It is. We can't have a reunion. It's too much. Unfortunately my own mother has been sucked into it. She's a huge Trump fan and they have all blocked each other.
Impeachment
- Thread starter mchammer
- Start date
It is. We can't have a reunion. It's too much. Unfortunately my own mother has been sucked into it. She's a huge Trump fan and they have all blocked each other.
To be fair, bystander, POTUS did mention the Bidens:
Yes... I was corrected. Reading comprehension skills were lacking...
Statalyzer
10,000+ Posts
Watch now as [guy who favors my team] says THIS that absolutely DESTROYS [guy who favors the other team]!
I have a pretty politically balanced friend who says (and I paraphrase):
"Trump is guilty of a quid pro quo because he clearly mentioned the Biden's, the aid had been held-up and was soon released after he became aware of the whistle-blower".
He sees these as undisputed facts that in concert point to intent.
"Trump is guilty of a quid pro quo because he clearly mentioned the Biden's, the aid had been held-up and was soon released after he became aware of the whistle-blower".
He sees these as undisputed facts that in concert point to intent.
This whole saga reminds me of the Democrat email release and the rigging of the primary. The wrong doing was ignored, but the information release was seen by the media/dems as the real wrongdoing.
I know I killed my wife, but my friend had no right to send my email confession to you.
I know I killed my wife, but my friend had no right to send my email confession to you.
So, if you're keeping score at home, the Liberals have it as follows:
CIA - Good
FBI - Good
ICE - Evil
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
The timing part has always been a red herring. There was always a hard deadline for release of the aid of Sept 15 (I think it was technically released a few days later). The deadline is a Congressional appropriations rule -- I cant remember the acronym for that rule right now. But it was always going to be released at least by that date.
Not doubting you my friend but I'd like to see a link on that hard deadline. It would be good for him to consider. He's interested in these things as am I. I think he is capable of going with the truth regardless of who is getting gored.
Is he incapable of finding the truth himself?
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
The acronym for this will come to me - its a use it or lose it hard deadline - otherwise the set aside funds go back the UST (or maybe "stay with" the Treas is the better way to say it). I think the way it works is that earmarked money must be spent before the end of the fiscal year which is Sept 30 ("use it or lose it"). But there is another fixed requirement that a 2-week prior notice be given to the Congress, which effectively moves the effective "hard deadline" to Sept 15
Last edited:
Sometimes that's what it takes.
See link:
The Hold On Ukraine Aid: A Timeline Emerges From Impeachment Probe
Fiscal YE was/is Sept 30. Also, we "shorted" them $35 million which apparently was re-appropriated by Congress.
Two questions then:
1) Did Ukraine know we had to release the money by 9/30?
2) Why did we wait until the last minute to release it?
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I brought the idea up above that Rs might move to dismiss either
(a) On the pleadings
(b) After the conclusion of the plaintiff's case (here House Dems)
(c) At conclusion of the trial before it "goes to the jury"
Here, Mitch on the Senate floor, deals with the idea of a motion to dismiss. He's responding to Schumer's letter, by pointing to all of Schumer's hypocrisy and inconsistency with regard to Bill Clinton, but he deals with other history as well
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
It was released Sept 11, I think. Why does Ukr knowledge matter?
It's a giant bureaucracy. Stuff likes this happens every day. Obama missed a funding deadline to Ukraine by 3 weeks or more. It didnt matter then. Why is it relevant now?
I thought there would be no leverage if Ukraine knew the funds were required by law to be released by Sept 30th. If both Trump and the Ukraine knew this (implicit in the conversation though not specifically stated) then Trump's "favors" were just that; requests, but not extortion or the like.
I35
5,000+ Posts
I guess you can’t be a hack for one side or the other to get the ciphered facts. I hate both establishments. But one much more than the other.
Well, duh...orange man bad. Didn't you KNOW this?
Obummer is more of a teflon man than Gotti EVER was...
Geez it sounds like you were in the car with me and a friend last night. He said exactly the same thing, but added that Trump was guilty of abuse of power because he targeted a political rival. I asked, if no one is above the law, then why is Hunter Biden supposed to get a pass just because his dad is running for POTUS? He could not answer.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
After all of this, the latest is that it sounds like both Mitch and Lindsey are willing to dump the whole thing with no witnesses. Which is in conflict with what Trump is asking for. He wants the Full Monty. He wants vindication and complete obliteration of the Dem's case for all the world to see.
For me, if we must go this far, as it appears we must, I would at least want to see the whistleblower and Schiff, under oath. The whistleblower started this whole thing. He should not get to slide through it all with zero public appearances, zero testimony under oath and zero confrontation with a good attorney for the person he sought to have banished. People familiar with him say he wont last long in the face of a good cross. The American people deserve and, I would argue, need to see that. They need and deserve to learn of his political biases, his deep animus towards Trump and his close personal ties to John Brennan. Do him and Schiff, then wrap it up.
After all of this, the latest is that it sounds like both Mitch and Lindsey are willing to dump the whole thing with no witnesses. Which is in conflict with what Trump is asking for. He wants the Full Monty. He wants vindication and complete obliteration of the Dem's case for all the world to see.
For me, if we must go this far, as it appears we must, I would at least want to see the whistleblower and Schiff, under oath. The whistleblower started this whole thing. He should not get to slide through it all with zero public appearances, zero testimony under oath and zero confrontation with a good attorney for the person he sought to have banished. People familiar with him say he wont last long in the face of a good cross. The American people deserve and, I would argue, need to see that. They need and deserve to learn of his political biases, his deep animus towards Trump and his close personal ties to John Brennan. Do him and Schiff, then wrap it up.
I think we all deserve to see the bias and Biden's role fully explored on national TV.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Lindsey said no Biden
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
George Soros listed as 2nd most influential figure in Ukraine
By all means, lets send them another Billion
George Soros listed as 2nd most influential figure in Ukraine - Voice of Europe
By all means, lets send them another Billion
George Soros listed as 2nd most influential figure in Ukraine - Voice of Europe
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
