I think he is fighting fire with fire. During his run, the dems dug up everything they could. Hell, 6 months prior they were his best friend!! All I know is that I'm sick of this circus show the dems are putting on as if they are the beacons of true and justice.
***** OFFICIAL TRUMP IMPEACHMENT THREAD *****
947,459 Views |
9220 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Pizza
captkirk said:Zelensky brought up Biden on the call - not TrumpQuote:
- however, also not a fan of sitting presidents trying to use the power of their office to dig up dirt on political opponents.
The charge is that Trump was withholding aid and a meeting at the WH in exchange for a public announcement that Biden was being investigated. The order in which it was tip toed around in the call is a red herring as others were making this clear in unofficial channels.
That's the allegation anyway.
The "servers" thing is just an odd misinterpretation of a fringe conspiracy theory. But it at least relates defensively to a national interest not personal gain. But Trump did bring up this first.
Gary Johnson said:captkirk said:Zelensky brought up Biden on the call - not TrumpQuote:
- however, also not a fan of sitting presidents trying to use the power of their office to dig up dirt on political opponents.
The charge is that Trump was withholding aid and a meeting at the WH in exchange for a public announcement that Biden was being investigated. The order in which it was tip toed around in the call is a red herring as others were making this clear in unofficial channels.
That's the allegation anyway.
The "servers" thing is just an odd misinterpretation of a fringe conspiracy theory. But it at least relates defensively to a national interest not personal gain. But Trump did bring up this first.
Good luck with that.
Like a million dollar donation to Trump's inauguration in return for an ambassadorship?Bo Darville said:MetoliusAg said:This is the impeachment discussion thread; the Kavanaugh hearing is not relevant. Take your trolling and thread derailing elsewhere, please.backintexas2013 said:
You seem very triggered. I hope you are ok. An internet message board should never set someone off like this.
Oh and what did I lie about?
It establishes credibility of a poster's related opinions.
You don't like what I have to say so you lie about some nonsense to try and change the narrative. I don't blame you because as I said that is SOP from the GOP and your little circle jerk here on forum 16 is just following what is spoon fed to you.
Don't like what Volker has to say: Nevertrumper
Don't like what Hill has to say: Deep State
Don't like what Taylor has to say: Human Scum
Don't like what Vindman has to say: Double Agent
Don't like what I have to say: Ford Supporter
Every accusation made contains zero proof.
Yawn, your same old plan of attack has gotten old and tiresome. You guys are just ridiculous at this point.
There are 753 words between when President Zelenskyy talks about weapons and when President Trump mentions something about Biden.chimmy said:Why are people saying this?captkirk said:Zelensky brought up Biden on the call - not TrumpQuote:
- however, also not a fan of sitting presidents trying to use the power of their office to dig up dirt on political opponents.
Trump mentioned Biden first.Quote:
The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.
The very next thing that Trump talks about after President Zelenskyy mentions the Javelins is Trump asking for help looking into the DNC hack.
In between talking about the Javelins and when Trump talks about Biden, they talk about multiple other things. Like investigating the DNC hack, how Trump thinks Zalenskyy is surrounding himself with entrenched corrupt people, Mueller investigation, open and fair cooperation, recalling Ukraines ambassador, Guilliani, they are friends, the prosecutor that Biden shut down, more Guilliani, and then FINALLY, Biden.
The javelins to Biden are far removed from each other. Why do you say they are related when there are all of those other points in between?
No one is asking you to stay. You are free to go elsewhere.
leftcoastaggie said:Like a million dollar donation to Trump's inauguration in return for an ambassadorship?Bo Darville said:MetoliusAg said:This is the impeachment discussion thread; the Kavanaugh hearing is not relevant. Take your trolling and thread derailing elsewhere, please.backintexas2013 said:
You seem very triggered. I hope you are ok. An internet message board should never set someone off like this.
Oh and what did I lie about?
It establishes credibility of a poster's related opinions.
You don't like what I have to say so you lie about some nonsense to try and change the narrative. I don't blame you because as I said that is SOP from the GOP and your little circle jerk here on forum 16 is just following what is spoon fed to you.
Don't like what Volker has to say: Nevertrumper
Don't like what Hill has to say: Deep State
Don't like what Taylor has to say: Human Scum
Don't like what Vindman has to say: Double Agent
Don't like what I have to say: Ford Supporter
Every accusation made contains zero proof.
Yawn, your same old plan of attack has gotten old and tiresome. You guys are just ridiculous at this point.
Actually I've been quite consistent in the fact that I don't really give a **** what Trump does as long as he opposes and keeps socialist liberal scum policy at bay.
So you DID believe her!Quote:
Don't like what I have to say: Ford Supporter
Does this not sound exactly like something Trump would try? You honestly think he's above it?
Possibly not even thinking it's illegal.
