7 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Schiff Got Early Account of Accusations as Whistle-Blower’s Concerns Grew

 

. . . but didn't share what he knew with his committee, which is  a serious break of committee rules which state that any information received must be shared with the committee immediately.

 

Even Dem's I know think Schiff should be suspended.

 

And from Representative Elise Stefanik's twitter:

 

 

 

You also think elected official's should be transparent or resign?  Once again, I agree.  The President who refuses to release his taxes, stopped making White House visitor logs public, hides records of phone calls and fights every attempt at seeing records should resign.

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Too funny, Becker.  You make believe that I'm frustrated, you claim mountains of irrefutable evidence as proof when the evidence is up for interpretation, you ignore or discredit evidence to the contrary, and you imaginatively believe I'm deflecting.

 

President Zelensky, the guy who is supposedly being extorted, has said that it's not true.  So let me get this straight.  Trump is accused of extorting a guy who says he wasn't being extorted so we'll charge Trump with extortion anyway.  LMAO.  Twisted, perverse logic.

 

If you are referring to the joint Trump-Zelinsky press conference in which Zelinsky asked if he felt pressure, Zelinsky waffled.  Understandable, since his country needs US military and diplomatic support in its fight against Russia.  Trump is the one who said no pressure.

42 minutes ago, heybruce said:

If you are referring to the joint Trump-Zelinsky press conference in which Zelinsky asked if he felt pressure, Zelinsky waffled.  Understandable, since his country needs US military and diplomatic support in its fight against Russia.  Trump is the one who said no pressure.

No wonder Democrats are going into overdrive ????

Ukraine to re-examine Biden-linked company https://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/no-info-on-biden-ukraine-prosecutor-says/news-story/f9ed5186c182b8fbeee39724aeeedec6

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Mostly in the article. 
 

Including the one I shared. 
 

However, here’s another for you

 

The Guardian article reads like Schiff's parody in his "reading" of Trump's call transcript.  It's written to make him look bad.  Not unexpected from the Guardian.  I don't have time to read all of the appended docs now but I will.  And then see if there was cherry picking from those docs to create a very forbidding narrative.

 

As far as the letter you posted I wouldn't expect anything less.  Of course they're going to write a damning indictment of Trump.  They want to impeach him!!  So what did you expect?  An endorsement?  I don't see the page with the member's signatures, though.  And if this letter is meant to imply a full consensus of this committee I wouldn't believe that for a nanosecond.

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

The Guardian article reads like Schiff's parody in his "reading" of Trump's call transcript.  It's written to make him look bad.  Not unexpected from the Guardian.  I don't have time to read all of the appended docs now but I will.  And then see if there was cherry picking from those docs to create a very forbidding narrative.

 

As far as the letter you posted I wouldn't expect anything less.  Of course they're going to write a damning indictment of Trump.  They want to impeach him!!  So what did you expect?  An endorsement?  I don't see the page with the member's signatures, though.  And if this letter is meant to imply a full consensus of this committee I wouldn't believe that for a nanosecond.

I read the docs and the article. 
 

They are in sync 

The man-child is so slimy dirty it's hard to pick a starting point. His slippery, slimy ways and days are numbered. The impeachment will not succeed, but The Teflon Don will never be re-elected. 

He will be impeached for sure. I guess you're talking about removal.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

52 minutes ago, heybruce said:

If you are referring to the joint Trump-Zelinsky press conference in which Zelinsky asked if he felt pressure, Zelinsky waffled.  Understandable, since his country needs US military and diplomatic support in its fight against Russia.  Trump is the one who said no pressure.

See.  No matter what evidence that's contrary to what you want to believe is provided you people will never accept it.  You guys always find a way to negate it.  You want us to take certain facts at face value but facts that are damning for the Dem cause can never be taken at face value by you guys.  Absolutely hypocritical and blind to it.  LMAO.

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I read the docs and the article. 
 

They are in sync 

Hey Bluespunk, when we put this aside we do have fun on the music threads, though.    Love dem blues!

30 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

See.  No matter what evidence that's contrary to what you want to believe is provided you people will never accept it.  You guys always find a way to negate it.  You want us to take certain facts at face value but facts that are damning for the Dem cause can never be taken at face value by you guys.  Absolutely hypocritical and blind to it.  LMAO.

I understand, trump supporters and facts, like chalk and cheese.

An off topic post and a reply have been removed. 

1 hour ago, BestB said:

No wonder Democrats are going into overdrive ????

Ukraine to re-examine Biden-linked company https://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/no-info-on-biden-ukraine-prosecutor-says/news-story/f9ed5186c182b8fbeee39724aeeedec6

Let them investigate Biden.  It won't change what Trump did, and continues to do.

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

See.  No matter what evidence that's contrary to what you want to believe is provided you people will never accept it.  You guys always find a way to negate it.  You want us to take certain facts at face value but facts that are damning for the Dem cause can never be taken at face value by you guys.  Absolutely hypocritical and blind to it.  LMAO.

You did not refute a single thing in my post.

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Let them investigate Biden.  It won't change what Trump did, and continues to do.

You seem to be totally contempt with what Biden may have done, as long as you can get Trump.

 

So if Trump would not have acted and Biden is/was guilty but got away with it, you would not care?  

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You did not refute a single thing in my post.

I'm refuting the entire post, that's why.  Not falling for it.

So has the Speaker called for a vote yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

1 hour ago, BestB said:

You seem to be totally contempt with what Biden may have done, as long as you can get Trump.

 

So if Trump would not have acted and Biden is/was guilty but got away with it, you would not care?  

More likely what he is saying is this...

 

1) It's undisputed that Trump basically tried to pressure a foreign country into investigating his political rival... and withheld aid inexplicably while doing that. That right there is all the information you need. He has since admitted to it publicly, and called for China to investigate the same person. That's enough right there to oust the guy. And anything else is a distraction trying to distract from that fact.

 

2) Go ahead and investigate Biden if you think a crime was committed. Ukraine doesn't believe so. There isn't any evidence that supports it other than a spun conspiracy theory. If he did commit wrongdoing though then by all means investigate him.  That should be independent of #1 though and not used as a distraction. 

There's no equivalency here between Biden and Trump. Trump has now openly cheated or attempted to cheat and been caught in both elections. The best case scenario is that he was unsuccessful in getting dirt from Russia on Hillary... He certainly tried. And now he's openly using the office of the presidency to try to tarnish his political rivals. You can try to distract from that but those are the facts. 

3 minutes ago, jcsmith said:

More likely what he is saying is this...

 

1) It's undisputed that Trump basically tried to pressure a foreign country into investigating his political rival... and withheld aid inexplicably while doing that. That right there is all the information you need. He has since admitted to it publicly, and called for China to investigate the same person. That's enough right there to oust the guy. And anything else is a distraction trying to distract from that fact.

 

2) Go ahead and investigate Biden if you think a crime was committed. Ukraine doesn't believe so. There isn't any evidence that supports it other than a spun conspiracy theory. If he did commit wrongdoing though then by all means investigate him.  That should be independent of #1 though and not used as a distraction. 

There's no equivalency here between Biden and Trump. Trump has now openly cheated or attempted to cheat and been caught in both elections. The best case scenario is that he was unsuccessful in getting dirt from Russia on Hillary... He certainly tried. And now he's openly using the office of the presidency to try to tarnish his political rivals. You can try to distract from that but those are the facts. 

Not an expert but Hillary had enough dirt without Russian help.

 

So in your opinion being paid millions when you have no experience is just lucky? 
 

and Ukraine does not think so but opened investigations anyway?

 

and you saying your point one is not related to point 2, why? Why would it be ok for one high ranking official to break the law but not for the other one?

 

why did democrats had no problem with Hilary keeping and deleting emails but have a problem with trump doing the same thing?

 

aa non American with no interest or relation to either party, I find it fascinating How biased this whole circus is and saddest part is Democrat’s and supporters do not even realise not only they just opened pandora box where the same tactics would be used against them in the future but most importantly no leader in the world will ever take a call from any US president being aware it could be made public and drag them into some scandal internationally and domestically .

36 minutes ago, jcsmith said:

More likely what he is saying is this...

 

1) It's undisputed that Trump basically tried to pressure a foreign country into investigating his political rival... and withheld aid inexplicably while doing that. That right there is all the information you need. He has since admitted to it publicly, and called for China to investigate the same person. That's enough right there to oust the guy. And anything else is a distraction trying to distract from that fact.

 

2) Go ahead and investigate Biden if you think a crime was committed. Ukraine doesn't believe so. There isn't any evidence that supports it other than a spun conspiracy theory. If he did commit wrongdoing though then by all means investigate him.  That should be independent of #1 though and not used as a distraction. 

There's no equivalency here between Biden and Trump. Trump has now openly cheated or attempted to cheat and been caught in both elections. The best case scenario is that he was unsuccessful in getting dirt from Russia on Hillary... He certainly tried. And now he's openly using the office of the presidency to try to tarnish his political rivals. You can try to distract from that but those are the facts. 

So Mr. Trump meets the Prez at the UN and the Prez of Ukraine said "no push"/no pressure and at the end of the news briefing,they seem to have gotten over the dems false pressure narrative ,the optics are so telling!

 

17 minutes ago, BestB said:

Not an expert but Hillary had enough dirt without Russian help.

 

So in your opinion being paid millions when you have no experience is just lucky? 
 

and Ukraine does not think so but opened investigations anyway?

 

and you saying your point one is not related to point 2, why? Why would it be ok for one high ranking official to break the law but not for the other one?

 

why did democrats had no problem with Hilary keeping and deleting emails but have a problem with trump doing the same thing?

 

aa non American with no interest or relation to either party, I find it fascinating How biased this whole circus is and saddest part is Democrat’s and supporters do not even realise not only they just opened pandora box where the same tactics would be used against them in the future but most importantly no leader in the world will ever take a call from any US president being aware it could be made public and drag them into some scandal internationally and domestically .

Again your trying to distract from the main source here. Even in a world where all of this is correct it doesn't detract from the fact that Trump cheated.

In regards to the Hunter Biden. Again that's a separate matter entirely. It's one of those things that looks fishy but there are reports that the investigation into the company which Hunter Biden was associated with was already dormant at the time. But again, that's a completely separate matter. If there was corruption in that case then by all means, investigate it. Nobody has said otherwise, you tried to make it sound like I did but I clearly stated otherwise in my post.  Now there is certainly evidence to suggest that the two of those are unrelated like this quote from Kasko, “There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky,” Kasko said in an interview last week. “It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015.”

Whether that is correct or not though really doesn't matter in terms of what Trump did. They are two entirely separate matters. 

The problem here is that Trump is trying to pressure another country into opening an investigation on his primary political rival and using congressionally assigned funds to do so without any valid reason. This seemed fishy at the time and I remember articles at Politico referring to it well before the story broke. But similar to the above, just because something sounds fishy doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it. The wrongdoing comes from the whistleblowers complaint, the justice department's efforts to keep that complaint from reaching congress, and then the FACT that Trump did in fact do deed. That's undeniable. And that's the difference between those two cases. 

 

You can't use "whatboutism" as an excuse to dismiss real and valid accusations against Donald Trump. And at this point these aren't accusations they are facts. We have the transcripts. We have the words right out of his own mouth. He did it.

8 hours ago, BestB said:

You seem to be totally contempt with what Biden may have done, as long as you can get Trump.

 

So if Trump would not have acted and Biden is/was guilty but got away with it, you would not care?  

Show some evidence Biden did something wrong and I'll tell you if I have "contempt" for what he did.

 

Even if Biden is guilty of something, Trump chose to single out an alleged incidence of corruption for investigation that, if proven, would hurt an opponent in the 2020 election.  He ignored the massive amounts of serious corruption Ukraine is dealing with.  Do you care?

8 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I'm refuting the entire post, that's why.  Not falling for it.

Refuting with no evidence, because you have none.  As I posted, Zelinsky didn't say there was no pressure, Trump did.  Your post stating otherwise was wrong.

