Pelosi says Trump has admitted to bribery as impeachment probe intensifies

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, Kelsall said:

The only poll to correctly a Trump win in 2016.

Yeah... and sometimes even I have scored 180 at darts.

 

...but not often.

[Tippaporn]

The Democrats are trapped.  As is the whistle blower.

[NanLaew]

27 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Regarding the facts of th matter, the claims of Pelosi and others, have been proven false by the Mueller report, which spent two years and came to the conclusion that there was no conspiracy.

I love the conservatives all embracing exculpatory release when they claim rather naively but otherwise falsely that Meuller concluded that "there was no conspiracy."

 

"Former special counsel Robert Mueller suggested during his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that his investigation contained evidence of conspiracy by Trump campaign officials. When Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asked if the decision not to bring charges of conspiracy against members of the Trump campaign “does not mean your investigation failed to turn up evidence of conspiracy,” Mueller responded: "That is correct.""

 

It must be akin to the exquisite release of the long-denied, masturbatory ejaculation, no?

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

'Offered' is usually linked to 'given' .....and 'solicited' linked with 'taken'.

Let's keep things simple for us deplorable please.

 

 

So there's no such crime as "attempted bribery?

[NanLaew]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

So there's no such crime as "attempted bribery?

Based on DJT's assertion that McCain wasn't a real war hero because he failed to die, then yes, if the bribery attempt didn't succeed, then it cannot be called a crime.

[Becker]

35 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

You can't educate me because you are not in a position to do so, and don't try to begin a conversation by laying a false claim that you have some sort of superiority of knowledge with someone when you don't. Regarding the facts of th matter, the claims of Pelosi and others, have been proven false by the Mueller report, which spent two years and came to the conclusion that there was no conspiracy. As for baseless charges of Putin having something on the President and being in his pocket, and working for them, this is something which is disgusting for a Speaker of the House to say. She had no such evidence and no such evidence was found. A disgusting assertion.  As for your statement that "either way" the man is a traitor. What does that mean either way? That he is a stooge or an agent? You know absolutely nothing of US foreign policy toward the Russians in this administration vs the previous administration and that is obvious in your post. In fact I think you know very little about US foreign policy in general.  Trump is not a traitor, is not going to jail. This impeachment is a shame. It is a continuation of a very sad episode in American politics. The Democrat part will not be forgiven and I am sure that they will not be forgiven. 

You state your opinions as facts. They're not - they're your opinions. And even if you fervently wish that Putin does not have your boy Trump by the short and curlies his words and actions (you know, facts) say otherwise.

That means it's not disgusting to say it because everything points to that (including the Mueller report which in no way exonerated Trump). What is disgusting is, despite all that he's said and done,  to continue supporting such a disaster of a president.

[xylophone]

13 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Former special counsel Robert Mueller suggested during his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that his investigation contained evidence of conspiracy by Trump campaign officials. When Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asked if the decision not to bring charges of conspiracy against members of the Trump campaign “does not mean your investigation failed to turn up evidence of conspiracy,” Mueller responded: "That is correct.""

 

"WalkingOrders" himself says in his post that you/we are not in a position to educate him, although I may politely suggest to him that paragraphs would help in order to read his drivel, although probably not, because as soon as I see oceans of text from him, I skip on to the next poster.

 

That aside, it appears that he and others really don't understand what has been going on and what the Mueller investigation found, because it did not clear the trump campaign officials of conspiracy.......if they bother to read what was stated at the time, but then this whole ongoing process of denial from the supporters of the cheating, lying and crooked POTUS seems par for course for these people.
 

[WalkingOrders]

15 hours ago, sirineou said:

Common sense man. common sense?

  Who is lying? the man who has being caught in thousands of lies, or exemplary military  hero who has never being caught in a lie and fought and bled for this country?

  Who is lying? the prosecutor of the most corrupt country whom the world was trying to have removed, or the career US  diplomats with an unblemished record?

