Geezus. After reading Sondland's revisions to his earlier testimony, it's clear his attny Robert Luskin and/or Sondland's GOP & Dem friends in Oregon had a frank talk w/Sondland about how cold it gets sitting in a federal prison cell for several months.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Geezus. After reading Sondland's revisions to his earlier testimony, it's clear his attny Robert Luskin and/or Sondland's GOP & Dem friends in Oregon had a frank talk w/Sondland about how cold it gets sitting in a federal prison cell for several months.

---

With this information the chances for senate removal went from 0.0% to 0.0%

Quote:

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over.

---

Good thing the Trump's never make money from foreign companies.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Deats: I would very glad to see the WB and the ICIG publicly testify. It would greatly strengthen the case for impeachment and removal and it would increase public support for removing Trump from office.

However, the existing federal whistleblower law protects a WB's identity if a WB wishes to remain anonymous. There are sound reasons for this.

The 'fruit of the poisonous tree' legal concept is a 4A issue in criminal court cases. If you wish to explain why you think the WB complaint filed with the ICIG has any relevance to the HoR impeachment investigation, please do.

---

a) You have to meet the requirements of the statute for you to be a WB. This one doesn't.
II) The fact is that the transcript of the phone call shows that most of the assertions in the complaint are not true.
3) Since a) is the reality, the person that submitted the complaint received classified information from someone, albeit incorrect information.
D) Not reporting that you've received classified information through the correct channels is a felony (hint: this was not the correct channel).
v) The person that submitted the complaint would be required to name the person that did an unauthorized release of classified information, who committed yet another felony.


Yeah...I want the person that submitted the complaint to testify.

nm

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over.

---

Good thing the Trump's never make money from foreign companies.

---

That Trump owns? Or through licensing deals which are completely legal?

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Biden walked away with millions of dollars from Ukraine

---

Link? Careful not to conflate Hunter and Joe, thinking it was subtle. We noticed. Earning income from foreign companies isn't illegal.

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over. You are just playing partisan power games and we might as well get a national divorce.

---

I agree w you on the obvious conflict and ethical issue of Hunter Biden being paid & how that ethically compromises Joe Biden.

Presumably you also want Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Justice Thomas, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Wilbur Ross, SecTreas Mnuchin, Mick Mulvaney, and Elaine Chao all removed from office asap and brought up on charges, correct? Yes or no?

And yes, I agree it applies to Tom Daschle and Hillary. And to scores of other Dems and R's. It makes me sick to my stomach.

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over.

---

Good thing the Trump's never make money from foreign companies.

---

Trump hotels is a US company. I'd also humor investigations that if Trump took official actions with promises to use his business, he should be investigated. That would be actual bribery. This stuff isn't as tricky as you seem to find it.

Joe Biden has such an allegation, so I think it's at least worth a look before dems nominate him to be president.

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Biden walked away with millions of dollars from Ukraine

---

Link? Careful not to conflate Hunter and Joe, thinking it was subtle. We noticed. Earning income from foreign companies isn't illegal.

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over. You are just playing partisan power games and we might as well get a national divorce.

---

I agree w you on the obvious conflict and ethical issue of Hunter Biden being paid & how that Joe Biden.

Presumably you also want Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Justice Thomas, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Wilbur Ross, SecTreas Mnuchin, Mick Mulvaney, and Elaine Chao all removed from office asap and brought up on charges, correct? Yes or no?

And yes, I agree it applies to Tom Daschle and Hillary. And to scores of other Dems and R's. It makes me sick to my stomach.

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

The DOJ could open an investigation into all of them and I wouldn't care. Heck even if you need to open investigations in other countries. Go for it.

Too bad the Obama administration didn't do anything about it... maybe because their VP was one of the most flagrant cases. But that's speculation.

Quote:

---

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

You know why.

Because there is only one party that always gets away with blatantly criminal behavior and one side that is continuously accused of criminal behavior without a shred or shall I say, scintilla of evidence.

Ag with kids said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Deats: I would very glad to see the WB and the ICIG publicly testify. It would greatly strengthen the case for impeachment and removal and it would increase public support for removing Trump from office.

However, the existing federal whistleblower law protects a WB's identity if a WB wishes to remain anonymous. There are sound reasons for this.

The 'fruit of the poisonous tree' legal concept is a 4A issue in criminal court cases. If you wish to explain why you think the WB complaint filed with the ICIG has any relevance to the HoR impeachment investigation, please do.

