7 minutes ago, Farangwithaplan said:

For someone who's extract of part of an apparently totally above board phone conversation was recently released to the world, Zelensky looked like he was about to be forced to eat an excrement pie in his UN presser with Trump.

 

Why would that be?

 

Trump has that effect on people.

40 minutes ago, Becker said:

Trump has that effect on people.

I see your point. But in the transcript it was clear Zelensky was enthusiastically conversing with Trump. He was looking forward to meeting - so much so that I wouldn't have been suprised if I read that Zelensky was prepared to offer Trump a reach-around during their meet.

 

So what could possibly have changed the Urkrainian leader's demeanor if that phone call was totally above board? Remember, that the actual phone call was 30 minutes in duration yet that abstract could have been more than a few minutes worth of conversation.

 

 

 

The abstract is bad enough, but I wonder if Zelensky is looking like his dog has just been kicked because he knows what is in the rest of the yet to be released transcript.

 

Zelensky is also now firmly in the sights of the European leaders. He didn't paint Merkel or Macron is a good light during the phone call.

 

I wonder if a US senate inquiry can legally call Zelensky to give evidence if he was willing to? And he may be willing to if he realises the trouble he has now put his country in. Putin will be laughing till he wets his pants over this. He has now read first hand what a sycophant Zelensky can be when he really needs support.

 

That support from the US may diminish or disappear due to this communication. Putin might already be ramping up the Annexure of the already annexed Crimea. Zelensky might realise the error of his ways and be willing to assist an inquiry by giving evidence.

 

 

This was hilarious. Especially starting at 5.20 minute mark. Scene from the Sopranos.

 

 

Once again the Democrats are using  "the best defense is a good offense" approach regardless of the potential damage.  In reality they are covering up for the recent Epstein fiasco as well as used car salesman Joe Biden and his corrupt deals enriching his son.  If the dots are connected it goes even deeper into the previous administration. I also suspect old Ruth is ready to pass away soon  and they are in panic mode regarding this as well.

 

Whether one likes Trump or not is irrelevant what is important is that the rights of the voters to elect their President is not taken away by the politicians they supposedly elect. 

2 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

Once again the Democrats are using  "the best defense is a good offense" approach regardless of the potential damage.  In reality they are covering up for the recent Epstein fiasco as well as used car salesman Joe Biden and his corrupt deals enriching his son.  If the dots are connected it goes even deeper into the previous administration. I also suspect old Ruth is ready to pass away soon  and they are in panic mode regarding this as well.

 

Whether one likes Trump or not is irrelevant what is important is that the rights of the voters to elect their President is not taken away by the politicians they supposedly elect. 

Impeachment when warranted is in the constitution. 

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Impeachment when warranted is in the constitution. 

and it also dictates that to be successful it must be supported in the senate. Given the rather large odds against the senate actually upholding an impeachment ( especially the senators up for re election in Republican areas ) it seems to be more about making a noise than actually impeaching him.

If they want to get rid of Trump they only need to find a better candidate than those currently standing, and run a better campaign than the last time. An old white guy running around saying Trump bad, Trump bad isn't going to cut it.

Perhaps the Dems that might actually have a chance are not interested, for obvious reasons.

8 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Impeachment when warranted is in the constitution. 

Yes when warranted lol.  I hardly think this is grounds for impeachment.  The disturbing part of all this is that it is entirely possible the NSA or FBI or CIA may have been monitoring all calls and simply passed this on to someone to take action.  As Chuck Schumer warned Trump "the Intelligence Community has a thousand ways to get you".... 

9 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

Once again the Democrats are using  "the best defense is a good offense" approach regardless of the potential damage.  In reality they are covering up for the recent Epstein fiasco as well as used car salesman Joe Biden and his corrupt deals enriching his son.  If the dots are connected it goes even deeper into the previous administration. I also suspect old Ruth is ready to pass away soon  and they are in panic mode regarding this as well.

 

Whether one likes Trump or not is irrelevant what is important is that the rights of the voters to elect their President is not taken away by the politicians they supposedly elect. 

imo best defense ...admit that the dems will loose the 2020 election on impeachment squad leader aocortez admitted so...

 

wbr

roobaa01

Troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

7 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

Yes when warranted lol.  I hardly think this is grounds for impeachment.  The disturbing part of all this is that it is entirely possible the NSA or FBI or CIA may have been monitoring all calls and simply passed this on to someone to take action.  As Chuck Schumer warned Trump "the Intelligence Community has a thousand ways to get you".... 

You don't. That's fine. I do. The vast majority of democrats do. The process has begun. Let's see how the process develops.

9 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

imo best defense ...admit that the dems will loose the 2020 election on impeachment squad leader aocortez admitted so...

 

wbr

roobaa01

Predicting the results of the election at this point is foolish. We don't know who the democrats will nominate and even who the republicans will put up has recently become a teeny bit more uncertain. Cheers.

