Pelosi says Trump has admitted to bribery as impeachment probe intensifies

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

And a side note - people are constantly ruined by baseless investigations both inside and out of politics. 

Like the baseless investigation Trump tried to bribe the Ukrainian’s into conducting?

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Thainesss said:

 

He says un-ironically while providing his own overbearing assumptions, constantly. 

I’ve not provided any assumptions.

[Mavideol]

15 minutes 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. 

oh I know, I know.... you are going to tell me it was under Obama's administration hmmm care to provide details? was the house majority R

[Thainesss]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Who is being impeached for illegally withholding military aid from Ukraine in an attempt to bribe the Ukrainian government into fabricating an investigation into one of his political rivals?

 

Dont you guys see how very obvious it is when you try and force people to stop looking/talking/debating in an unfavorable direction. Its really quite pathetic and childish. 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Dont you guys see how very obvious it is when you try and force people to stop looking/talking/debating in an unfavorable direction. Its really quite pathetic and childish. 

 Not as obvious as your attempts to take the thread off topic followed by your projection of your own conduct onto others.

[Thainesss]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’ve not provided any assumptions.

 

Thats rich. Whats this?

 

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Who is being impeached for illegally withholding military aid from Ukraine in an attempt to bribe the Ukrainian government into fabricating an investigation into one of his political rivals?

 

Oh that's just a big fat assumption. 

[Thainesss]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

 It as obvious as your attempts to take the thread off topic followed by your projection of your own conduct onto others.

 

Ok Jr. Mod. Didn't realize you were the arbiter of forum topics here. It's a bid hard to talk about Ukraine and American foreign policy without bringing up previous administration decisions that led us here. 

[Boon Mee]

Just when you thought this pathetic excuse for a partisan witch hunt couldn't be any more pathetic, it does... 

[legend49]

Great photo of him. Living proof of what eating KFC everyday can do to your health. He may not make 2020 November election.

[jany123]

5 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

But this isn't an investigation at all, as has been constantly repeated in this very thread. It does not have 2 sides. There is no justice involved. There is no prosecution and defense. Its public meetings framed in a politically beneficial way for the majority party. 

 

And a side note - people are constantly ruined by baseless investigations both inside and out of politics. 

Rubbish. Crime. Investigate. Charge. Rule.

 

since when has an investigation involved two sides during investigation. An investigation investigates evidence and determines if a crime has been committed. An investigation is not about justice, that’s what a trial is about. (And that’s when the justice bit kicks in... at a trial of your peers) 

 

The trumps personal lawyers can investigate to their hearts content and bring up their findings in the appropriate forum (now that they have a heads up about the investigations progress)... the trial.... wherein they counter the governments case/ evidence with their contrary evidence.

 

the only systemic failure here, in the normal course of events, is that the investigation is being made public, (that’s your unusual bit) because that’s what the republicans were clamoring about... now you decry the publicity... babies.... sheesh

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Thats rich. Whats this?

 

 

Oh that's just a big fat assumption. 

No that’s a paraphrase of the terms of Impeachment outlined by Schiff in his opening statement.

 

I understand and entirely that you may not have been paying attention.

[jany123]

21 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

And a side note - people are constantly ruined by baseless investigations both inside and out of politics.

true...  it’s the fault of the system, right? Damn constitution. Damn partial/ faulty democracy which is the US political system.

 

meanwhile.... for justices sake.... it’s just as well this impeachment enquiry isn’t baseless, but grounded in demonstrable wrong doing on the trumps behalf. 

[DoctorG]

These documents are far more interesting than third hand hearsay.

 

[stevenl]

22 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Dont you guys see how very obvious it is when you try and force people to stop looking/talking/debating in an unfavorable direction. Its really quite pathetic and childish. 

Difference is all you can provide is opinions, while others provide facts based on witnesses and simply the way it is, like what transpired with aid to UIkraine under Biden.

 

So yes, I do get tired of having to refute baseless opinions, while the facts are ignored.

[Bundooman]

5 hours ago, xylophone said:

Agree, he does not have the intelligence to know the difference between right and wrong, as evidenced in your two examples above, and also evident in his consistent lying.

 

There is something mentally very wrong with this poor excuse for a human being.  

There is something mentally very wrong with these poor excuses his extreme right wing supremest supporters love to roll out every time the bumbling clown president commits a crime. 

[Thainesss]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Difference is all you can provide is opinions, while others provide facts based on witnesses and simply the way it is, like what transpired with aid to UIkraine under Biden.

 

So yes, I do get tired of having to refute baseless opinions, while the facts are ignored.

 

Its funny because 90% of these last 8 pages have been opinions over and over again with very little 'facts'. Its almost all speculation, assumption, and embellishment. The same people that have been crying and moaning since day one about trump are still today crying and moaning about Trump. 

[thaicurious]

5 hours ago, Tug said:

I don’t know looks to me to resemble extortion more than bribery but what would you expect from the guy that ran the rip off university or the scam charity it’s just Donald beeing Donald he needs to be removed ASAP and managed untle then

What we today would call extortion, the founding fathers then called bribery. So the term applies appropriately to Trump's violation of Constitution.