   Who is lying? The politician of one of the most corrupt country in the world , or the trump supporter who contributed millions to trump inauguration committee but was forced to tell the truth under oath?

Common sense man. common sense?  I know asking common sense from a trump supporter? Where is my common sense?

  

Did the Democrat National Committee send an operative to UKRAINE in 2016? YES OR NO

Did the US Ambassador the Ukraine, Yovanovitch recently fired by Trump, speak publicly against the Ukrainian President, and did the Ukrainian President report this to Trump? YES OR NO

Did the Democrat National Committee pay for a Dossier - proven false - which was then used by the FBI to obtain warrants on people associated with the Trump campaign? YES OR NO

Did Joe Biden go on Television and claim he gave the Ukranians 6 hours to fire a prosecutor investigating the company Burisma which is son was on the board? YES OR NO

Did Joe Biden's son join the board of Burisma gas and oil get paid $85K a month despite zero knowledge of Ukraine or the Ukraine gas and oil industry, or even the gas industry in general? YES OR NO

And did Joe Biden's son join this board less then one year after popping positive for cocaine, and being booted from the USNR making him a less then stellar person to sit on such a board? YES OR NO

Did James Comey take his notes to a professor and tell the professor explicitly to leak the notes to the press? YES OR NO

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? YES OR NO

Did the Ambassador the Ukraine voice her concern to the state department about this development? YES OR NO

IS the president of the United States allowed to FIRE whom he chooses when he chooses? YES OR NO?

Is all US foreign aid contigent upon certifcation for lack of corruption? YES OR NO and if YEs would not any developments be of interest to the US president such as pointed out above? YES OR NO

Are there any US laws that protect someone from criminality if they are running for President? YES OR NO

Did Andrew McCabe discuss removing the President of the United States using the 25th amendment with the Acting DOJ?  YES OR NO

Did the same people who met with Don Jr in Trump tower meet with members of the same Fusion GPS that made the Dossier the very day earlier? YES OR NO

OK so do your best to deny these facts. then talk to me about common sense.

[WalkingOrders]

10 minutes ago, Becker said:

You state your opinions as facts. They're not - they're your opinions. And even if you fervently wish that Putin does not have your boy Trump by the short and curlies his words and actions (you know, facts) say otherwise.

That means it's not disgusting to say it because everything points to that (including the Mueller report which in no way exonerated Trump). What is disgusting is, despite all that he's said and done,  to continue supporting such a disaster of a president.

I gave facts. It is you who is making up nonsense. 

[WalkingOrders]

58 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

I love the conservatives all embracing exculpatory release when they claim rather naively but otherwise falsely that Meuller concluded that "there was no conspiracy."

 

"Former special counsel Robert Mueller suggested during his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that his investigation contained evidence of conspiracy by Trump campaign officials. When Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asked if the decision not to bring charges of conspiracy against members of the Trump campaign “does not mean your investigation failed to turn up evidence of conspiracy,” Mueller responded: "That is correct.""

 

It must be akin to the exquisite release of the long-denied, masturbatory ejaculation, no?

Is that all it takes to convict in your mind some evidence? Is there any amount of evidence? Any bar? Any overwhelming evidence? or beyond a resonable doubt? Or enough evidence to convict? Or is evidence enough for you? If you were to be in a criminal case would you consider that ANY evidence put forward should be considered enough to convict you? The fact of the matter is that not enough evidence as found to convict. That is the fact of the Mueller report. If there was enough evidence to convict he would have said so. In fact he said exactly the other, that not enough evidence was found. Does that carry any meaning for you? I suppose not. Because your dislike of the President is greater then your understanding or desire to understand the facts. I didn't write the Mueller report man, I just read it. See vol I page 181.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, Thainesss said:

It’s funny because the more I watch the lefts antics, the more I would do anything to keep them out of power. 