7 hours ago, RideJocky said:

So has the Speaker called for a vote yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

No, Trump keeps providing incriminating evidence and impeachable offenses.

How's this for a smoking gun? This is from Senator Ron Johnson, a very conservative Republican and a strong backer of Donald Trump:

"Johnson told reporters Trump said he was considering withholding the aid because of alleged corruption involving the 2016 U.S. election. Johnson stood by the president, saying he was sympathetic to his concerns and didn't see any bad motives on his part. "

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/04/ron-johnson-says-trump-blocked-him-assuring-ukraine-aid/3862948002/

 

"A Republican senator said he was told by an American diplomat in August that the release of U.S. aid to Ukraine was contingent on an investigation desired by President Trump and his allies, but Mr. Trump denied pursuing any such proposal when the lawmaker pressed him on it.

Sen. Ron Johnson said that Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had described to him a quid pro quo involving a commitment by Kyiv to probe matters related to U.S. elections and the status of nearly $400 million in U.S. aid to Ukraine that the president had ordered to be held up in July."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

This is the same Sondland, (a political appointee who sent 1 million dollars to the Trump Inauguration fund), who denied such a connection to Volker and asked him to continue the discussions about the Ukrainian situation by phone, not by text.

 

More likely what he is saying is this...
 
1) It's undisputed that Trump basically tried to pressure a foreign country into investigating his political rival... and withheld aid inexplicably while doing that. That right there is all the information you need. He has since admitted to it publicly, and called for China to investigate the same person. That's enough right there to oust the guy. And anything else is a distraction trying to distract from that fact.
 
2) Go ahead and investigate Biden if you think a crime was committed. Ukraine doesn't believe so. There isn't any evidence that supports it other than a spun conspiracy theory. If he did commit wrongdoing though then by all means investigate him.  That should be independent of #1 though and not used as a distraction. 

There's no equivalency here between Biden and Trump. Trump has now openly cheated or attempted to cheat and been caught in both elections. The best case scenario is that he was unsuccessful in getting dirt from Russia on Hillary... He certainly tried. And now he's openly using the office of the presidency to try to tarnish his political rivals. You can try to distract from that but those are the facts. 

1. It is disputed

2. Thanks

5 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

 

1. It is disputed

2. Thanks

 

Everything is disputed. I imagine there are still flat earthers. But the game 45 was playing with Ukraine is obvious to anyone with an open mind and common sense. That would exclude hard core 45 base fans, you know, the excusing shooting random people on the street brigade. 

Impeachment inquiry . Right. Democrats just keep taking the useful idiots for a ride. 

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Show some evidence Biden did something wrong and I'll tell you if I have "contempt" for what he did.

 

Even if Biden is guilty of something, Trump chose to single out an alleged incidence of corruption for investigation that, if proven, would hurt an opponent in the 2020 election.  He ignored the massive amounts of serious corruption Ukraine is dealing with.  Do you care?

Why would I care about internal corruption in Ukraine? Did they put it on front page of every news paper in the world ?

1 hour ago, BestB said:

Why would I care about internal corruption in Ukraine? Did they put it on front page of every news paper in the world ?

Well, if they take your money to bolster their defense but it ends up in the hands of a few persons without bolstering the defense you should care.

To all you anty-Trumpers. You and democrats have only wish to impeach Trump. This will never happen. All you have is <deleted>, lies by democrats , fabricated stories by pencil-neck Shiff and hating Trump members of his administration. To start impeachment process Congress needs to vote. Why Pelosi does not decide to start  to vote? She realizes that whistleblower is not credible witness and will be destroyed during hearings. There is nothing on Trump, three years witch hunting and nothing only lies by democrats who can't accept Trump's winning.  Pelosi also knows that starting impeachment will  bring defeat Democratic Party in 2020 election. Finally, she knows that Republicans Senat will never convict Trump ( required 67 votes). Please however wait for results of GA Barr investigation how corrupt democrats are. This is only the matter of time and we will see who was behind Russian dossier , who spied on Trump during 2016 election and tried to collude to destroyed Trump. You are going to be stunned. Trump president 2020