking joke. Be careful not to overstretch. 

It isn't I who put a 'LOT of stock' in it Jim.

Every single person that has testified about it has stated that Zelensky held the WH meeting in high value and WHY.

You must have missed all of that testimony if you think that's a joke or an overreach. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.19  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.10    3 weeks ago
That is what i said. He testified to a negotiations for  a quid pro quo over a possible meeting/ phone call. He said in his opening testimony he has no evidence of a quid pro quo condition on the military  aid. 

I don't know where you are getting "negotiations" for a quid pro quo. Sondland repeatedly said during the course of the morning that his belief was that the "whole thing" was in a "logjam" that would have to be resolved by the announcement of an investigation.  

There was no negotiation over whether or not there would be a quid pro quo. There may have been some back and forth over exactly what form it would take, what type of an announcement by which Ukrainian official. 

It is likely that initially Trump demanded an investigation into the Democrats (in 2016), and Burisma (Bidens)  in exchange for a white house visit and the details developed as time went by to include the aid. It depends on what Trump was watching and listening to in right wing conspiracy media on any given day or week. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.20  It Is ME  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.17    3 weeks ago
overstretch.

The "Liberal" way !

And Mr./Mrs. "Democrat most bestest Witness"...riddle me this:

Bribery ?

NO !

Extortion ?

NO !

"Quid-Pro-Quo" ?

Schiffty Schiff interjects on that question : "We Democrats don't use that word anymore" !

 
 
 
katrix
8.1.21  katrix  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.17    3 weeks ago
You sure put a LOT of stock in a White House Meeting

Righties sure put a lot of stock in White House meetings when Dems were in office.

Talk about hypocrisy.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.22  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @8.1.9    3 weeks ago

Not applicable - this is a "political" hearing, not a "Criminal" hearing - or so you keep expounding to others about.

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.23  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.22    3 weeks ago
Not applicable - this is a "political" hearing, not a "Criminal" hearing - or so you keep expounding to others about.

Bribery IS applicable since it is cited as an Impeachable offense in the Constitution. 

I note that you aren't denying that Trump did solicit a bribe. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.1.24  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Dulay @8.1.18    3 weeks ago
Every single person that has testified about it has stated that Zelensky held the WH meeting in high value and WHY.

That is their opinion. Where is Mr. Zelensky quoted as saying this? Because he said he would really like a WH meeting? Whether you like it or not, it is an honor to be asked to the WH. And I am sure he would like that honor. If nothing else, for photo ops with the leader of the free world to show his constituents that he is working in their interests.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8.1.25  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.24    3 weeks ago
Whether you like it or not, it is an honor to be asked to the WH.

Can I assume that would also be your defense of the POTUS if it had been Obama back in 2011 leading up to the 2012 campaign asking the President of Ukraine to announce publicly that they were opening an investigation into "Bain Capital" in connection with bribes and corruption when everyone knew at that time that Mitt Romney, the Republican front runner, had worked for the company. And Obama was going around the normal State department lines to implement such a deal and was withholding the "honor" of coming to the white house as well as hundreds of millions in military aide. You'd be all about defending Obama over something like that, right? You wouldn't be able to find a single thing wrong with what he'd done, he's the President , so when the President does it, that makes it legal, right? It would be fine because Obama did release the aide, albeit 2 days after a whistleblower came forward to complain of the deal bringing the whole thing into the daylight. That would make it all okay at least, right?

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.26  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.24    3 weeks ago
That is their opinion. Where is Mr. Zelensky quoted as saying this? Because he said he would really like a WH meeting?

So you support calling Zelensky? How did the GOP leave him off of their list? 

Whether you like it or not, it is an honor to be asked to the WH. And I am sure he would like that honor. If nothing else, for photo ops with the leader of the free world to show his constituents that he is working in their interests.

That is YOUR opinion and I'm pretty fucking sure you didn't hear that directly from Zelensky. It's not about what I like Jim, it's about what even YOU admit Zelensky would like. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.1.27  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8.1.25    3 weeks ago
Can I assume that would also be your defense of the POTUS if it had been Obama back in 2011 leading up to the 2012 campaign asking the President of Ukraine to announce publicly that they were opening an investigation into "Bain Capital" in connection with bribes and corruption when everyone knew at that time that Mitt Romney, the Republican front runner, had worked for the company.

IF indeed Romney (but Obama, but Mitt) had some shady dealings at Bain that were perpetrated in the Ukraine, damned right I would have. And I am pretty fucking sure you think you have a point.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8.1.29  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.27    3 weeks ago
IF indeed Romney (but Obama, but Mitt) had some shady dealings at Bain that were perpetrated in the Ukraine, damned right I would have. And I am pretty fucking sure you think you have a point.

So without any actual evidence, you'd want the President of the United States to hold aide back on condition that another government start an investigation into his political rival to find out if Romney had any "shady dealing"? Really? That's what you're going with here? No wonder the President thinks he could shoot someone in the street and not lose any voters, his voters are apparently incapable of understanding the meaning of words or the law. "Shoot? When you say the President shot someone, do you mean with a camera?" "No, with a gun" "The President took a picture of someone with a gun?" "No, he shot someone with a gun" "The person he shot had a gun?" "No goddamn it, the President took a gun and shot someone on 5th ave!" "Is there a law against that?" "Yes!" "But what if he was only trying to shoot a deep state operative and the bystander got in the way?" "Oh for fechs sake...".

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.1.30  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8.1.29    3 weeks ago

YAWN!!!

"you'd want the President of the United States to hold aide "

That WASN'T a part of your original question. Nor does it have any relevance as it is turning out. Did not Sondland say that Zelensky was more interested in a WH visit than any QPQ?  Are you pulling a Dem and trying to "lead" a witness (me)?

 
 
 
MrFrost
8.1.31  MrFrost  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.22    3 weeks ago

Not applicable - this is a "political" hearing, not a "Criminal" hearing - or so you keep expounding to others about.

True. But the hearing wouldn't be held without a crime committed. At the end of the day, we can spin and dance around terminology, (which Nunes seemed to spend most of his time on), but did trump withhold funding to get the Ukraine to get dirt on the bidens? That's pretty much a slam dunk, it's obvious he did. We have Mulvaney admitting it on live tv, as did Rudy and trump has all but admitted to it. 

So where is the illegality of what he did? 

1) Bribery/extortion/quid pro quo, is illegal. 

2) He withheld funding to further his own personal campaign, (having an announcement on national TV that the Ukraine is investigation the Bidens would undoubtedly have a negative effect on Biden's presidential run, (just like wikileaks did to Clinton leading up to election day)), and that's a violation of campaign finance laws, you cannot use taxpayer dollars to fund a campaign. 

3) Obstruction of justice. 

All of this is bad for the country, but honestly, the right wing finds that trump would just NEVER do something like that? He has admitted openly that he would accept help from a foreign country to win an election and the Mueller report said that he accepted help from Russia to win in 2016, (he didn't ask for help, but he did accept help). 

Why aren't the people in trumps admin that have direct knowledge of the call testifying? Why is trump ordering them to not testify? That doesn't strike you as odd? 

I guess I just don't understand why it's such a stretch to believe that trump would extort the Ukraine to win an election, he has spent a lifetime ripping people off and engaging in shady business deals. He thought he wouldn't get caught, and he did. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
8.1.32  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.11    3 weeks ago

If they dig any deeper, Musk will have a direct route to China.

 
 
 
bugsy
8.1.33  bugsy  replied to  MrFrost @8.1.31    3 weeks ago
But the hearing wouldn't be held without a crime committed

Then you need to tell the AP they are wrong.

https://apnews.com/5ff1520d5e5e4159b85172bb635d46e9

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.34  1stwarrior  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8.1.25    3 weeks ago

did release the aide,

Uhhh - it's "aid" - not "aide".

An "aide" is an assistant to an important person, especially a political leader.

"Aid" is to help, assist, or support (someone or something) in the achievement of something.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.35  KDMichigan  replied to  lady in black @8.1.3    3 weeks ago
Bad case of TDS, Trump DENIAL Syndrome

Hopefully you get over it and accept that Trump is your President before his next 4 years are over.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
8.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Sean Treacy @8    3 weeks ago

Ouch..... Sondland's points looks like it hurt a bit there Sean.....

Try rubbing some dirt in it.  Might make it feel better. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.2    3 weeks ago
Sondland's points looks like it hurt a bit there Sean

Funny that many liberals can't talk about them accurately, if they hurt so bad. 