Indeed. When he wins in 2020, the Dems have only themselves to blame for presenting such a farce ever since he was elected. Why would any normal American want to elect a Democrat given the circus they are watching?

[roobaa01]

59 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Based on DJT's assertion that McCain wasn't a real war hero because he failed to die, then yes, if the bribery attempt didn't succeed, then it cannot be called a crime.

there is no crime at all, reading the transcript, the crime is this shifty schiff sham show for partisan political reasons only. supported by aocortez tv statement ......without impeachment we cannot win the 2020 election.

 

wbr

roobaa01

[bristolboy]

Only going to comment on the statements relevant to the Ukraine situation,

Did the US Ambassador the Ukraine, Yovanovitch recently fired by Trump, speak publicly against the Ukrainian President, and did the Ukrainian President report this to Trump?  NO

I can't find any references to this. Got a quote from her?

 

Did Joe Biden's son join the board of Burisma gas and oil get paid $85K a month despite zero knowledge of Ukraine or the Ukraine gas and oil industry, or even the gas industry in general? YES

It may be sleazy but sleaziness is not a crime. If it were, then China granting Ivanka trademarks in record breaking time, particularly around the time that Trump decide to spare ZTE, would be proof of Trump's criminality. Which it isn't. Or the fact that Jared got an amazing sweetheart deal that bailed him out of his disastrous NY real estate would be another.

 

Did Joe Biden go on Television and claim he gave the Ukranians 6 hours to fire a prosecutor investigating the company Burisma which is son was on the board? NO

As has been repeatedly pointed out, Victor Shokin, the prosecutor, is the only one claiming that he was investigating Burisma at the time. Everyone else in a position to know said that Shokin was doing as little to investigate corruption as possible.

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? NO

 

Did the Ambassador the Ukraine voice her concern to the state department about this development? YES

She didn't like the way it looked. No allegations from her about corruption. And doesn't Yovanovitch's report support her non-partisanship? Doublethink much?

 

Is all US foreign aid contingent upon certification for lack of corruption? YES and if YEs would not any developments be of interest to the US president such as pointed out above? YES

Except of course that there's 0 evidence that Trump has shown any interest in corruption as it applies to other nations. And even as it applies to the Ukraine except to pursue investigations that would benefit him politically. Trump was so concerned about corruption in the Ukraine that in his budget proposal anti-corruption funds for the Ukraine were slashed even as he was pursuing the Biden case. And he fired Yovanovitch who by all accounts except those manufactured by the flunkeys of the corrupt and indicted Ukrainian oligarch, Dmytrov Firtash, was doing a bang-up job in aiding anti-corruption efforts. Firtash is the corrupt gas oligarch who got fired thanks in part to her efforts. If you're looking for suspect motives in this case, I suggest you start with Firtash. And Parnas and Fruman. And Giuliani. Who was heading to Vienna the day after Parnas and Fruman were scheduled to go there on one-way tickets to meet with Firtash.

 

IS the president of the United States allowed to FIRE whom he chooses when he chooses? YES 

Are we free to cite that as evidence of corrupt motivation? YES

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? YES

Stupid leading question. Joseph Biden may have been at the point but it was Obama carrying the spear. And the reason that the Ukraine was being urged to increase gas production was to lessen its dependence on Russian gas. Not an outcome that Firtash would approve of.

 

 

[Becker]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Only going to comment on the statements relevant to the Ukraine situation,

Did the US Ambassador the Ukraine, Yovanovitch recently fired by Trump, speak publicly against the Ukrainian President, and did the Ukrainian President report this to Trump?  NO

I can't find any references to this. Got a quote from her?

 

Did Joe Biden's son join the board of Burisma gas and oil get paid $85K a month despite zero knowledge of Ukraine or the Ukraine gas and oil industry, or even the gas industry in general? YES

It may be sleazy but sleaziness is not a crime. If it were, then China granting Ivanka trademarks in record breaking time, particularly around the time that Trump decide to spare ZTE, would be proof of Trump's criminality. Which it isn't. Or the fact that Jared got an amazing sweetheart deal that bailed him out of his disastrous NY real estate would be another.

