Ulty Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 14 minutes ago, funhusker said: Aid was inexplicably held... People around Trump pushed for investigations into Trump's political opponent... The actual State Dept had no idea what was going on.... Several career employees were concerned after hearing the actual call... Once concerns were made public, the aid was inexplicably released... The POTUS Chief of Staff tells the press that "Yes, personal politics was involved. Get over it!"... No people who were involved in the inner circle want to or will be allowed to testify... People confirmed this under oath, including a person with first hand knowledge of the "inner circle"... but whoooo is the whistleblower?!?! 2 Link to comment
Landlord Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 2 hours ago, Frostberg said: Don't attack me for this as it is just my opinion... I really didn't see a good case for impeachment presented. I won't attack you as you're allowed to believe whatever you want, but if you didn't see it's because you're not looking. Trump withheld taxpayer money aid to a country until they announced an investigation into a political rival, influencing the upcoming election in his favor. This happened. There's no contesting that this happened. If you can't see that that's impeachable, that's on you. 4 Link to comment
ZRod Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 23 minutes ago, Ulty said: but whoooo is the whistleblower?!?! Honest to God it could be Bolton. How nuts is that? But really everyone is saying it's a 30 something CIA guy assigned to the White House. 1 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 Here's the thing: Trump is a would-be mobster. He grew up around them via his father's business ties in New York. Most of what he does and how he behaves can be explained by this. In this case, he repeatedly tried to shake a foreign country down to investigate a political opponent to help his own re-election without actually explicitly asking. This is what mobsters do to retain plausible deniability. Can't outright ask what you want for even though everyone with a functioning brain knows what you mean. If you wanted more proof of why what Trump is actually doing is wrong: Ukraine Stopped Helping Mueller Probe After Trump Administration Gave It Weapons to Fight Russia ^^^ This is from May 2018. Trump was again leveraging foreign aid to a country that desperately needed it to help protect himself from investigation. Nothing to do with the Bidens then. But it establishes a pattern of corrupt behavior using the power of his office to further Trump's own personal interests. 1 Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said: Here's the thing: Trump is a would-be mobster. He grew up around them via his father's business ties in New York. Most of what he does and how he behaves can be explained by this. In this case, he repeatedly tried to shake a foreign country down to investigate a political opponent to help his own re-election without actually explicitly asking. This is what mobsters do to retain plausible deniability. Can't outright ask what you want for even though everyone with a functioning brain knows what you mean. If you wanted more proof of why what Trump is actually doing is wrong: Ukraine Stopped Helping Mueller Probe After Trump Administration Gave It Weapons to Fight Russia ^^^ This is from May 2018. Trump was again leveraging foreign aid to a country that desperately needed it to help protect himself from investigation. Nothing to do with the Bidens then. But it establishes a pattern of corrupt behavior using the power of his office to further Trump's own personal interests. I'm surprised this wasn't brought up in the hearings honestly. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said: I'm surprised this wasn't brought up in the hearings honestly. Was it you that mentioned it initially? Someone somewhere in here mentioned it ITT and that was the only reason I found out about it. Without that I never would have connected the dots. Link to comment
TGHusker Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 27 minutes ago, ZRod said: Honest to God it could be Bolton. How nuts is that? But really everyone is saying it's a 30 something CIA guy assigned to the White House. We shall see https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-bolton-makes-mysterious-return-twitter-tells-followers-to-stay-tuned-for-backstory Quote Former National Security Adviser John Bolton made a dramatic return to Twitter on Friday morning, telling followers to “stay tuned” for an unspecified “backstory” and claiming the White House tried to block his Twitter access. Bolton denied that his two-month absence from the platform was him going into hiding after he left the administration. “Since resigning as National Security Advisor, the White House refused to return access to my personal Twitter account,” he wrote Friday afternoon. “Out of fear of what I may say?” Bolton left the White House in September due to foreign-policy disagreements with Donald Trump, and is considered a key witness in the impeachment inquiry into the president. His lawyer, Charles Cooper, said this month that Bolton was “part of many relevant meetings and conversations” pertaining to the Ukraine impeachment inquiry, but will only appear before Congress if a judge orders him to do so. However, it's possible he could be teasing a forthcoming book rather than an appearance before lawmakers in the inquiry. He recently reached a multimillion-dollar deal with publisher Simon & Schuster. Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, TGHusker said: We shall see https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-bolton-makes-mysterious-return-twitter-tells-followers-to-stay-tuned-for-backstory 5 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said: 4 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said: Was it you that mentioned it initially? Someone somewhere in here mentioned it ITT and that was the only reason I found out about it. Without that I never would have connected the dots. I think I brought it up I was seeing that on twitter and @QMany verified with the news source Link to comment