 
 
 
 
katrix
8.3.1  katrix  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3    3 weeks ago

So many on the right don't know any actual facts - the Fox spin ensures they never actually have to concern themselves with the truth. But sometimes even Fox has to admit facts.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.3.2  1stwarrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3    3 weeks ago

"Potential" - gads - makes a helluva lot of FACTUAL support, eh?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
8.3.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @8.3.2    3 weeks ago

Hmmmm….. That headline was from your far-right, Trump-lovin Fox News.

That headline stating "Potential" is damn near a revelation on that network.  Just imagine what the "un-spun" Sondland testimony yielded....

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.3.4  1stwarrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3.3    3 weeks ago

Oh, the un-spun testimony where Sondland continuously states that Trump DID NOT ASK for "quid-pro-quo" and Shifty kept interrupting him to state that it was????

You must be on a different channel Fly - oh, wait - you're 8 hours behind us - keep watching - it'll show up.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
8.3.5  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @8.3.4    3 weeks ago

Just like about everything else you've gotten wrong, I'm 7-8 hours AHEAD of you.

"I know that members of this Committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a 'quid pro quo?' As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes," 

G. Sondland 

Sondland said in his opening statement that there was a "quid pro quo" scheme to arrange a White House meeting in exchange for opening investigations. He also said the desire for Ukraine to open investigations into the Bidens was "no secret," and that "everyone was in the loop."

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.3.6  1stwarrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3.5    3 weeks ago

Heh heh heh - knew you'd catch that time thingy :-)

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
8.3.7  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @8.3.6    3 weeks ago

You want it in "Zulu" time?

 
 
 
Tessylo
9  Tessylo    3 weeks ago

20buel.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
10  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Watching Sondland , the whole game is becoming clear. And in all seriousness it all comes down to this, and Sondland and Pompeo and Giuliani all know it, completely.  

800

That is the entirety of their response. 

Watching Sondland laugh, it is obvious that he knows that they all know that it is that simple. Trump thinks he has the right to do whatever he wants. 

 
 
 
lib50
10.1  lib50  replied to  JohnRussell @10    3 weeks ago

And Pence.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
10.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  lib50 @10.1    3 weeks ago

Yes indeed. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
10.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  lib50 @10.1    3 weeks ago

Is that pos still hiding out here in CA to avoid it all?

 
 
 
It Is ME
10.2  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @10    3 weeks ago
Watching Sondland , the whole game is becoming clear.

It sure is !

"He doesn't recall" ….. much ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

The "Bus" keeps missing the intended "Victim". jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
10.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @10    3 weeks ago

Speaking of that cockroach Rudy, has he totally gone off the grid?  We never see anything from him these days.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
11  Paula Bartholomew    3 weeks ago

Testimony has resumed.  As expected Nunez is trying to shift the blame off of Trump with but but but Hillary.

 
 
 
It Is ME
11.1  It Is ME  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @11    3 weeks ago
As expected Nunez is trying to shift the blame off of Trump with but but but Hillary.

He is ?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @11    3 weeks ago
As expected Nunez is trying to shift the blame off of Trump with but but but Hillary.

Of course he is. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
12  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

The jackass Nunes , who is in theory Trump's main defender on this committee, is not making a single comment in defense of what Trump and Giuliani did.  His whole thing is claiming that Trump had the right to shoot the victim in cold blood because the victim's cousin was mean to him. 

Trump's creation of a quid pro quo with the government of another country for his personal gain is an abuse of power he should be impeached for.  It doesnt matter what his personal grievances were. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
13  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 weeks ago

Impeachment brought to you by the Failed Russia Hoaxers. When are the fans of fake news going to give it up? Hopefully never, it's really entertaining to see these imbeciles expose themselves publicly. 

They have no self awareness at all and it's amazing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
13.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @13    3 weeks ago

Now the gaslighting begins, or we should say, continues. 

"Failed Russia Hoaxers"

That is what Nunes constantly says. Much of the country thinks he is an idiot. 

 
 
 
katrix
13.1.1  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @13.1    3 weeks ago
Failed Russia Hoaxers"

Are people who use that phrase truly stupid enough to believe that all those indictments and guilty pleas (including indictments of several Russians) somehow count as a hoax, are they Russian bots, or are they just trolls who like gaslighting people in here?