 

Did Joe Biden go on Television and claim he gave the Ukranians 6 hours to fire a prosecutor investigating the company Burisma which is son was on the board? NO

As has been repeatedly pointed out, Victor Shokin, the prosecutor, is the only one claiming that he was investigating Burisma at the time. Everyone else in a position to know said that Shokin was doing as little to investigate corruption as possible.

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? NO

 

Did the Ambassador the Ukraine voice her concern to the state department about this development? YES

She didn't like the way it looked. No allegations from her about corruption. And doesn't Yovanovitch's report support her non-partisanship? Doublethink much?

 

Is all US foreign aid contingent upon certification for lack of corruption? YES and if YEs would not any developments be of interest to the US president such as pointed out above? YES

Except of course that there's 0 evidence that Trump has shown any interest in corruption as it applies to other nations. And even as it applies to the Ukraine except to pursue investigations that would benefit him politically. Trump was so concerned about corruption in the Ukraine that in his budget proposal anti-corruption funds for the Ukraine were slashed even as he was pursuing the Biden case. And he fired Yovanovitch who by all accounts except those manufactured by the flunkeys of the corrupt and indicted Ukrainian oligarch, Dmytrov Firtash, was doing a bang-up job in aiding anti-corruption efforts. Firtash is the corrupt gas oligarch who got fired thanks in part to her efforts. If you're looking for suspect motives in this case, I suggest you start with Firtash. And Parnas and Fruman. And Giuliani. Who was heading to Vienna the day after Parnas and Fruman were scheduled to go there on one-way tickets to meet with Firtash.

 

IS the president of the United States allowed to FIRE whom he chooses when he chooses? YES 

Are we free to cite that as evidence of corrupt motivation? YES

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? YES

Stupid leading question. Joseph Biden may have been at the point but it was Obama carrying the spear. And the reason that the Ukraine was being urged to increase gas production was to lessen its dependence on Russian gas. Not an outcome that Firtash would approve of.

 

 

And neither would Putin (and by extension Trump).

[metisdead]

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

 

Some troll posts and replies have been removed. 

[WalkingOrders]

14 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Only going to comment on the statements relevant to the Ukraine situation,

Did the US Ambassador the Ukraine, Yovanovitch recently fired by Trump, speak publicly against the Ukrainian President, and did the Ukrainian President report this to Trump?  NO

I can't find any references to this. Got a quote from her?

 

Did Joe Biden's son join the board of Burisma gas and oil get paid $85K a month despite zero knowledge of Ukraine or the Ukraine gas and oil industry, or even the gas industry in general? YES

It may be sleazy but sleaziness is not a crime. If it were, then China granting Ivanka trademarks in record breaking time, particularly around the time that Trump decide to spare ZTE, would be proof of Trump's criminality. Which it isn't. Or the fact that Jared got an amazing sweetheart deal that bailed him out of his disastrous NY real estate would be another.

 

Did Joe Biden go on Television and claim he gave the Ukranians 6 hours to fire a prosecutor investigating the company Burisma which is son was on the board? NO

As has been repeatedly pointed out, Victor Shokin, the prosecutor, is the only one claiming that he was investigating Burisma at the time. Everyone else in a position to know said that Shokin was doing as little to investigate corruption as possible.

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? NO

 

Did the Ambassador the Ukraine voice her concern to the state department about this development? YES

She didn't like the way it looked. No allegations from her about corruption. And doesn't Yovanovitch's report support her non-partisanship? Doublethink much?