 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean

"the Founders had a broader conception of bribery than what’s in the criminal code. Their understanding was derived from English law, under which bribery was understood as an officeholder’s abuse of the power of an office to obtain a private benefit rather than for the public interest. This definition not only encompasses Trump’s conduct—it practically defines it."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawfare_(blog)

"Lawfare is a blog dedicated to national security issues, published by the Lawfare Institute in cooperation with the Brookings Institution"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution

"The Brookings Institution is an American research group founded in 1916 on Think Tank Row in Washington, D.C...

 

Brookings...describes itself as non-partisan...referred to by conservative politicians almost as frequently as liberal politicians"

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, thaicurious said:

What we today would call extortion, the founding fathers then called bribery. So the term applies appropriately to Trump's violation of Constitution.

Pelosi brought up bribery was very strategic. Bribery and treason are specifically stated in the constitution as impeachable offenses. Bribery can be proven by acts of requesting and agreeing to receive or accepting of an advantage. There are plenty of that evidence in the testimonies on the first day. It is easier to understand by the lay people and don’t need hearsay which can be hijacked and distorted by Trump’s surrogates.

[stevenl]

32 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Its funny because 90% of these last 8 pages have been opinions over and over again with very little 'facts'. Its almost all speculation, assumption, and embellishment. The same people that have been crying and moaning since day one about trump are still today crying and moaning about Trump. 

Thanks for underlining my point by not seeing the difference between facts and opinion.

[Tippaporn]

Nice vid, DoctorG.  Despite all of the facts brought out I'm sure the lefties will still call it a conspiracy theory, LOL.  If they'll even watch it.

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, Thainesss said:

You say this like any information given or provided will be portrayed honestly. You and I both know that the objective is to make things look and sound as bad as possible. 
 

I repeat, this is the 3rd impeachment attempt - all of which were glaringly partisan failures. 

He doesn't have to just release it to the House. He can give everybody access to it.

[bristolboy]

2 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. 

Which does nothing to contradict this:

"About 30 to. 35 percent of the population are hard core 45 fans that would as 45 himself bragged about even if he went out on the street and murdered someone." 

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, Thainesss said:

Yep totally not partisan at all. 

 

Nothing to stop republicans except for Schiff stopping republicans. 

Odd how the Republicans haven't called for thoses 2 Ukrainian prosecutors, Shokin and Lutsenko, to testify. Especially given how much they are relying on what those 2 have claimed. You think maybe it's because if they testify they'll be exposed in all their sleaziness?

[Thainesss]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Thanks for underlining my point by not seeing the difference between facts and opinion.

 

Hate to break it to you but your feelings and opinions are not facts, buddy. 

[Thainesss]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

He doesn't have to just release it to the House. He can give everybody access to it.

 

What 'it' are you referring to exactly. 

 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, roobaa01 said:

i wonder why the dems have not issued a subpoena to bolton ??? would too much <deleted> hit the dem fan ???

 

wbr

roobaa01

ya could look it up:

House Investigators Decide Not to Subpoena John Bolton

Democrats hold fire as they await court decision on Don McGahn’s testimony

House Democrats didn’t try to compel former national security adviser John Bolton to testify on Thursday in the impeachment probe of President Trump, holding their fire as a federal court plans to rule soon on whether another former White House official can avoid cooperating with lawmakers.

Democratic lawmakers have eagerly sought testimony from Mr. Bolton, whom other witnesses have described as alarmed over a push by Mr. Trump and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to pressure Ukraine into conducting investigations that could have benefited the president politically.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-impeachment-investigators-wont-subpoena-john-bolton-11573147474

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

Just when you thought this pathetic excuse for a partisan witch hunt couldn't be any more pathetic, it does... 

Just when we thought that your comments couldn't get any emptier, they do...

[xylophone]

3 hours ago, Thainesss said:

Why would anyone in their right mind give anything to the people who want ruin you

To prove that they have nothing with which to ruin you.......simple really, then it is all over and done with, because they don't have a case.

 

UNLESS there is something to hide/incriminate, then trump and co won't want that known. 

 

Logical, no? 

[thaicurious]

29 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Pelosi brought up bribery was very strategic. Bribery and treason are specifically stated in the constitution as impeachable offenses. Bribery can be proven by acts of requesting and agreeing to receive or accepting of an advantage. There are plenty of that evidence in the testimonies on the first day. It is easier to understand by the lay people and don’t need hearsay which can be hijacked and distorted by Trump’s surrogates.

I think a lot of the strategy is to be as accurate as can be to teach those Americans who skipped that day of history class precisely what were the founding fathers' intentions as spelled out in the Constitution to which oath is taken: to Make America America Again. The greatness of America is its truths; not Trump's falsehoods. Certainly not his violations of Constitution.

 

 

[bristolboy]

26 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Nice vid, DoctorG.  Despite all of the facts brought out I'm sure the lefties will still call it a conspiracy theory, LOL.  If they'll even watch it.

Because most lefties tend to be literate and don't need to get information via videos, they get their information from something called the written word. Something right wingers don't seem nearly so fond of to judge by the number of dubious videos they cite.. Probably they prefer videos because it's a lot easier to analyze text and catch misinformation in text than it is in a video.