 
 
 
Dulay
13.1.2  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @13.1    3 weeks ago
Much of the country thinks he is an idiot. 

Including his cow. jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
gooseisgone
13.1.4  gooseisgone  replied to  JohnRussell @13.1    3 weeks ago
Much of the country thinks he is an idiot. 

You mean you, Dulay, katrix, DM, rtb and throw Tessylo in there.  

 
 
 
katrix
13.2  katrix  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @13    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
13.2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  katrix @13.2    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
13.2.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  katrix @13.2    3 weeks ago

Not seeing the correlation here. Fish was talking about the dems and not pointing a finger at anyone in particular. I don't think it was in reference to any users here but you know what they say about "the shoe"......................

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
14  Dismayed Patriot    3 weeks ago

I find it rather humorous that Sondland is remembering to use the recommended 'cover your ass' phrase "I don't recall" in response to anything that might implicate himself or the President. Even so his testimony has been enlightening, and no American watching this with more than half a brain believes him when he claims he can't recall or just "forgot" a cell phone call with the President at a cafe in front of several other people. Either Sondland should star in the next 'Memento' film, or he's a lying weasel acting like he can't remember rather astounding facts all to keep Trump happy by refusing to admit they knew all about it and it was a coordinated plan hatched by the President and his minions to help Trump in the upcoming 2020 election. And the desperate Republicans are trying to give them cover by running a separate congressional investigation where they dump out spurious facts about hearsay from former pro-Russian Ukrainians and friends of Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs in an effort to push debunked conspiracy theories. They pretend as if the hearsay or a anti-Trump tweet are evidence of some Ukrainian "deep state" plot against Trump coordinating with some US "deep State", as if our intelligence agencies only used witness statements to determine Russia was behind the 2016 election meddling. As if our intelligence agencies just went around asking Russians and Ukrainians "Hey, did you hack us? What about you, did you hack us?" and didn't have any actual digital trail proving who was behind it. These Republican legislators are truly proving themselves dumber than a bag of hammers.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14    3 weeks ago

I have watched all of his testimony, although not necessarily paid attention to every minute of it. 

One impression is sticking out like a sore thumb to me. Sondland believes that a quid pro quo was applied and pressure was put on Ukraine to submit to Trump's demands. 

Sondland also portrays the attitude that   "that is who Trump is. that's what he does"  . No help for it. 

Sort of like "just another day at the office". He has even laughed about it a couple times. 

Power corrupts. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
14.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1    3 weeks ago
Sondland believes that a quid pro quo was applied and pressure was put on Ukraine to submit to Trump's demands. 

He " Believes". .... instead of " Knows for sure " ?

Great Witness ! jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

" Feelings. ...NOTHING MORE than Feelings " ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  It Is ME @14.1.1    3 weeks ago
He " Believes". .... instead of "Knows for sure" ?

Only the Shitow knows for sure. 

800

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
14.1.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  It Is ME @14.1.1    3 weeks ago

I guess we need to rewrite some history, perhaps Hitler wasn't as bad as we thought. Maybe he never told Mengele to carry out horrific experiments on women and children, maybe he never told Himmler to round up millions of Jews and dissidents and put them in concentration camps and then order their destruction. Perhaps they just "believed" that's what their dear Leader wanted. They just had the "feeling" that it would please him, so we shouldn't put the blame on Hitler, right? /s

Just because a mob boss communicates with inference and not so subtle proclamations of "hating to see something bad happen" to their opponents, it doesn't make them any less culpable. Michael Cohen has already testified that's how Trump communicates, like he's a 'golden real estate' mob boss, giving his underlings winks and nods to communicate what he wishes, the ones who screw up get thrown under the bus but the ones who succeed at what they "believe" the President wants, get rewarded. "These guys, they're a real pain in my ass." "What are we gonna do about these guys, eh?" "So Fox says Biden has a double digit lead over me in the polls? What are we gonna do about this, can't we investigate him or something? Can't we prove he's corrupt?" "What if Ukraine investigated him, or just announced they were going to investigate him?"... "We'll get right on it boss".... then later "Did the President ever ask you to get Ukraine to investigate Biden?" … "No, he never told me to ask them to investigate Biden...". Right, sure he didn't.

 
 
 
MUVA
14.1.4  MUVA  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.1.3    3 weeks ago

Your post is figment of your imagination nothing like what you posted was said

 
 
 
MUVA
14.1.5  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1    3 weeks ago

I paid attention to every minute that way I did have to rely on Schitt or a corrupt media for a recap.Thiis is the biggest waste of time since the corrupt Mueller investigation I know for sure now nothing that Schitt is implying happen it is all a democrat wet dream.

 
 
 
katrix
14.1.6  katrix  replied to  MUVA @14.1.5    3 weeks ago
Thiis is the biggest waste of time since the corrupt Mueller investigation

[Removed]

 
 
 
r.t..b...
14.1.7  r.t..b...  replied to  MUVA @14.1.5    3 weeks ago
to rely on Schitt or a corrupt media for a recap

...your dismissal of the proceedings based on your bias is duly noted, and duly muted.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
14.1.8  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  MUVA @14.1.5    3 weeks ago
nothing that Schitt is implying

The fact that you have to call him childish names betrays your desperation. The Republicans are flailing, the facts are all coming out and anyone with even a smidgen of civics education knows it does not look good for this President. He will be impeached and then all the highlights will get replayed in the Senate trial and the Republicans will whine and moan and claim even though it was all bad, it's not enough to remove the President so we'll go into the election next year with all Trumps dirty laundry and he'll get most of the same voters who voted for him last time because they just don't care about the law or constitution and just want to see their hated enemy, the liberals and progressives, suffer through another 4 years of disaster. But even if he manages to hold onto the 62,984,828 voters who voted for him last time, it's simply not going to overcome the 71 million or more who will not vote for Trump. Will some 3rd party candidate peel off 5 million voters in just the right States in 2020 the way they did in 2016 which gave Trump the electoral win? I highly doubt it, too many patriotic Americans know what is at stake and barring Hillary somehow becoming the Democrats nominee again (which could only really happen if Trump signs some pact with a demon from hell) they are going to vote Democrat in a landslide.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
14.1.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  r.t..b... @14.1.7    3 weeks ago
your dismissal of the proceedings based on your bias is duly noted

Sorry but what part of "I paid attention to every minute that way I did(n't) have to rely on Schitt or a corrupt media for a recap." didn't you get?

 
 
 
It Is ME
14.1.10  It Is ME  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.1.3    3 weeks ago
I guess we need to rewrite some history, perhaps Hitler wasn't as bad as we thought.

"Innuendo" and "Conjecture" ….. AGAIN ?

 
 
 
It Is ME
14.1.11  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.2    3 weeks ago

Adam Schiff ?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
14.1.12  r.t..b...  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @14.1.9    3 weeks ago
Sorry but what part of "I paid attention to every minute that way I did(n't) have to rely on Schitt or a corrupt media for a recap." didn't you get?

I listen with an ear yearning for the truth, nothing more and nothing less. I only hope the proceedings, justified by the facts that have come to light, will allow each individual to come to their own conclusion, regardless of 'Schitt' [sic] and/or media influence.

To anyone that cares about our future, put away the partisan pontificating and think for yourself.

 
 
 
dennis smith
14.1.13  dennis smith  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.1.8    3 weeks ago

Childish name calling is what those who fail to spell Trump correctly constantly do. The left posters on NT know who they are.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1.14  author  JohnRussell  replied to  dennis smith @14.1.13    3 weeks ago

You mean like this?

tuck_frump_tshirt-r5341fd84ca244178827cd

 
 
 
dennis smith
14.1.15  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.14    3 weeks ago

Exactly

 
 
 
Ender
15  Ender    3 weeks ago

Late to tune in to this today. The republicans are really attacking him.

 
 
 
Ender
16  Ender    3 weeks ago

Can the republicans actually ask questions that pertain to the issue at hand.

Doesn't seem like it.

Funny how they say the press is all fake news yet they love to quote the press and add them into record.

 
 
 
Ender
17  Ender    3 weeks ago

Ok, watching what I did of this, I have come to the conclusion that Sondland is a fruitloop dingus.

He is a fucking weird one. Something is seriously wrong with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he is the next one in jail for lying to congress.

 
 
 
Transyferous Rex
18  Transyferous Rex    3 weeks ago

I've paid attention to about thirty minutes of this, and the closing statements of Nunes and half a Schiff's, who continues to pontificate as I type. 

