Impeachment

Just cracks me up to hear Democrat pundits continue to talk about how mistreated the "Career Diplomats" were by the Trump Admin. Isn't that the point of what the Republicans are saying here?

Is it far fetched to believe these people are "colluding" to make these false charges against Trump for that very simple reason: They are all really career cry babies. They don't get their way, Trump is changing how things are done, the way they have done things for years. It's so easy t read between the lines.

I mean, you have Juan Williams defending these people. If media people like him and Chris Wallace and others are defending diplomats and politicians, that tells you everything you need to know about them: you can't trust these diplomats.
 
Why all this hate for the whistleblower? He literally saved Tump's voluminous keister. Had he not made this all public, the President of the Ukraine would have gone on CNN announcing a Hunter Biden investigation, clearly to get the funds released. The whisteblower shortened the rope and saved Trump from hanging himself. To fair minded folks Trump is not perfect, but he doesn't look like he's done enough to have the Senate throw him out of office.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I don't give you crap for supporting Trump. You can support anybody you want. I also never disagreed that the Democrats are generally worse than Trump.

The dispute was whether or not I should get crap for taking a "none of the above" stance and choosing not to be part of either **** show. Of course, I got different a range of treatment. You, I35, Joe, Garmel, and Brad Austin vitriolically gave me an enormous amount of crap for several months. Horn6721 gave me a little but far less. Eye, UTChe, and Sangre seemed to generally respect my approach even if they disagreed with it.

The point is that you (and others) were the crap-flinger. I wasn't.
Click to expand...
Okay. At the time, you were the face of the Never Trumpers. Where is Brad Austin?
 
Last edited:
Ha, Shifty opening statement talking about, of course, how anti corrupt what's her name is and was. It was pointed out earlier that she was buddy buddy with previous corrupt President of Ukraine. Why does Trump have to defend not having confidence in her. It's such BS.

Edit: Yovanovitch
 
So, they want to know WHY Trump removed her. Shifty doesn't dispute Trump can hire and remove anyone as an ambassador. They want to impeach based on why.
 
horninchicago said:
So, they want to know WHY Trump removed her. Shifty doesn't dispute Trump can hire and remove anyone as an ambassador. They want to impeach based on why.
Click to expand...
I think it was the demand for political favors in exchange for releasing desperately needed defense funds Congress had appropriated for Ukraine.
 
You didn't hear that in the testimony? I realize it's "hearsay" because those connected to the president are prevented from testifying. But clearly the President asked for an investigation into Hunter Biden and Burisma. The Ambassador testified that Trump's team made it clear that Trump wanted the President of the Ukraine to publicly announce that investigation before the funds were released. If it hadn't been for this going public, that scenario was all set to play out.
 
Mr. Deez said:
And politically, it's really, really stupid. Proving an improper quid pro quo is a much easier case to make, because you don't have a defined statute. You can sorta lump it under "abuse of power" and impeach over it. If you suggest bribery, the level of proof is much higher. If you read the federal bribery statute, it has a lot of elements to it and lots of wiggle room. She's making her job harder. It's like charging a guy who drives drunk and kills someone with murder rather than intoxication manslaughter. You're gonna have your work cut out for you.
Click to expand...
 
It's amazing to watch them changes theories on the fly
I suspect part of the reason is that they realize their Day One testimony was too much for their own base to follow and comprehend. They realized they needed to dumb it down, give them a simple word they can gobble up
And so that word is now bribery? (a word that is actually in the Constitution). My somewhat fleeting memory of that coming up in Con Law is that the US politician was the one being bribed. Here, I think, they are arguing Trump sought to bribe some foreigners to get them to do what he wanted them to do?

Is this the latest plan?
 
I hear her in her statement saying she had grave concern the State Department was hijacked on its Ukraine policy and it did nothing to fight back.

Again, she and the other diplomats milking it all these years and Trump coming in and changing it up. That is not a crime from what I understand. It is just crying by all these career government workers.
 
He right about Ukraine girls -- they do represent well
Anyone want to argue this fact?

EJa3qFlW4AA4Gxh.jpg
 
horninchicago said:
I hear her in her statement saying she had grave concern the State Department was hijacked on its Ukraine policy and it did nothing to fight back.

Again, she and the other diplomats milking it all these years and Trump coming in and changing it up. That is not a crime from what I understand. It is just crying by all these career government workers.
Click to expand...

This is the woman who, in coordination with the Obama people, denied visas to Ukrainians who were willing to come forward with the bad stuff Dems were doing

Ive written about her quite a but in years past, in this forum

She also worked with Eric Ciaramella - go figure
 
She just continues to make the case for her removal by complaint over and over about how bad Trump's policy is. You can't make this up.

I hope the Rs ask why Ukraine's borders and security are more important than on our southern border.
 
horninchicago said:
She just continues to make the case for her removal by complaint over and over about how bad Trump's policy is. You can't make this up.

I hope the Rs ask why Ukraine's borders and security are more important than on our southern border.
Click to expand...

She did seem to be whining about the dismantling of the Deep State
 
Is she saying Ambassadors should never be replaced because all including her are good effective people?
She sent a lot of time patting herself on the back for the many
deprivations she endured in foreign service as if that makes her immune to being fired. Ask anyone who has served in the military about moving about being in dangerous situations about hardships. That does not make them heroic.
Her bitterness is obvious. Schift is fanning her righteousness.
 
Crockett said:
Why all this hate for the whistleblower? He literally saved Tump's voluminous keister. Had he not made this all public, the President of the Ukraine would have gone on CNN announcing a Hunter Biden investigation, clearly to get the funds released. The whisteblower shortened the rope and saved Trump from hanging himself. To fair minded folks Trump is not perfect, but he doesn't look like he's done enough to have the Senate throw him out of office.
Click to expand...

I don't hate him, but I'm not going to pretend he has a bunch of rights that he doesn't have.
 
As I noted Weds, this type of "leading of the witness" is not allowed in trial courts. For good reason. I get that they can do whatever they want in this type of hearing, but it's still not a good look -- for some of the same reasons the rules of evidence and civil procedure do not allow it.

Here, we have an educated qualified woman, but these white men wont let her speak. They are speaking for her. Putting their words in her mouth. It looks like they do not trust her. My guess is there are many female progressives watching this who are squirming in their seats.
 
Good grief. She is saying she was told by someone at State that she needed to be concerned about her "security" and needed to get on next plane out of Kiev. She was led into saying the White House had it in for her.
This is a kangaroo court.
 
Part of what they are doing now, it seems to me, is counter all the bad talk of Hunter Biden that has already come up by trying to drag Don Jr. into this.
Sort of a "look over there, a squirrel" defense
 
I'd watch this hearing right now, but Deez, Jr. wants to watch Curious George instead, and frankly that sounds more interesting. I might watch some of it after he goes to bed, and I think I may need to drink some beer while I watch.
 
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