Impeachment

Liberals loves the Snopes Family, even though they often produce unintended humor. This time they thought they were shutting down a claim that Dems have tried to impeach every elected Republican President since Eisenhower--

"The U.S. has had six republican presidents since Eisenhower left office in 1961: Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump. The claim is wrong on its face because Democrats made no effort to impeach Ford. ..."​

Ford, of course, was not elected, so they actually confirmed the claim
 
I35 said:
it was over when the Ukrainian leader said he felt no pressure by President Trump and that he didn’t know any funds were being held.


Not sure how many times this has to be said until it sinks in, but if that leader didn’t know that funds were being delayed and he wasn’t told to do something by force or he wouldn’t get those funds, then there isn’t anything more that needs to be said. Well accept to get those SOBs that were lying and doing an attempted coup.
Click to expand...
Plus, from what I have read and heard, it is the obligation of the Executive Branch to ensure the country in question is not corrupt before sending funds. So, the whole fake quid pro quo and he was withholding aid to "dig up dirt" is so tiring.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Who ever claimed Taylor got the impression of quid pro quo directly from Trump? It was always reported it came from Sondland/Volker.

Now you're making up a narrative to try to defame Taylor. That's deceitful and disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Spreading 2nd hand info to undercut the president is deceitful.
 
horninchicago said:
Plus, from what I have read and heard, it is the obligation of the Executive Branch to ensure the country in question is not corrupt before sending funds. So, the whole fake quid pro quo and he was withholding aid to "dig up dirt" is so tiring.
Click to expand...
My guess is that the money was held up until due diligence was completed by executive branch. However, this was for internal purposes or concerns, and as such, Ukraine was not aware of it. The confirmation bias by the TDS-addled Never Trumpers conflated the Biden corruption request with the aid delay.
 
The Dems have been making up false testimony news since the Trayvon Martin case.

No one ever gets put in jail, so they keep doing it.
 
theiioftx said:
I’m still trying to identity an instance where quid pro Quo is not involved when giving a country a billion dollars. Do we just give them money and say, “do what you want with it”?
Click to expand...
Quid pro quo is certainly a foreign policy thing. The difference here: Foreign military aid approved by Congress to go to Ukraine. The POTUS withholds said APPROPRIATED military aid and a visit to the White House (implies international legitimacy) for an announcement on CNN that they're investigating something that had already been debunked. Probably also looking for HRC's email server - he doesn't get the cloud concept.
 
OUBubba said:
Quid pro quo is certainly a foreign policy thing. The difference here: Foreign military aid approved by Congress to go to Ukraine. The POTUS withholds said APPROPRIATED military aid and a visit to the White House (implies international legitimacy) for an announcement on CNN that they're investigating something that had already been debunked. Probably also looking for HRC's email server - he doesn't get the cloud concept.
Click to expand...

Let's keep it clean:

1) Is there any direct evidence of a quid pro quo or not?
2) What was debunked? Are you saying that Trump should have known Hunter's plumb position was all roses? I can't believe you would say that if it was Trump Jr.
 
mchammer said:
Click to expand...


Ummm...this is a quote directly from Sondland's amended statement.

“I said that resumption of the U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Mr. Sondland said in the new statement, which was made public by the House committees leading the inquiry, along with the transcript of his original testimony.
Click to expand...

Meadows is trying to pull the Clinton defense and debate the definition of 'is'.
 
bystander said:
Let's keep it clean:

1) Is there any direct evidence of a quid pro quo or not?
2) What was debunked? Are you saying that Trump should have known Hunter's plumb position was all roses? I can't believe you would say that if it was Trump Jr.
Click to expand...
You mean like the kind where the text messages say that they don't get the goods without coming on CNN and announcing investigations against Bursima and Biden? Or, like noted Never-Trumper Sondland's edited testimony? That means he perjured himself initially. Correct?