---

a) You have to meet the requirements of the statute for you to be a WB. This one doesn't.
II) The fact is that the transcript of the phone call shows that most of the assertions in the complaint are not true.
3) Since a) is the reality, the person that submitted the complaint received classified information from someone, albeit incorrect information.
D) Not reporting that you've received classified information through the correct channels is a felony (hint: this was not the correct channel).
v) The person that submitted the complaint would be required to name the person that did an unauthorized release of classified information, who committed yet another felony.

Yeah...I want the person that submitted the complaint to testify.

---

None of your assertions are correct.

The WB complaint was filed with the ICIG. Take a few minutes to think through the implications of that before embarrassing yourself further.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

You know why.

Because there is only one party that always gets away with blatantly criminal behavior and one side that is continuously accused of criminal behavior without a shred or shall I say, scintilla of evidence.

---

Saving this one for posterity before you do like Sondland and revise it.

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

You know why.

Because there is only one party that always gets away with blatantly criminal behavior and one side that is continuously accused of criminal behavior without a shred or shall I say, scintilla of evidence.

---

Saving this one for posterity before you do like Sondland and revise it.

---

Like saying the GOP should nominate a guy like McCain if they wanted your vote and then promptly voting for a thug like Obama when they do? That kind of revision?

hbtheduce said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Biden walked away with millions of dollars from Ukraine

---

Link? Careful not to conflate Hunter and Joe, thinking it was subtle. We noticed. Earning income from foreign companies isn't illegal.

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over. You are just playing partisan power games and we might as well get a national divorce.

---

I agree w you on the obvious conflict and ethical issue of Hunter Biden being paid & how that Joe Biden.

Presumably you also want Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Justice Thomas, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Wilbur Ross, SecTreas Mnuchin, Mick Mulvaney, and Elaine Chao all removed from office asap and brought up on charges, correct? Yes or no?

And yes, I agree it applies to Tom Daschle and Hillary. And to scores of other Dems and R's. It makes me sick to my stomach.

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

The DOJ could open an investigation into all of them and I wouldn't care.

---

Yet here you are, every day, making post after post which state your objections to Trump being investigated.

The reality is you are fine with GOP corruption. Like Bo Darville says, all that matters to your side is policy.

Quote:

---

The reality is you are fine with GOP corruption. Like Bo Darville says, all that matters to your side is policy.

---

Have you been a sentient being for the last 30 years? I am thinking you were not.

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Biden walked away with millions of dollars from Ukraine

---

Link? Careful not to conflate Hunter and Joe, thinking it was subtle. We noticed. Earning income from foreign companies isn't illegal.

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over. You are just playing partisan power games and we might as well get a national divorce.

---

I agree w you on the obvious conflict and ethical issue of Hunter Biden being paid & how that Joe Biden.

Presumably you also want Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Justice Thomas, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Wilbur Ross, SecTreas Mnuchin, Mick Mulvaney, and Elaine Chao all removed from office asap and brought up on charges, correct? Yes or no?

And yes, I agree it applies to Tom Daschle and Hillary. And to scores of other Dems and R's. It makes me sick to my stomach.

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

The DOJ could open an investigation into all of them and I wouldn't care.

---

Yet here you are, every day, making post after post which state your objections to Trump being investigated.

The reality is you are fine with GOP corruption. Like Bo Darville says, all that matters to your side is policy.

---

One of them negatively affects myself my family and my community and one does. Being a socialist gun grabber is 10x worse than any form of corruption imaginable.

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

You know why.

Because there is only one party that always gets away with blatantly criminal behavior and one side that is continuously accused of criminal behavior without a shred or shall I say, scintilla of evidence.

---

Saving this one for posterity before you do like Sondland and revise it.

---

That was a cheap and completely undeserved shot at me. I admit my errors and own up to them.

---

C'mon now.
Saving a post of yours isn't "a shot at you". That accusation doesn't even make sense, hawg.

Read what you posted. If you truly believe what you said, it means you are ignoring an overwhelming amount of documented factual data and documented factual evidence which contradicts your stated belief.

I've seen you do this a lot when you're making an argument in this forum -- you present the favorable data and ignore / discount / misrepresent the unfavorable data -- and I'm honestly curious why you do it. After all, this forum isn't a courtroom.

Do you view your role in this forum to be somewhat like that of an attny representing a client's side of a case? If so, that would explain a lot.

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over.

---

Good thing the Trump's never make money from foreign companies.

---

Trump hotels is a US company. I'd also humor investigations that if Trump took official actions with promises to use his business, he should be investigated. That would be actual bribery. This stuff isn't as tricky as you seem to find it.

Joe Biden has such an allegation, so I think it's at least worth a look before dems nominate him to be president.

---

You can't be this obtuse and got caught in a pickle. Trump has made tens of millions from foreigners and foreign ventures. It's not illegal.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Deats: I would very glad to see the WB and the ICIG publicly testify. It would greatly strengthen the case for impeachment and removal and it would increase public support for removing Trump from office.

However, the existing federal whistleblower law protects a WB's identity if a WB wishes to remain anonymous. There are sound reasons for this.

The 'fruit of the poisonous tree' legal concept is a 4A issue in criminal court cases. If you wish to explain why you think the WB complaint filed with the ICIG has any relevance to the HoR impeachment investigation, please do.

---

a) You have to meet the requirements of the statute for you to be a WB. This one doesn't.
II) The fact is that the transcript of the phone call shows that most of the assertions in the complaint are not true.
3) Since a) is the reality, the person that submitted the complaint received classified information from someone, albeit incorrect information.
D) Not reporting that you've received classified information through the correct channels is a felony (hint: this was not the correct channel).
v) The person that submitted the complaint would be required to name the person that did an unauthorized release of classified information, who committed yet another felony.

Yeah...I want the person that submitted the complaint to testify.

---

None of your assertions are correct.

The WB complaint was filed with the ICIG. Take a few minutes to think through the implications of that before embarrassing yourself further.

---

Yes they are.

Sorry you're wrong.

I remember when you were a sane TexAgs poster.

Sorry you've been consumed by TDS...

aggiehawg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

You know why.

Because there is only one party that always gets away with blatantly criminal behavior and one side that is continuously accused of criminal behavior without a shred or shall I say, scintilla of evidence.

---

Saving this one for posterity before you do like Sondland and revise it.

---

That was a cheap and completely undeserved shot at me. I admit my errors and own up to them.

You?

---

He's been wrong eleventy billion times and just powers forward....

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Biden walked away with millions of dollars from Ukraine

---

Link? Careful not to conflate Hunter and Joe, thinking it was subtle. We noticed. Earning income from foreign companies isn't illegal.

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over. You are just playing partisan power games and we might as well get a national divorce.

---

I agree w you on the obvious conflict and ethical issue of Hunter Biden being paid & how that Joe Biden.

Presumably you also want Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Justice Thomas, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Wilbur Ross, SecTreas Mnuchin, Mick Mulvaney, and Elaine Chao all removed from office asap and brought up on charges, correct? Yes or no?

And yes, I agree it applies to Tom Daschle and Hillary. And to scores of other Dems and R's. It makes me sick to my stomach.

So tell us, why are you okay with your GOP side doing it?

---

The DOJ could open an investigation into all of them and I wouldn't care.

---

Yet here you are, every day, making post after post which state your objections to Trump being investigated.

The reality is you are fine with GOP corruption. Like Bo Darville says, all that matters to your side is policy.

---

False again. Nice straw-man.

Congress has a proper role in oversight and impeachment. You and congressional libs, are just lying when you claim Trump committed a crime by pushing to investigate Joe Biden. Its a lawful presidential power.

Impeachment is a political process, which is why your side is lying about the severity of the allegations. So by all means, sink you chances in the 2020 with this nonsense. I'm going to continue to point out the major flaws in your sides allegations and blatant hypocrisy.

I've been 100% consistent. You are the one having to alter laws and principles to fit your sides narrative. Heck you can't even represent my argument correctly. So be ready for many many more pages of me repeating the same thing to you over and over.

When Judge Sullivan soon throws out the Flynn Case it will be the beginning of the end of the Democrats. The Trump Freight Train will then start rolling nicely down the tracks with the Horowitz's IG Report and then faster than a speeding bullet with Durham ! POW / ZOOM NANCY !

Gary Johnson said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Gary Johnson said:

---

Quote:

---

Don Jr should join as many foreign company boards as possible then. If you can't see the conflict, our conversation is over.

---

Good thing the Trump's never make money from foreign companies.

---

Trump hotels is a US company. I'd also humor investigations that if Trump took official actions with promises to use his business, he should be investigated. That would be actual bribery. This stuff isn't as tricky as you seem to find it.

Joe Biden has such an allegation, so I think it's at least worth a look before dems nominate him to be president.

---

You can't be this obtuse and got caught in a pickle. Trump has made tens of millions from foreigners and foreign ventures. It's not illegal.

---

Correct, Hunter Biden could very well be innocent. Trump only needs a proper predicate for an investigation, the DOJ obviously felt that standard was met to let Bill Barr discuss with Ukraine.

Further, if the Dem whistleblower described the phone call as "Ukraine would get aid money and promised to stay at Trump properties whenever possible". You and Metolius would be correct, that would be very concerning. But you two seem unable to grasp the concept of "thing of value".

Plus, seeing how Adam Schiff had WH staff listening digging for impeachable offense, the fact the above has never come up is very telling.