 

Is all US foreign aid contingent upon certification for lack of corruption? YES and if YEs would not any developments be of interest to the US president such as pointed out above? YES

Except of course that there's 0 evidence that Trump has shown any interest in corruption as it applies to other nations. And even as it applies to the Ukraine except to pursue investigations that would benefit him politically. Trump was so concerned about corruption in the Ukraine that in his budget proposal anti-corruption funds for the Ukraine were slashed even as he was pursuing the Biden case. And he fired Yovanovitch who by all accounts except those manufactured by the flunkeys of the corrupt and indicted Ukrainian oligarch, Dmytrov Firtash, was doing a bang-up job in aiding anti-corruption efforts. Firtash is the corrupt gas oligarch who got fired thanks in part to her efforts. If you're looking for suspect motives in this case, I suggest you start with Firtash. And Parnas and Fruman. And Giuliani. Who was heading to Vienna the day after Parnas and Fruman were scheduled to go there on one-way tickets to meet with Firtash.

 

IS the president of the United States allowed to FIRE whom he chooses when he chooses? YES 

Are we free to cite that as evidence of corrupt motivation? YES

 

Did Joe Biden's son take a position on Burisma board at Ukraine precisely at the time his father was at the point of US/Ukraine policy and the Obama administration was asking Ukraine to increase gas production? YES

Stupid leading question. Joseph Biden may have been at the point but it was Obama carrying the spear. And the reason that the Ukraine was being urged to increase gas production was to lessen its dependence on Russian gas. Not an outcome that Firtash would approve of.

 

 

You lie repeatedly in this post. Your characterizations of events likewise false. Time will tell which one of us is telling the truth.

[bristolboy]

Just now, WalkingOrders said:

You lie repeatedly in this post. Your characterizations of events likewise false. Time will tell which one of us is telling the truth.

Thank you for your detailed response showing specifically how my replies are lies. Some people just make allegations and don't back them up with reasons. But not you.

[WalkingOrders]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Thank you for your detailed response showing specifically how my replies are lies. Some people just make allegations and don't back them up with reasons. But not you.

No further response is needed. Everyone can read. 

[roobaa01]

dot committed the following .....high crimes ...

 

1. told the public 2016 on tv that close relations to russia would be good for the usa

2. won 2016 eletions

3. brushed off russian, racism, economic, ukrain hoaxes

4. implemented successful policies acc. to election promises

5. reelection 2020

 

wbr

roobaa01

[Mavideol]

22 hours ago, Thainesss said:

 

You clearly do not have any idea of Ukrainian/American politics and military aid pre-trump. Who let Russia move into Crimea? Who let Ukraine flounder under threat from Russian invasion while blustering about red lines and not crossing them? Yeah. 

you are correct, have no idea about Ukrainian/American politics, do you know why? it appears there are too many different political channels involved, there the legal/official one represented by the legal/official US embassy, protecting US interests and then there are a couple of not so legal ones or illegal and oriented towards protecting Trump personal interests, that so called illegal one managed / directed by the well known mafia affiliated Giuliani and his gang, such illegal group of actions/deals has absolutely no interest in preserving US interests in Ukraine but since you appear to have such a deep clear knowledge about the Ukrainian/American politics, maybe and I say just maybe you could enlighten us with additional details, BTW be so nice to avoid mentioning Biden's son as he has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the bribery investigation

[Mavideol]

18 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

Golly, so the topic of Biden comes up in this phone call with the Ukrainian President and that isn't what this is about? The fact that the Democrat National Committee had operatives in UKraine in 2016 purposefully asking Ukraine to interfere in US politics, and also interfered in Ukraine politics which was - the subject of the call - is not what this about either? Hmmm OK so its just about Trump asking about these things so he is a bad guy? But it can't possibly be about the subject of the call? So this doesn't seem like a shady attempt to run cover for the real scandals? That is something that can't be seen by you? Because this can't possibly be about Joe Biden and his son, and can't possibly be about the Democrat national committee running operatives to Ukraine? Right OK if you say so. Wait and see. 

are you for real? do you have any idea about Ukrainian/American politics? Biden's name was mention in a bribery phone call nothing to do with the current inquiry which is based on the big mess created by Trump when hired Giuliani's to look into things in Ukraine and bypass the legal/official US embassy which represents and (try) to protect US interests, unfortunately it appears there are too many different political channels involved, there the legal/official one represented by the legal/official US embassy, protecting US interests and then there are a couple of not so legal ones or illegal and oriented towards protecting Trump personal interests, that so called illegal one managed / directed by the well known mafia affiliated Giuliani and his gang, such illegal group of actions/deals has absolutely no interest in preserving US interests in Ukraine but since you appear to have such a deep clear knowledge about the Ukrainian/American politics, maybe and I say just maybe you could enlighten us with additional details, such as official reason to dismiss a public official, a veteran that worked 33 years for the US government....

[JHolmesJr]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It is a crime to offer or solicit a bribe regardless of whether or not the transaction takes place.

wow what a legal eagle!

 

a bribe is something extraneous that is given to grease the wheels.

 

Ukraine was already entitled to the money....they weren't aware of any holdups....while 

the Trump admin vetted the new admin's claims of taking an anti-corruption stance.

The aid flowed freely once the vetting was complete. Standard procedure.

 

Nothing impeachable here. Just a sad process to vilify a sitting president who the Dems

fear in an election.

 

 

[spidermike007]

3 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

Foreign policy is happening in this administration and happening well. No one is going to remove him. No one is going to lock him up. The Attorney General will issue indictments soon. As I said earlier . All bets taken. We can revisit this later. I want you to tell everyone here how wrong you were.

I guess if you call coddling dictators and alienating allies the practice of foreign policy, you could describe it as "happening well".

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, WalkingOrders said:

The fact of the matter is that not enough evidence as found to convict. That is the fact of the Mueller report. If there was enough evidence to convict he would have said so. In fact he said exactly the other, that not enough evidence was found.

You've got that completely backwards. What Mueller actually said was:

 

Quote

"If we had confidence that the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

 

Just to make that clear, Mueller is saying that they did not have any basis on which to exonerate the president.

 

Mueller also said the only reason he was unable to make a decision on whether to charge the president with a crime was because it's against Justice Department policy.

[Opl]

The Whistleblower Complaint Timeline

some of the key dates in the fast-moving, still-unfolding story.

[bristolboy]

33 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

wow what a legal eagle!

 

a bribe is something extraneous that is given to grease the wheels.

 

Ukraine was already entitled to the money....they weren't aware of any holdups....while 

the Trump admin vetted the new admin's claims of taking an anti-corruption stance.

The aid flowed freely once the vetting was complete. Standard procedure.

 

Nothing impeachable here. Just a sad process to vilify a sitting president who the Dems

fear in an election.

 

 

Attempted bribery is also a crime.

[JHolmesJr]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Attempted bribery is also a crime.

Attempting to concoct the word 'bribery' after running focus groups to see which term the public will

understand readily is a desperate move. No one's buying it. No one sees bribery except Adam Schiff and his minions....the same way they saw Trump's 'russian collusion' farce 2 years ago.

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Attempting to concoct the word 'bribery' after running focus groups to see which term the public will

understand readily is a desperate move. No one's buying it. No one sees bribery except Adam Schiff and his minions....the same way they saw Trump's 'russian collusion' farce 2 years ago.

One of the doctrines of the current supreme court is understanding words in the way they were used when a law was created. "Bribery" fits the original meaning to a "T".

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, WalkingOrders said:

You lie repeatedly in this post. Your characterizations of events likewise false. Time will tell which one of us is telling the truth.

You might time will change facts that have been established in the past. Interesting. So, in the future, will 2 plus 2 equal 5?

[Becker]

2 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

No further response is needed. Everyone can read. 

Yes, but it's the comprehension of what they've read that certain posters seem to struggle mightily with.