Possibly not even thinking it's illegal.
Gary Johnson said:
Does this not sound exactly like something Trump would try? You honestly think he's above it?
He sure as hell didn't need the Ukrainian president to "publicly state that he was opening an investigation into Biden". Biden bragging about bribing the country was far more damaging than anything that Ukraine could have offered.
You want to believe that we would withhold aid unless the president put a hit on Biden? It far more likely that Trump wanted to know if the new administration was going to be corrupt too. And that story has been testified to under oath multiple times already.
You are living in a pipe dream hoping something else is true.
So you do or don't think he's above it? "He didn't need to" is not an answer.
"I need you to do us a favor...."
"I need you to do us a favor...."
In reference the 2016 election investigation, not Biden.Gary Johnson said:
So you do or don't think he's above it? "He didn't need to" is not an answer.
"I need you to do us a favor...."
You should stick to complaining about tariffs.
Gary Johnson said:
So you do or don't think he's above it? "He didn't need to" is not an answer.
"I need you to do us a favor...."
It didn't happen the way you wanted it to. I'm not going to assume he's above or below any of it. The facts are the facts.
Quote:
It far more likely that Trump wanted to know if the new administration was going to be corrupt too.
Whoa is this an actual theory? Trump was just testing him with some kind of sting operation? I'm rolling at that idea. Pure comedic gold.
Gary Johnson said:Quote:
It far more likely that Trump wanted to know if the new administration was going to be corrupt too.
Whoa is this an actual theory? Trump was just testing him with some kind of sting operation? I'm rolling at that idea. Pure comedic gold.
That's been out there a long time. What's wrong with meeting with someone first before giving them a lot of money? Trump doesn't think Europe is pulling their weight with this either. That's consistent with testimony and with the actual call. You are making up a false narrative.
If Ukraine was not going to crack down on corruption then why should we give them more money? Trump probably had to give it anyways in the end because Congress appropriated it, but nothing wrong with meeting the new guy first.
Quote:
I'm not going to assume he's above or below any of it. The facts are the facts.
Nobody has all the facts yet. Especially the(alleged) informal pressure and communications through Giuliani and others. That's rather the point of an investigation.
Gary Johnson said:Quote:
I'm not going to assume he's above or below any of it. The facts are the facts.
Nobody has all the facts yet. Especially the(alleged) informal pressure and communications through Giuliani and others. That's rather the point of an investigation.
No, the point of all of this is to impeach Trump.
The allegation is that the meeting was contingent on QPQ for public embarrassment of Biden. Demanding cooperation with normal anti corruption measures is fine.
I thought you were saying the Biden QPQ was a trap set by Trump to test Zelensky. It sounded that way, but I don't think you meant it.
I thought you were saying the Biden QPQ was a trap set by Trump to test Zelensky. It sounded that way, but I don't think you meant it.
And,BTW, your idea would be a laughable impeachment charge. I hope that's what the dems go with, but they aren't that dumb.
Why is that so funny to you? Trump called to congratulate Zelensky back in April when he won the election. It wasn't until after Zelensky held the snap elections and solidified Zelensky's control over the Parliament without having to kowtow to other power brokers for a coalition government that the second call happened.Gary Johnson said:Quote:
It far more likely that Trump wanted to know if the new administration was going to be corrupt too.
Whoa is this an actual theory? Trump was just testing him with some kind of sting operation? I'm rolling at that idea. Pure comedic gold.
So Zelensky's good intentions aside, it was still in doubt as to whether he would be able to act as he wanted and had promised to act until after those snap elections. Zelensky was emphatic that his choice for Prosecutor would not encumbered with alliances to other power brokers in Ukraine (or Moscow for that matter.)
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
agsfan said:
If he did it to help his campaign, that is illegal.
Every action the president takes is to help is campaign. Joker.
Gary Johnson said:
The allegation is that the meeting was contingent on QPQ for public embarrassment of Biden. Demanding cooperation with normal anti corruption measures is fine.
I thought you were saying the Biden QPQ was a trap set by Trump to test Zelensky. It sounded that way, but I don't think you meant it.
Every single administration does this with aid. Didn't we give Guatemala and Mexico more money because they were helping with immigration? Why should we give people money if they are going to use it against us?
Again, we didn't need Ukraine's help to make Biden look stupid. The Barr/Durham investigation into the 2016 election interference was going to continue with or without Ukraine's help. But, it would be nice to have their assistance. That's what Trump was asking for and it's laughable to think this was about Biden.
leftcoastaggie said:Like a million dollar donation to Trump's inauguration in return for an ambassadorship?Bo Darville said:MetoliusAg said:This is the impeachment discussion thread; the Kavanaugh hearing is not relevant. Take your trolling and thread derailing elsewhere, please.backintexas2013 said:
You seem very triggered. I hope you are ok. An internet message board should never set someone off like this.
Oh and what did I lie about?
It establishes credibility of a poster's related opinions.
You don't like what I have to say so you lie about some nonsense to try and change the narrative. I don't blame you because as I said that is SOP from the GOP and your little circle jerk here on forum 16 is just following what is spoon fed to you.
Don't like what Volker has to say: Nevertrumper
Don't like what Hill has to say: Deep State
Don't like what Taylor has to say: Human Scum
Don't like what Vindman has to say: Double Agent
Don't like what I have to say: Ford Supporter
Every accusation made contains zero proof.
Yawn, your same old plan of attack has gotten old and tiresome. You guys are just ridiculous at this point.
It doesn't matter what any of these idiots say. No matter how many "policy experts" or bureaucrats dems can fine to complain about trump, all of his actions were legal. I can even say that assuming everything dems say happened is true.
He pressured Ukraine into investigating a political opponent's son. Yes, and there was evidence to support that investigation. Investigation into a possible crime is the presidents job, and he has broad powers to pursue justice.
FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
All they have is that Trump was soliciting campaign support.
1. That statue covers contributions "of value". A potential criminal investigation has no value under campaign finance laws. (Is it a campaign contribution if Mexico/Canada sign the new NAFTA?)
2. Trumps conversations are covered by the Mutual Criminal Investigation Treaty signed with Ukraine.
3. Our military aid shouldn't go to corrupt countries that don't comply with criminal investigations.
Dems have nothing. Don't even accept there absurd framing that a quid pro quo is wrong. Career diplomats are just pissed because Trump ****s on their own self-importance.
Good to know I'm not the only one who has realized this...hbtheduce said:FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
All they have is that Trump was soliciting campaign support.
1. That statue covers contributions "of value". A potential criminal investigation has no value under campaign finance laws. (Is it a campaign contribution if Mexico/Canada sign the new NAFTA?)
2. Trumps conversations are covered by the Mutual Criminal Investigation Treaty signed with Ukraine.
3. Our military aid shouldn't go to corrupt countries that don't comply with criminal investigations.
Dems have nothing. Don't even accept there absurd framing that a quid pro quo is wrong. Career diplomats are just pissed because Trump ****s on their own self-importance.
Pretty sad that the HoR can make up crimes they deem worthy of articles of impeachment...
Thank goodness the Senate is where the case is tried...
You don't have to commit a crime to be impeached by the House or removed by the Senate.FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc_19-41-A.pdf
What FEC crime was committed?agsfan said:FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc_19-41-A.pdf
The ACTUAL crime that throws things like enumerated executive powers and our treaty with Ukraine to jointly fight corruption and share info out the window because THIS crime, supersedes ALL else..
The really dumb thing is that Biden was mentioned on a private phone call that should have never been made public. How exactly was this supposed to make Biden look bad?
Depends on his intent.
If Giuliani/Trump were doing all this to get after Biden = bad.
If Giuliani/Trump were doing all this to get after Ukrainian corruption = good.
Because he was intent on using his personal lawyer, my immediate assumption is that his motives were for personal gain. And Giuliani has said as much when he said he was in Ukraine to work for his client, his client being Donald Trump, not POTUS.
My assumption might be wrong, but I'm glad they're investigating it.
If Giuliani/Trump were doing all this to get after Biden = bad.
If Giuliani/Trump were doing all this to get after Ukrainian corruption = good.
Because he was intent on using his personal lawyer, my immediate assumption is that his motives were for personal gain. And Giuliani has said as much when he said he was in Ukraine to work for his client, his client being Donald Trump, not POTUS.
My assumption might be wrong, but I'm glad they're investigating it.
agsfan said:FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc_19-41-A.pdf
Glad we left the Paris Accords and Iran deal. Those were illegal campaign contributions to dems.
Multiple officials have testified that Trump and Giuliani were working on getting Zelensky to make a public statement that he was starting an investigation into Burisma/Biden. That's how he would've made Biden look bad.
A) That's a draft of a new interpretation of the law, not the law.agsfan said:FireAg said:
I'm still trying to figure out exactly what crime was alleged to have occurred...
https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc_19-41-A.pdf
B) Weintraub is partisan and refuses to hold Dems accountable for campaign finance crimes (See D and E, infra.)
C) Dated September 26, 2019 after this mess broke so it is part of the Dems' plan.
D) The DNC and Alexandra Chalupa actually obtained a likely forged black ledger from Ukrainian officials (with an assist from Biden's earlier threat to withhold a billion dollar in loan guarantees) to interfere with Trump's campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.
E) Obama is on tape soliciting Medvedev's and Putin's assistance in his 2016 Presidential campaign.
TCag2007
Another Interesting Thing From Elko That Went Under The Radar Monday
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
89