TGHusker Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 I think he will get his desire. I doubt it goes the way he wants it to go. However, the majority jury of Senators will most likely not vote based on the evidence. https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-tells-fox-friends-i-want-a-trial/ Quote In a lengthy interview with Fox & Friends Friday morning, the first since impeachment inquiry hearings appear to have wrapped up, President Donald Trump proclaimed “I want a trial,” in the matter of Trump’s alleged plot to seek domestic political help from a foreign entity. In a question designed to praise Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik, Trump quickly turned to the overall ordeal. “The bottom line is, all of those witnesses, they’re all shifty Schiff’s,” he noted, adding “don’t forget there was no due process. You can’t have lawyers. We couldn’t have any witnesses.” He then said “we want to call the whistleblower. But you know who I want as the first witness> Because frankly, I want a trial. You know, I think–” Brian Kilmeade followed “You want a trial?” Trump replied “Oh, I would! Look, number one, they should never, ever impeach.” He then cited as evidence the flurry of pro-Trump legal analysis he had seen on Fox News. “I watched, I watched five people on your network yesterday say there’s nothing here. Andy McCarthy, how about Ken, special prosecutor,” Trump said. Kilmeade interjected: “Ken Starr.” “Special counsel. Ken Starr, he was fantastic, he said there’s nothing here. So ready? Number one, there should never be an impeachment. This is not an impeachment,” Trump concluded. Link to comment
TGHusker Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 Trump is all about conspiracies. That is why he ran in the first place - believing so many lies about immigration, the boarder, national security, climate change, Obama's birth, etc and etc. Thus he bases polices on falsehoods and promotes the same that drive his actions. While he is fond of calling out 'fake news' the fact is that his actions, words, and policies are based on believing false conspiracy theories and he does so wt little to no evidence. Speaking of second hand witness accounts - see Trump's words in bold below. In the Fox interview, Trump 'indites' Obama and his change of command. Listen to the Fox and Friends video and see even Doocy questioning the validity of Trump's claim. https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-and-friends-host-steve-doocy-scrambles-when-trump-boosts-insane-conspiracy-theory-are-you-sure Quote During a freewheeling, hour-long phone interview with Fox & Friends, President Donald Trump promoted the long-debunked conspiracy that cyber company CrowdStrike helped the DNC fabricate Rusian hacking during the 2016 election, prompting host Steve Doocy to attempt to scramble to get the president to walk it back. “They have the server from the DNC, Democratic National Committee,” an unhinged Trump yelled. “The FBI went in and they told them, ‘Get out of here! We’re not giving it to you.’ They gave the server to CrowdStrike or whatever it is called, which is a company owned by a very wealthy Ukrainian. And I still want to see that server. You know, the FBI has never gotten that server. That’s a big part of this whole thing. Why did they give it to a Ukrainian company?” (CrowdStrike is not owned by a Ukrainian.) “Are you sure they did that? Are you sure they gave it to Ukraine?” Doocy asked, causing Trump to reply: “That is what the word is.” 1 Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 6 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said: For all of you saying you don't see enough for impeachment...the bottom line is this: Trump or Ukraine didn't have to actually go through with Quid Pro Quo (this for that). Trump just had to OFFER it up. That's all it takes...and he admitted on television 3 times that it's what he did. So, you have your evidence straight from the orange horses mouth. No need for the whistleblower at all. No need for people listening on the call. No need for 1st or 2nd hand accounts. Straight from his mouth. It's pretty simple. Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 Despite the obvious... https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/471542-poll-finds-sharp-swing-in-opposition-to-impeachment-among-independents Link to comment
knapplc Posted November 22, 2019 Author Share Posted November 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Nebfanatic said: I'm surprised this wasn't brought up in the hearings honestly. But wait... THERE'S MORE! Quote Impeachment is about to get a Robert Mueller reprise Now that the Ukraine hearings are over, Democrats want to hold at least one Mueller-related impeachment hearing on Trump's possible obstruction and perjury. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts