1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

What's wrong with making money from Russians? What's wrong with doing a real estate deal in Moscow? What's wrong with wanting to be friends with Russia? I seem to recall another US politician who was $145 million friendly with Russia.

 

As for your assertion about a discredited conspiracy theory, that is flat out FALSE.

Better ask trump. He seems to think there is something wrong with it because he denies it.

 

trump also said he would stop any international business while he is president. Another lie.

37 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The witnesses that have given evidence dont agree with you.

Nancy's refusal to hold an impeachment inquiry trump your witnesses.

5 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Nancy's refusal to hold an impeachment inquiry trump your witnesses.

She certainly is holding an inquiry. Have you been living under a rock?

2 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

After he wins in 2020 Ivanka or Eric can carry the torch in 2024. They are as sharp as nails compared to anybody the dems have with the exception perhaps of Pete or Tulsi. 

Pete and Tulsi are basically Republicans.

 

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

She certainly is holding an inquiry. Have you been living under a rock?

She's been doing the same thing Democrats have been doing for years, trying to GET TRUMP. Putting lipstick on the pig and now calling it an impeachment inquiry doesn't make it so. A vote would, but she's afraid to hold a vote for some reason

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Pete and Tulsi are basically Republicans.

 

Yes, because lots of Republicans like Yang's universal income scheme. Said no one. EVER.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/15/tulsi-gabbard-endorses-andrew-yangs-universal-basic-income-plan/

Link: 'Final straw': GOP ex-Ohio Gov. Kasich supports impeachment

 

"Kasich said he decided to back impeachment after hearing acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledge Thursday that Trump's decision to hold up military aid to Ukraine was linked to his demand that Ukraine investigate the Democratic National Committee and the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. Mulvaney later claimed his remarks were misconstrued.

"This is an extremely serious matter," Kasich told The Associated Press in an interview. "I wrestled with it for a very long time."

It marked a reversal for Kasich, who previously said he hadn't seen evidence of a quid pro quo on Trump's part. "

 

Link: Rooney steps out: GOP member 'thinking' about impeachment

 

"The second-term Republican said publicly Friday what others in his party are not, namely that acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledged a quid pro quo was at work when Trump held up U.S. aid to Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv's investigation of Democrats and the 2016 elections. 
"He said there's a quid pro quo," Rooney said of Mulvaney during a telephone interview. "I just don't think that the power and prestige of our country is supposed to be used for political things."

34 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

She's been doing the same thing Democrats have been doing for years, trying to GET TRUMP. Putting lipstick on the pig and now calling it an impeachment inquiry doesn't make it so. A vote would, but she's afraid to hold a vote for some reason

Absolutely and totally incorrect. The US Constitution says:

 

Quote

The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, announced on September 24:

 

Quote

Therefore, today I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry.

So an impeachment inquiry has most definitely started.

 

Despite what you personally might like to happen, there is no  constitutional or legal requirement to hold a vote to start an impeachment inquiry - none.

 

A vote is only required when the actual articles of impeachment are put forward on the floor of the House.

 

2 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Absolutely and totally incorrect. The US Constitution says:

 

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, announced on September 24:

 

So an impeachment inquiry has most definitely started.

 

Despite what you personally might like to happen, there is no  constitutional or legal requirement to hold a vote to start an impeachment inquiry - none.

 

A vote is only required when the actual articles of impeachment are put forward on the floor of the House.

 

I think its best to now not respond to those with no concept of reality. I am not surprised a trump supporter has no idea between fact and fiction but its best to just put them on ignore now.

 

its no use trying to explain facts, they just cant handle the truth.

On 10/10/2019 at 1:03 PM, mtls2005 said:

Joe Biden is not the President

Joe Biden is not the subject of an impeachment inquiry

Joe Biden was fulfilling his duties as VP, in full view, with the backing of the U.S. and many, many partners, in getting corrupt prosecutor removed.

This "story" has been fully debunked.

 

Joe Biden used his position lawfully.

MRLS2005 if this is what you consider "lawfully"  you should be a lawyer for the mafia. 
 

