Impeachment

[Horn2RunAgain]

Remember when someone in the Trump admin questioned the loyalty of Vidman? Maybe it was because of this (though I agree it was done in poor taste and disrespectful to do so):

when I heard that my first thought was he was recv'g his own payola from Ukraine and he was doing what he could to stop the investigation into his and others side hustle....then I read this and wonder 'who's lying here?'

Ukraine Pol: I Was Joking When I Asked Vindman To Be Our Defense Minister

Oleksander Danylyuk, the former Chairman of the National Security and Defence Council in Ukraine, said he only remembers speaking with Vindman once about the defense minister position. He said it he and Vindman had engaged in a light-hearted conversation about how the two used to live close to one another in the former Soviet Union. It was then that Danylyuk jokingly told Vindman that he should take the defense minister job in Ukraine.

“We both smiled and laughed,” Danylyuk said. “It was clearly a joke.” Danylyuk said he wouldn’t have been able to seriously offer Vindman the position without direct sign off from President Volodymyr Zelensky.

snip-

 

[OUBubba]

when I heard that my first thought was he was recv'g his own payola from Ukraine and he was doing what he could to stop the investigation into his and others side hustle....then I read this and wonder 'who's lying here?'

Ukraine Pol: I Was Joking When I Asked Vindman To Be Our Defense Minister

Oleksander Danylyuk, the former Chairman of the National Security and Defence Council in Ukraine, said he only remembers speaking with Vindman once about the defense minister position. He said it he and Vindman had engaged in a light-hearted conversation about how the two used to live close to one another in the former Soviet Union. It was then that Danylyuk jokingly told Vindman that he should take the defense minister job in Ukraine.

“We both smiled and laughed,” Danylyuk said. “It was clearly a joke.” Danylyuk said he wouldn’t have been able to seriously offer Vindman the position without direct sign off from President Volodymyr Zelensky.

snip-

When I heard this story I thought of Darrel K royal, Sooner, being hired by the horns. Vindman reported it to his superiors. The efforts to undercut this guy are sad. Bigly.

 

[Joe Fan]

It now has a name #fartgate

 

[bystander]

The problem with credibility concerning the sincerity of the impeachment inquiry:

Beto: Called for impeaching Trump PRIOR to the release of the Mueller Report

AOC: “At the end of the day, we have to be able to come together as a caucus, and if it is this Ukrainian allegation that is what brings the caucus together, then I think we have to run with however we unify the House,” Ocasio-Cortez told Wolf Blitzer, who asked the Congresswoman whether she hoped other potential violations by Trump would be considered in any articles of impeachment.

“. . . We also need to move quite quickly because we’re talking about the potential compromise of the 2020 elections,” Ocasio-Cortez ended. “And so this is not just about something that has occurred; this is about preventing a potentially disastrous outcome from occurring next year.”

Rep Green (TX): “It’s not just about what he’s doing in Ukraine. It’s about what he’s doing to our country and how he is corrupting our society,” said Green.

These people are corrupt political minds who want only one thing: The removal of the greatest impediment ever to Liberal extremism and they will do it by any means necessary.

Concurrently we see calls for reparations, the de facto legalization of illegal immigration (sanctuary cities, calling for the abolishment of ICE, benefits for illegals, calls of racism as a means to stifle dissent), student loan debt forgiveness, the green deal, socialism as a catch-all. THIS IS THE LIBERAL PLATFORM without a doubt. It will cost TRILLIONS AND TRILLIONS of dollars and they don't care how it wrecks our economy. It is a feudal society in the making (a patronage complex) and Trump is in the way.

If you believe in Sanders, Warren, AOC, Beto, Kamala, Booker, Green et al then I'm glad I'm the dumb one not getting private messages on this forum from Liberals who are blind as blind can be. Or maybe they just agree with all of that "policy."

 

[Mr. Deez]

If there is one direct piece of evidence that PROVES Donald Trump ordered or negotiated a quid pro quo with Ukraine then it would be great to see it.

But there is another fact and this is it: The Left has never accepted Trump's victory and they've been on a mission to impeach from day one. It is OBVIOUS.

I think there's evidence that a quid pro quo was pushed. Mulvaney likely had personal knowledge of that and confirmed it in his press conference. What they're having trouble coming up with is evidence of an improper quid pro quo - something that suggests that this was primarily about getting at Biden rather then a broader anti-corruption agenda.

 

[Horn6721]

MrD
That is for me the point. Like many Presidents Trump likely did in some manner say before you get our taxpayer dollars you, Ukraine, need to prove to us this money will not hand up in the wrong hands.
I also think what Biden did for his son was wrong.
So call it a quid pro quo or simply an attempt to make sure our money did not get wasted.
IMO Trump does not think Biden poses any threat to his reelection, Trump would like for Biden to be the nominee.

all that said Sondland is throwing Guiliani and Trump under the schitt bus.

 

[Seattle Husker]

So you are going with the “I’m too intelligent for you” argument. If you are so intelligent then why are you a Democrat? Oh.....and you are indeed a Democrat if you want to admit it or not. Something else you won’t admit is that you believed everything Adam Schitt said. That Schitt head let you down again.

Let me guess you are private messaging with Roger35’s circle. It’s where all the liberals go that have been humiliated.

Ok, Boomer.

 

[bystander]

I think there's evidence that a quid pro quo was pushed. Mulvaney likely had personal knowledge of that and confirmed it in his press conference. What they're having trouble coming up with is evidence of an improper quid pro quo - something that suggests that this was primarily about getting at Biden rather then a broader anti-corruption agenda.

I feel we can't dodge the political convenience that it happened to be Biden. But that's just it; it was Biden. We can throw around comments such as, "Why doesn't Trump pursue the corruption of [fill in the blank]" as if choosing one car to ticket means a cop doesn't care about the others. This was the Vice President of the United States and his son. Pretty major deal. The appearance is horrible and knowing the LIBERAL EXTREMIST standard for guilt then I'd have to say Biden is guilty in that arena.

 

[OUBubba]

If someone changes their "story", they toss away their credibility. That pertains to any situation

I'd say that the one that they correct it to after they realize that they'd previously committed perjury is more likely the one to trust. Especially after they see Roger Stone, General Michael Flynn (he earned the title), Michael Cohen, et al. going to jail for similar things.

 

[Mr. Deez]

If he changed his testimony and goes with the “refreshed” then that makes him lose his credibility due to changing it.

If he changed his testimony and goes with the “refreshed” then that makes him lose his credibility due to changing it.

You don’t think roger stone’s recent conviction might not have something to do with the sudden improvements in memories?

Even though you guys are on opposite sides of the underlying issue, you're sorta making the same point, which is that changing one's testimony equals blown credibility. It doesn't. Some who change their testimony were lying. That is true. However, I've seen plenty of people (both clients and defendants) change their testimonies after seeing other evidence that refreshes their memories. Sometimes the change was in their interests, but plenty of times it wasn't. You truly can't assume.

 

[OUBubba]

I feel we can't dodge the political convenience that it happened to be Biden. But that's just it; it was Biden. We can throw around comments such as, "Why doesn't Trump pursue the corruption of [fill in the blank]" as if choosing one car to ticket means a cop doesn't care about the others. This was the Vice President of the United States and his son. Pretty major deal. The appearance is horrible and knowing the LIBERAL EXTREMIST standard for guilt then I'd have to say Biden is guilty in that arena.

Except that it was already debunked. AND, it was NOT being looked into by the prosecutor that Biden wanted removed. That means that removing Prosecutor A for an unknown Prosecutor B meant that Bursima was MORE likely to be scrutinized.

 

[OUBubba]

Even though you guys are on opposite sides of the underlying issue, you're sorta making the same point, which is that changing one's testimony equals blown credibility. It doesn't. Some who change their testimony were lying. That is true. However, I've seen plenty of people (both clients and defendants) change their testimonies after seeing other evidence that refreshes their memories. Sometimes the change was in their interests, but plenty of times it wasn't. You truly can't assume.

I agree with that. Volker seemed to do a good job of navigating from the "I forgot" to the "now that I see how things evolved, I may not have realized"

 

[OUBubba]

I think there's evidence that a quid pro quo was pushed. Mulvaney likely had personal knowledge of that and confirmed it in his press conference. What they're having trouble coming up with is evidence of an improper quid pro quo - something that suggests that this was primarily about getting at Biden rather then a broader anti-corruption agenda.

EXCEPT that Trump was more concerned with the President (not one of his lesser officials) announcing it on CNN that they were investigating Biden. Not Fox, not MSNBC. If they were truly worried about corruption and they were going to investigate it there would be minimal concern of any announcement about it. Heck, I'd think you'd want to run silent, run deep as you investigated it. Right?

 

[bystander]

Except that it was already debunked. AND, it was NOT being looked into by the prosecutor that Biden wanted removed. That means that removing Prosecutor A for an unknown Prosecutor B meant that Bursima was MORE likely to be scrutinized.

Biden's son got the job because of influence. That's it. That is not debunked. If you want to believe it was arm's length and that you'd give any of Trump's children the same sober, rational, unbiased analysis and conclusion then good for you.

But I don't believe you would.

 

[OUBubba]

Biden's son got the job because of influence. That's it. That is not debunked. If you want to believe it was arm's length and that you'd give any of Trump's children the same sober, rational, unbiased analysis and conclusion then good for you.

But I don't believe you would.

Oh, I believe that Hunter Biden got this thing due to who his daddy was. He said as much. That does not besmirch Joe Biden. That's the world that we live in. Look at W., Jeb, Trump Jr., JFK Jr., the list is long and often distinguished. I believe that Ivanka and Jared are working in the White House despite not having the credentials or passing the appropriate background check. Troubling? Yes. Corrupt? Not necessarily.

 

[bystander]

Oh, I believe that Hunter Biden got this thing due to who his daddy was. He said as much. That does not besmirch Joe Biden. That's the world that we live in. Look at W., Jeb, Trump Jr., JFK Jr., the list is long and often distinguished. I believe that Ivanka and Jared are working in the White House despite not having the credentials or passing the appropriate background check. Troubling? Yes. Corrupt? Not necessarily.

It's hard for me to imagine that having a close relationship with your son and being a political animal did not create some level of influence. Would you attack a fort knowing your son was inside? Would you advocate tough measures as needed if your son is over there?

Maybe Biden could do it. I know it would make me blink.

You see, we're being asked to believe all that. We're being asked to believe nothing is amiss. I can't do it. These people (all of them) are virtual sociopaths of ambition to which I cannot relate in any shape or form.

 

[OUBubba]

It's hard for me to imagine that having a close relationship with your son and being a political animal did not create some level of influence. Would you attack a fort knowing your son was inside? Would you advocate tough measures as needed if your son is over there?

Maybe Biden could do it. I know it would make me blink.

You see, we're being asked to believe all that. We're being asked to believe nothing is amiss. I can't do it. These people (all of them) are virtual sociopaths of ambition to which I cannot relate in any shape or form.

Hey, I think Biden should drop out of the race so as not to have this muddy the waters. That's not going to happen. That said, I'd vote for Joe 100 times over the current President.

 

[bystander]

Program alert:

I may be a hopeless cynic. I'm thinking I am. It means I have a hard time reading a transcript online and believing it's the real thing and even if it is so, how can I believe that it was transcribed accurately (especially to the level needed for an impeachment)? It also means I can't listen to one word that the extremists have to say knowing how coordinated it all is (Remember the lynching comments made by multiple politicians on the Left concerning Jussie? Remember how impeachment has been pushed aggressively since Trump won the election? Remember how they all of sudden had the media pass along the escalation from quid pro quo to bribery?). What am I supposed to believe? The theory or possibility of an action and then move forward as if it is a fact?

I can't do it.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[Horn6721]

Given the known history of Ukraine saying things and then not doing them and the utter corruption know it is reasonable and smart for Trump to require Zelensky to publically say he would conduct the investigations.
The question is is this impeachable.

 

[OUBubba]

Given the known history of Ukraine saying things and then not doing them and the utter corruption know it is reasonable and smart for Trump to require Zelensky to publically say he would conduct the investigations.
The question is is this impeachable.

You guys are really good at reverse engineering this crap. Another movement of the goal posts.

 

[mchammer]

 

[Horn6721]

bubba
read post above. No moving the goal posts.

 

[OUBubba]

bubba
read post above. No moving the goal posts.

That is moving the goal posts. There was no quid pro quo....well, yeah, there was quid pro quo but only because Ukraine is bad about not following through.

 

[OUBubba]

Mutual legal assistance treaty - Wikipedia
This is what you would utilize to actually work with Ukraine to investigate corruption. If you were doing it through proper state channels. We've had one with Ukraine for about 20 years. Ukraine (12978) - Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters - United States Department of State

 

[Horn6721]

It is the definition of qpq that hangs people up.'
You want it to be an unusual criminal definition.
for most asking a corrupt country to clean itself up before receiving tax payers money is what SHOULD done

 

[Seattle Husker]

It is the definition of qpq that hangs people up.'
You want it to be an unusual criminal definition.
for most asking a corrupt country to clean itself up before receiving tax payers money is what SHOULD done

Requesting a corrupt country to clean up its act before getting aid has universal support. Asking it to target it's corruption for political benefit is the antithesis of concern for corruption.

 

[OUBubba]

It is the definition of qpq that hangs people up.'
You want it to be an unusual criminal definition.
for most asking a corrupt country to clean itself up before receiving tax payers money is what SHOULD done

In this case it is bribery. If you do this thing (announce on US television an announcement into a debunked conspiracy against my potential political opponent) you will get this thing (the already appropriated $400,000,000 and a visit to the White House).

 

[mchammer]

Requesting a corrupt country to clean up its act before getting aid has universal support. Asking it to target it's corruption for political benefit is the antithesis of concern for corruption.

It was for the American people. We need to know if the Bidens are paid and bought by Ukraine.

 

[Seattle Husker]

It was for the American people. We need to know if the Bidens are paid and bought by Ukraine.

"The American people" = Trump and his supporters.

There is no iota of evidence that Joe Biden is "bought and paid for by Ukraine". Hunter Biden's board seat was absolutely unethical and creates a ****** perception which is why Trump wanted the investigation. That's not for me but Trump and his supporters like you.

 

[Garmel]

Hey, the Bidens did something highly unethical but that doesn't warrant an investigation.