This is my admittedly conservative view of the hearing. Dog and pony...

The trouble with interpreting the writing on a blank piece of paper is that the interpreter is free to see whatever he or she wants to. 

 
 
 
Suz
19  Suz    3 weeks ago

It's a little odd that no two people can agree on anything as it relates he/said/she/said/they/said.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
19.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Suz @19    3 weeks ago

Suz, you do understand that Trump is a completely corrupt person don't you?  I know you mean well but I am just wondering if you understand that? 

 
 
 
Heartland American
19.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  JohnRussell @19.1    3 weeks ago

It is the democrats who are corrupt and who are corrupting the impeachment process.  Democrats if they proceed will be sending impeachment articles to the senate with only democrat votes over bi partisan opposition to it. 

 
 
 
Dulay
19.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @19.1.1    3 weeks ago

SO WHAT? 

There was bi-partisan opposition to repealing the ACA yet Ryan pushed it through and they had a YUGE celebratory victory lap with Trump.

Why pretend that the GOP give a fuck about bi-partisanship. 

 
 
 
lady in black
20  lady in black    3 weeks ago

77062899_1219891711544907_49045127053705

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
21  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 weeks ago

So this guy is implicating the President in something that happens EVERY DAY IN POLITICS?  

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
21.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @21    3 weeks ago

Really? 

Holding up $400-million in military aid in return for a promise from a foreign country to dig up dirt on your political opponent happens every day...... Who knew...! 

Have you got an example of Trump doing this yesterday too? 

 
 
 
Heartland American
21.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @21.1    3 weeks ago

Sondland’s testimony was coerced by progressives boycotts and defaming his businesses at the behest of a congressman from Oregon and others outside of government.   

 
 
 
Heartland American
21.1.2  Heartland American  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @21.1    3 weeks ago
(deleted)
 
 
 
pat wilson
21.1.3  pat wilson  replied to  Heartland American @21.1.2    3 weeks ago

SPAM !

 
 
 
CB
21.1.4  CB   replied to  Heartland American @21.1.1    3 weeks ago

Can you tell me how much stock to you place on testimony stated under oath? Or shouldn't Sonland value his life and liberty outside of spending time in jail for lying in a congressional hearing?

Question: How do you know when President Donald Trump is telling the truth (to you)? 

Question: When has President Donald Trump ever delivered verbal testimony under oath?

This should be an interesting thought exercise if you are willing to undertake it. I feel certain you will not, sadly.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
21.1.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @21.1    3 weeks ago
Holding up $400-million in military aid in return for a promise from a foreign country to dig up dirt on your political opponent happens every day...... Who knew...! 

So then bring Biden and Obama up on the same thing.  At least on that instance there is a recording of Biden threatening that if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating Biden's kid they weren't getting the money.  Funny how the prosecution was fired THEN they got the money.

And when did Hunter Biden throw his name into the political arena that would make him the President's "rival"?

Oh, by the way, Ukraine received the money.  But lets ignore that little tidbit.

 
 
 
Tessylo
21.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @21.1.5    3 weeks ago

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about 

 
 
 
Dulay
21.1.7  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @21.1.5    3 weeks ago
At least on that instance there is a recording of Biden threatening that if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating Biden's kid they weren't getting the money. 

There was NO investigation into 'Biden's kid'. THAT is a LIE. You've been gaslighted. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
21.1.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @21.1.7    2 weeks ago

I've been glasslighted.  And you expect me to believe you?

 
 
 
Dulay
21.1.9  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @21.1.8    2 weeks ago
I've been glasslighted.  

Self awareness is a good thing. 

And you expect me to believe you?

I could not care less whether you believe me or not. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
22  FLYNAVY1    3 weeks ago

Really? 

Holding up $400-million in military aid in return for a promise from a foreign country to dig up dirt on your political opponent happens every day...... Who knew...! 

Have you got an example of Trump doing this yesterday too? 

 
 
 
 
pat wilson
23.1  pat wilson  replied to  WallyW @23    2 weeks ago

Doesn't change his testimony.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

KDMichigan
JBB
Sunshine
Wishful_thinkin
jungkonservativ111
Gordy327
Ozzwald
Tessylo
Ronin2
SteevieGee

bccrane
Freefaller
Just Jim NC TttH
Texan1211
loki12


32 visitors