 

7 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

MRLS2005 if this is what you consider "lawfully"  you should be a lawyer for the mafia. 
 

 

This video should be a sticky on top of every Ukraine related thread. THIS is corruption, 100% blatant and obvious. 

Treaty 106-16

 

Joe Biden was a member of the U.S. Senate and then signed by then-President Bill Clinton. 

A comprehensive treaty agreement that allows cooperation between both the United States and Ukraine in the investigation and prosecution of crimes. 

It appears President Trump was following the law to the letter when it comes to unearthing the long-standing corruption that has swirled in Ukraine and allegedly involves powerful Democrats like Joe Biden and others.

“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.

This video should be a sticky on top of every Ukraine related thread. THIS is corruption, 100% blatant and obvious. 

No, it was just a coincidence that his son was making bank and under investigation.

Vice President Biden didn’t even know about it.

On 10/16/2019 at 4:57 PM, stevenl said:

Yes, could happen.

But by that time Trump's shenanigans will be all over the news....

 

"Shenanigans" reported tirelessly by an exposed and biased Jeff Zucker controlled CNN.

Shenanigans unearthed in a one-sided, secretive star chamber buried deep in some basement on 

the Hill.

Shenanigans presented as truth without allowing the accused any counsel, or legal rights, or opportunity

to cross-examine, or present witnesses that counter any inaccuracies.

 

Yeahhhh, that'll work gangbusters. ????????????

8 hours ago, Becker said:

Link: 'Final straw': GOP ex-Ohio Gov. Kasich supports impeachment

 

"Kasich said he decided to back impeachment after hearing acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledge Thursday that Trump's decision to hold up military aid to Ukraine was linked to his demand that Ukraine investigate the Democratic National Committee and the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. Mulvaney later claimed his remarks were misconstrued.

"This is an extremely serious matter," Kasich told The Associated Press in an interview. "I wrestled with it for a very long time."

It marked a reversal for Kasich, who previously said he hadn't seen evidence of a quid pro quo on Trump's part. "

 

Link: Rooney steps out: GOP member 'thinking' about impeachment

 

"The second-term Republican said publicly Friday what others in his party are not, namely that acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledged a quid pro quo was at work when Trump held up U.S. aid to Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv's investigation of Democrats and the 2016 elections. 
"He said there's a quid pro quo," Rooney said of Mulvaney during a telephone interview. "I just don't think that the power and prestige of our country is supposed to be used for political things."

Wow, someone is thinking about impeachment. Not very impressive, given Democrats have been obsessing over impeachment talk for nearly three years. And given they won't even hold an impeachment inquiry vote, there's no reason to believe they will ever impeach. Just watch. We'll hear excuses and more excuses, stuff like "the scope of crimes is so large", and other blathering.

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

"Shenanigans" reported tirelessly by an exposed and biased Jeff Zucker controlled CNN.

Shenanigans unearthed in a one-sided, secretive star chamber buried deep in some basement on 

the Hill.

Shenanigans presented as truth without allowing the accused any counsel, or legal rights, or opportunity

to cross-examine, or present witnesses that counter any inaccuracies.

 

Yeahhhh, that'll work gangbusters. ????????????

Ya got a problem with grand juries? That's how they work. These proceedings are the equivalent of a grand jury. The trial takes place in the Senate.

3 hours ago, Longcut said:

Treaty 106-16

 

Joe Biden was a member of the U.S. Senate and then signed by then-President Bill Clinton. 

A comprehensive treaty agreement that allows cooperation between both the United States and Ukraine in the investigation and prosecution of crimes. 

It appears President Trump was following the law to the letter when it comes to unearthing the long-standing corruption that has swirled in Ukraine and allegedly involves powerful Democrats like Joe Biden and others.

“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.

 

That's great news. Obviously, it applies to president Trump as well, given Biden literally bragged about extorting Ukraine. Of course, his crack addict son getting a cush job shortly after Biden being put in charge of relations with Ukraine makes it even more suspicious. The fact that an investigation into Burisma was in progress when Biden extorted Ukraine makes an investigation absolutely mandatory. And now that a diplomat has gone on record to say he was ignored when he sounded the alarm on these shenanigans? What rational person would NOT think a criminal investigation should be held?

13 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

They will have to wait at least till the G7 summit ends....so they can include "Doral Gate" in the articles.

So like, maybe November 2020

????????????

 

That's another *favorite* of mine. They'll find so many *scandals* along the way, impeachment will have to be pushed further and further out when they wake up each day and find something to be outraged over.

 

I think a simple fact will continue to make impeachment unlikely: the minute an impeachment vote is held, Democrats lose control of the narrative. They can't afford to let that happen.

Off topic posts and the off topic replies have been removed.  This topic is not about the recent tiff between Tulsi Gabbard and Hillary Clinton. 

 

A post with insulting comments to another member has been removed.  

 

Edit:  Some more off topic posts and troll posts have been removed.

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

This video should be a sticky on top of every Ukraine related thread. THIS is corruption, 100% blatant and obvious. 

In what way did joe Biden personally or illicitly benefit from this action? in what way was it dishonest or criminal?

 

Biden’s actions were not hidden away on a secret server, but done in public (obvious... as you point out) and in line with US and allied partners foreign policy. He ticks none of the boxes

 

the trump, on the other hand, well..... ding ding ding! Winner winner chicken dinner, and we all know what the prize is. Ment-peach-‘im

 

“In general, corruption is a form of dishonesty or criminal activity undertaken by a person or organization entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire illicit benefit, or, abuse of entrusted power for one's private gain.”

 

Corruption - Wikipedia

18 minutes ago, jany123 said:

“In general, corruption is a form of dishonesty or criminal activity undertaken by a person or organization entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire illicit benefit, or, abuse of entrusted power for one's private gain.”

 

ohhh yeahhh.....we're about to find about about all that from a guy called John Durham. All this whistleblower stuff is just a shield to deflect that %^$%storm coming down the pike.

 

Corruption is being discussed here more specifically:

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1129421-us-diplomat-told-congress-he-raised-red-flag-about-biden-and-ukraine-source/

 

52 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

 

That's great news. Obviously, it applies to president Trump as well, given Biden literally bragged about extorting Ukraine. Of course, his crack addict son getting a cush job shortly after Biden being put in charge of relations with Ukraine makes it even more suspicious. The fact that an investigation into Burisma was in progress when Biden extorted Ukraine makes an investigation absolutely mandatory. And now that a diplomat has gone on record to say he was ignored when he sounded the alarm on these shenanigans? What rational person would NOT think a criminal investigation should be held?

Except that it's not a fact that the Burisma investigation was in progress when Shokin was fired. The only person claiming that is Shokin. His deputy says so and sources from the Ukraine parliament say so. What is indisputable is that Shokin was dragging his feet in going after corrupt oligarchs. Not that he was entirely lacking in zeal. When some of deputies were being investigated for their inexplicable possession of valuable jewels, Shokin prosecuted the prosecutors investigating them. He also went after Ukraine's most prominent ant-corruption NGO. He was and is a lowlife.

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Except that it's not a fact that the Burisma investigation was in progress when Shokin was fired. The only person claiming that is Shokin. His deputy says so and sources from the Ukraine parliament say so. What is indisputable is that Shokin was dragging his feet in going after corrupt oligarchs. Not that he was entirely lacking in zeal. When some of deputies were being investigated for their inexplicable possession of valuable jewels, Shokin prosecuted the prosecutors investigating them. He also went after Ukraine's most prominent ant-corruption NGO. He was and is a lowlife.

So, we have conflicting stories as to whether an investigation was in progress by the Ukrainians. I see an easy solution to clearing this up- a US investigation.

 

And given that a US diplomat has stepped forward to say it was the Obama regime who orchestrated the firing of Shokin, a US investigation is no longer an option but a NECESSITY.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/16/top-diplomat-testified-that-obama-admin-not-international-community-orchestrated-ukraine-prosecutors-firing/

 

6 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

So, we have conflicting stories as to whether an investigation was in progress by the Ukrainians. I see an easy solution to clearing this up- a US investigation.

 

And given that a US diplomat has stepped forward to say it was the Obama regime who orchestrated the firing of Shokin, a US investigation is no longer an option but a NECESSITY.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/16/top-diplomat-testified-that-obama-admin-not-international-community-orchestrated-ukraine-prosecutors-firing/

 

First of all, I don't believe this to be true.

Secondly, it is not important in the context of an inquiry into Trump's illegal activities. This is just deflecting.

2 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

So, we have conflicting stories as to whether an investigation was in progress by the Ukrainians. I see an easy solution to clearing this up- a US investigation.

 

And given that a US diplomat has stepped forward to say it was the Obama regime who orchestrated the firing of Shokin, a US investigation is no longer an option but a NECESSITY.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/16/top-diplomat-testified-that-obama-admin-not-international-community-orchestrated-ukraine-prosecutors-firing/

 

Except that the stories backing the version you prefer are very thinly sourced and depends on the testimony of Victor Shokin. And are you seriously contending that the Obama administration orchestrated the firing of Shokin to help Hunter Biden?

 

As for Lutsenko, he took office in May of 2016. So he really didn't have the time to develop a track record before the end of the Obama adminstration? But he sure did during the Trump administration. And yet Trump, who claims that his motivation for his actions vis-a-vis Ukraine were motivated by concerns about corruption, did  nothing in regard to Lutsenko.

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed:

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.

 

24 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

He benefited from the action by protecting his son's employer from an ongoing investigation. It appears he also protected Hillary Clinton as well as other apparent shady dealings in the Ukraine, including but not limited to:

Regards HRC... sure... whatever... investigate her again and again if it makes you feel good, but why are you bringing up Hillary in relation to my post about Biden? It is unrelated

 

now ... if we can get back to Biden’s actions... how did removing a prosecutor that was universally seen as corrupt, help joe Biden, who was acting in plain sight, in line with public US policy

 

how was Biden’s actions dishonest?

what illicit gain was made?

il·lic·it

/i(l)ˈlisit/

adjective

1. forbidden by law, rules, or custom.

https://www.google.co.th/search?q=illicit&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-th&client=safari

 

are you saying that the corrupt prosecutor whom was removed from office, was over zealously investigating Biden’s sons employer, and would have corruptly found against Biden, and that this potentially negative finding was circumvented following the appointment of an honest prosecutor?

37 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Regards HRC... sure... whatever... investigate her again and again if it makes you feel good, but why are you bringing up Hillary in relation to my post about Biden? It is unrelated

 

now ... if we can get back to Biden’s actions... how did removing a prosecutor that was universally seen as corrupt, help joe Biden, who was acting in plain sight, in line with public US policy

 

how was Biden’s actions dishonest?

what illicit gain was made?

il·lic·it

/i(l)ˈlisit/

adjective

1. forbidden by law, rules, or custom.

https://www.google.co.th/search?q=illicit&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-th&client=safari

 

are you saying that the corrupt prosecutor whom was removed from office, was over zealously investigating Biden’s sons employer, and would have corruptly found against Biden, and that this potentially negative finding was circumvented following the appointment of an honest prosecutor?

I reject your premise that Shokin was universally seen as corrupt. In fact, it appears it was the Obama regime that was behind the firing the whole time. Furthermore, a bunch of corrupt governments all saying some other guy is corrupt isn't very impressive.

 

As far as illicit: I don't recall using the term. Thus, I am puzzled as to your attention to it in context of a response to me.

 

As for the "are you saying" line? I'm saying what I said, not what you'd like to say I said.

 

 

First of all, I don't believe this to be true.
Secondly, it is not important in the context of an inquiry into Trump's illegal activities. This is just deflecting.

Of course. Anything anyone else has ever done is deflection. The ONLY thing that matters is whether we can get Trump.

12 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

 

Of course. Anything anyone else has ever done is deflection. The ONLY thing that matters is whether we can get Trump.

 

Well, in an investigation into Trump it is trump that matters. Sure you pick up the pieces on the side, but that should not distract from the focus. And possible wrongdoings of others are no excuse.