Trust me, my argument has been crafted over the past month and a half. You obviously have put less thought into yours arguing over non-material standards like "quid pro quo".

How is the Concord LLC case going?

MetoliusAg said:

---

captkirk said:

---

Trump not going anywhere. I don't know why you guys put yourselves through this over and over again

---

We already know that. I have posted several times Trump won't be removed by Senate trial unless a smoking gun of financial crimes is uncovered.

Look at past Potus scandals in the GOP. The **only** reason that enough House and Senate R's got onboard with removing Nixon was the tapes.

Without those tapes of Nixon, all the other mountain of evidence was still not enough to convince a sufficient number of R's to choose country over party.

It wasn't a sense of duty or of right vs wrong that motivated enough GOP Senators to agree the removal of Nixon was necessary. It was their understanding of how the tapes would overwhemingly affect public opinion and voters in their future Senate elections.

Reagan committed numerous crimes, but he never faced impeachment. There were no tapes, and so Reagan cowardly let his subordinates take all the blame.

Just like with Nixon and Reagan, most people in the GOP will turn a blind eye to Trump's criminal behavior as long as no smoking gun evidence of Presidential wrongdoing & criminality emerges equivalent to Nixon's tapes.

---

Did Bill Clinton commit crimes? Did the Dems turn a blind eye to them? C'mon man, you are better than this. You are getting more partisan with age.

BMX Bandit said:

---

an argument can be made for anything. arguing the 9th amendment is reason Trump gets to cross examine witnesses during impeachment is not an argument that gets you very far and one Trump's team is not going to ever make.

---

You're probably right, but

- the 9th amendment deals with rights not enumerated in the Constitution but are still "retained by the people".
(the reasons for this amendment are well described in the Federalist papers, but my understanding is the founding fathers knew they could not codify all rights, especially in unforeseen circumstances)
- an impeachment does not fall within the criminal justice system.
- an impeachment is not a grand jury, which is within the justice system no matter what bag of schiff claims.
- the founding fathers could not foresee an impeachment "investigation" taking place by the House of Representatives, looking for a crime, rather than as typically performed by law enforcement.
- since what is occurring is not covered by the 6th amendment, but the right of an accused to face their accuser is in fact "a right" then the logical extension is to demand the accused in this impeachment must have the right to face the accuser in person and interview the accuser and witnesses.

If bag of schiff contends Trump is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, state specifically what the crime is and put it to a vote before the House of Representatives.

oysterbayAG said:

---

When Judge Sullivan soon throws out the Flynn Case it will be the beginning of the end of the Democrats. The Trump Freight Train will then start rolling nicely down the tracks with the Horowitz's IG Report and then faster than a speeding bullet with Durham ! POW / ZOOM NANCY !

---

I am sure etc is going to tell us that the mistakes made were just honest mistakes.

backintexas2013 said:

---

oysterbayAG said:

---

When Judge Sullivan soon throws out the Flynn Case it will be the beginning of the end of the Democrats. The Trump Freight Train will then start rolling nicely down the tracks with the Horowitz's IG Report and then faster than a speeding bullet with Durham ! POW / ZOOM NANCY !

---

I am sure etc is going to tell us that the mistakes made were just honest mistakes.

---

"Sorry our lab mixed up the DNA samples, turns out the blood on the victim doesn't match your clients, oops. Too bad your client already pled guilty"

You're mixing/matching again, 2016 election interference =/ Hunter Biden. There's no DOJ investigation, the Ukrainians had no use for the conspiracy nonsense and had nothing on Hunter or Joe Biden. They were even more confused by the "server" nonsense but that related to an actual investigation of national interest.

Gary Johnson said:

---

You're mixing/matching again, 2016 election interference =/ Hunter Biden. There's no DOJ investigation, the Ukrainians had no use for the conspiracy nonsense and had nothing on Hunter or Joe Biden. They were even more confused by the "server" nonsense but that related to an actual investigation of national interest.

---

You have no basis to claim there is no DOJ investigation into Biden. The fact Bill Barr is willing to discuss the situation with Ukraine, suggests that there is a DOJ investigation, possibly into the Shokin situation even if it looks like Biden is ~probably~ innocent.

An investigation into possible corruption by the former VP who is running for President is in the national interest. Or would you rather elect another unethical (and possibly corrupt) president?

Still glad we all agree that half the quid pro quo is legal. Proving that "quid pro quo" is a meaningless standard.

My basis is we would have heard about it by now, loudly proclaimed by Trump or at least a strategic leak. And that officials who would know, aka Lindsey Graham, have publicly called for one.

You have no basis to claim that there is.