2 minutes ago, Silurian said:

 

Ooooo...let's look at "The Hill"...found a good article there.

 

George Conway predicts Republicans will vote against Trump on impeachment

 

 

5555555555555555

Some senators may vote against Trump, but not those in Republican areas that are up for re election next year. If they did, they can kiss their senate seats bye bye, IMO. 

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Your non-biased list is HILARIOUS!

Especially the Examiner and Fox.

Let's agree to disagree about the best sources because this is just an endless loop if we don't. 

since u are so full of sound knowledge, pls explain i think amendment 2 impeachment as reasons are bribery, high treason, misdemeanor.....where has the president ever committed one of the 3 ????

 

wbr

roobaa01

1 minute ago, roobaa01 said:

since u are so full of sound knowledge, pls explain i think amendment 2 impeachment as reasons are bribery, high treason, misdemeanor.....where has the president ever committed one of the 3 ????

 

wbr

roobaa01

Personal baiting post ignored.

22 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Impeachment when warranted is in the constitution. 

Absolutely correct.  But it's not warranted in this case.  Trump is with his rights to fight corruption wherever it is found.  Running for president doesn't preclude Biden from being investigated for potential crimes.

Just now, Tippaporn said:

Absolutely correct.  But it's not warranted in this case.  Trump is with his rights to fight corruption wherever it is found.  Running for president doesn't preclude Biden from being investigated for potential crimes.

So you actually believed that excuse? Wow. NOT impressive. Really the only "excuse" to follow "trump" now is because of blind loyalty, emphasis on BLIND. 

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

Absolutely correct.  But it's not warranted in this case.  Trump is with his rights to fight corruption wherever it is found.  Running for president doesn't preclude Biden from being investigated for potential crimes.

There was no evidence biden was corrupt so no reason to investigate.

 

Ukraine began the investigation into the company before his son joined it.

Also, congress decides when impeachment is warranted for any reason it wants to.

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So you actually believed that excuse? Wow. NOT impressive. Really the only "excuse" to follow "trump" now is because of blind loyalty, emphasis on BLIND. 

Personal baiting post ignored.

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Personal baiting post ignored.

Fair enough but I wasn't actually soliciting any response. It was more of a statement but understandable that you may have perceived it that way due to the question mark. 

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

There was no evidence biden was corrupt so no reason to investigate.

 

Ukraine began the investigation into the company before his son joined it.

Also, congress decides when impeachment is warranted for any reason it wants to.

Enough evidence is in plain sight.  People are sick and tired of the corruption.  Time to drain the swamp.  That's what Trump campaigned on the that's what Trump is doing.  People voted for him to fulfill that promise.

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Enough evidence is in plain sight.  People are sick and tired of the corruption.  Time to drain the swamp.  That's what Trump campaigned on the that's what Trump is doing.  People voted for him to fulfill that promise.

"trump" IS the swamp! 

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

"trump" IS the swamp! 

Please provide factual evidence to back that claim up.

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Personal baiting post ignored.

baiting is what the president is doing to the dems all the time, when he is playing em to make em look foolish.

 

wbr

roobaa01

2 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

baiting is what the president is doing to the dems all the time, when he is playing em to make em look foolish.

 

wbr

roobaa01

He played himself into being impeached. Such a genius. 

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

He played himself into being impeached. Such a genius. 

How is it that Pelosi called for impeachment without ever having any evidence that the accusation was true or false?

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Please provide factual evidence to back that claim up.

Please consult Captain Obvious. "trump" as a champion of corruption while he's blatantly demanding help for dirt on a major political opponent is corruption personified.

This is what "trump" always does. The things he is and does himself he DEFLECTS on to others. The shocking thing is how many Americans still haven't learned that about him. To me, it was clear he was criminally corrupt CON MAN well before he even ran for president. Ironically the people of his home town that know him best knew that long ago as well.

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

How is it that Pelosi called for impeachment without ever having any evidence that the accusation was true or false?

It was already obvious. He basically had admitted it already. Please pay attention. 

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Please consult Captain Obvious. "trump" as a champion of corruption while he's blatantly demanding help for dirt on a major political opponent is corruption personified.

This is what "trump" always does. The things he is and does himself he DEFLECTS on to others. The shocking thing is how many Americans still haven't learned that about him. To me, it was clear he was criminally corrupt CON MAN well before he even ran for president. Ironically the people of his home town that know him best knew that long ago as well.

Please provide evidence.  You are only expressing opinion thus far.

Interesting article from a traditionally left leaning paper.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/24/democrats-investigation-might-do-more-hurt-biden-than-trump/

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It as already obvious. He basically had admitted it already. Please pay attention. 

Pelosi had no factual information about the content of Trump's conversation.  What were her grounds for impeachment then?