The plumb position is chronyism. I don't like it. It's not election meddling and it's not a crime syndicate like Trump University or Trump Steaks or like all of the emoluments violations that Trump is committing. Or like Ivanka's Chinese patents. If he's worried about corruption then please look into the murder of an American citizen by the Saudis.
 
"...would likely not occur..." seems to leave open the possibility that he did not know what happened.

Is that too nuanced?
 
OUBubba said:
You mean like the kind where the text messages say that they don't get the goods without coming on CNN and announcing investigations against Bursima and Biden?
Click to expand...

Ok... who texted it? Was this someone working as an official agent for the POTUS officially telling the Ukraines the terms for the aid?
 
bystander said:
Ok... who texted it? Was this someone working as an official agent for the POTUS officially telling the Ukraines the terms for the aid?
Click to expand...
Dude, you've seen the texts. Here they are again. A visual timeline of the text messages in the Trump-Ukraine affair

Taylor is obviously irritated that they're leveraging $ on US domestic political games that the Ukrainians don't want to get tied into.

Here's a summary of Burisma. The investigation was shelved in 2015. So asking for the ousting of the people doing investigations into corruption would be poor logic.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
 
OUBubba said:
Rudy, Sondland, etc. Are you pretending to be an aggy on purpose?
Click to expand...

No... just wanted to hear you say it. You can insult me if you want. It has no effect.

Thank you for the link.

I'm not wanting to see an impeachment. You can't wait for it. I want us to be dead sure. You are ready to sharpen the axe.
 
bystander said:
No... just wanted to hear you say it. You can insult me if you want. It has no effect.

Thank you for the link.

I'm not wanting to see an impeachment. You can't wait for it. I want us to be dead sure. You are ready to sharpen the axe.
Click to expand...
I know that you're a smart guy/gal. You seem to be pretending not to be for some reason. Unclear.

What do you want to hear me say? We should have invoked the 25th Amendment some time ago. We tried to impeach a President over lying about inappropriate sexual situations. Given that Russia is currently in an active war with Ukraine (an ally of ours), potentially aiding their enemy by extorting personal benefits derived from taxpayer funded resources seems, as the kids say, sketch. If it were on the up and up we would not have seen the ambassador removed, Rudy involved, Bolton wouldn't have quit, McKinley wouldn't have resigned. There would not have been any moving the conversations to secure servers if they were "perfect". They'd release a transcript that wasn't a summary and not a transcript. It smells worse than anything Nixon did. His was all domestic. If we placed presidential misdeeds on a monopoly board this would be on Pennsylvania Avenue but maybe a little less, Marvin Gardens. Clinton's were over on Oriental Avenue.
 
If I were a Senator on the Intelligence Committee I'd want to have a bipartisan group listen to all of Trump's calls stored on that server. I'd like to think that conscientious bipartisan folks would want to know what was discussed when he pulled out of Syria so fast that we had to go back and bomb our bases.
 
OUBubba said:
If I were a Senator on the Intelligence Committee I'd want to have a bipartisan group listen to all of Trump's calls stored on that server. I'd like to think that conscientious bipartisan folks would want to know what was discussed when he pulled out of Syria so fast that we had to go back and bomb our bases.
Click to expand...
Just because you don’t like the president you are allowed to find a crime by digging through privileged documents
 
OUBubba said:
If I were a Senator on the Intelligence Committee I'd want to have a bipartisan group listen to all of Trump's calls stored on that server. I'd like to think that conscientious bipartisan folks would want to know what was discussed when he pulled out of Syria so fast that we had to go back and bomb our bases.
Click to expand...

Way too overbroad. No court would ever order a congressional subpoena for that, and if it did, the President would refuse to follow the order.
 
In combination with the FOIA releases, there are now several documents, plus new testimony, that reveal multiple attempts by Hunter Biden's Burisma reps or his fellow Burisma board member/business partner to lobby or meet with officials in the Obama State Department or in then-Vice President Biden's office
 
EI4F6FhXYAEEgYv.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top