1 hour ago, J Town said:

It will be a disaster if you are a veteran.

 

Like that time when you said that Trump stole from veterans but you were actually duped by leftwing fake-news and proven wrong? 

 

1 hour ago, J Town said:

It will be a disaster if you are a farmer.

It will be a disaster if you are a woman.

It will be a disaster if you are a news reporter (even Shepherd Smith from Fox News got fired).

It will be a disaster if you are not white.

It will be a disaster if you get sick.

And the list goes on and on and on and . . .

 

Man you'd think if this was true, Trump wouldn't have won the election in the first place. 

9 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

1 hour ago, J Town said:

 

 

Man you'd think if this was true, Trump wouldn't have won the election in the first place. 

He won with the help of Russia. He is still diverting attention of Russia to Ukraine so they can help him again in 2020. That’s a fact. 

What utter hysterical farcical circus here. Have use even read the transcripped of the phone call? The fact that not once in the whole circus did anyone say there was ever any pressure or dealing being done in fact the opposite was said and the only so called evidence was "I heard it from someone who heard it from someone else". Even loading the deak these idiots have had it blow up in their faces. Instead of showing the people what a great job they are doing they have spent 3 years trying to overturn democracy. As for "oh this has nothing to do with dirty Biden and his son" OMG are probably the same people who think Clinton's should be saints. 

17 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

He won with the help of Russia. He is still diverting attention of Russia to Ukraine so they can help him again in 2020. That’s a fact. 

 

That is not a fact, and you clearly have no idea what "fact" means. 

 

 

31 minutes ago, Scot123 said:

What utter hysterical farcical circus here. Have use even read the transcripped of the phone call?

You mean the edited transcripts, right?

44 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

Like that time when you said that Trump stole from veterans but you were actually duped by leftwing fake-news and proven wrong?

This might make it clearer for you..........Trump used the Veterans fundraiser to promote him and his campaign. Low-life:-

 

"The New York Attorney General’s office objected to the way in which the Trump Foundation had been used to advance the interests of the Trump campaign, and especially the way in which the campaign dictated how more than half of the funds were to be distributed, with Trump at times personally handing out checks at campaign rallies. The Attorney General’s Office did not object on the grounds that Trump, his children, or his foundation, had stolen or kept the money". 

 

Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that:

 

I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump’s political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump’s campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law].

1 hour ago, Thainesss said:

 

Like that time when you said that Trump stole from veterans but you were actually duped by leftwing fake-news and proven wrong? 

 

 

Man you'd think if this was true, Trump wouldn't have won the election in the first place. 

And what "left wing fake-news" source said that Trump stole from veterans? The ones that right wingers routinely refer to in that way that I've tracked down correctly reported that Trump was fined for, among other things, donating money for veterans in such a way as to benefit his campaign. And the other things, which you have resolutely ignored, include paying off with charitable money a $100000+ fine imposed on his resort, spending 10,000 on a portrait of himself which he hung in his club, and other sleazy stuff which are found easily enough. Except for those who want to avoid acknowledging them.

Edited November 25, 20196 yr by bristolboy

9 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump's administration has refused to provide documents requested by House Democrats and blocked witnesses from testifying, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. The president's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, also has refused to cooperate.

but they have nothing to hide.....  hmmmmm

9 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

It's funny, we keep getting told by posters here that this fiasco has nothing to do with the Bidens, and yet every article that covers it makes mention of both Biden sr and jr. It is problematic that the only hard evidence of extortion/bribery/quid pro quo concerning the Ukraine comes from Biden sr with his boasting of witholding aid money until the Ukrainians fired the prosecutor. 

 It's the sticky fly paper syndrome that 3rd graders are familiar with, the harder they try make it off limits to discus the Bidens corruption and extortion, the more it gets mentioned. Oh dear!

please explain what holding funding from Ukraine, has to do with Biden.... Trump play the "it's them not me..." and you and so many other go for it

The next step in the impeachment probe appears to be Schiff starting to chicken out.  

 

During a Sunday morning interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Schiff said he would have to "discuss this with my constituents and my colleagues" before deciding whether or not the House should move forward with articles of impeachment.

 

Translation:  "We're afraid of a Senate trial.   We're going to go with House censure only."

 

 

Edited November 25, 20196 yr by Kelsall

9 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

It's funny, we keep getting told by posters here that this fiasco has nothing to do with the Bidens, and yet every article that covers it makes mention of both Biden sr and jr. It is problematic that the only hard evidence of extortion/bribery/quid pro quo concerning the Ukraine comes from Biden sr with his boasting of witholding aid money until the Ukrainians fired the prosecutor. 

 It's the sticky fly paper syndrome that 3rd graders are familiar with, the harder they try make it off limits to discus the Bidens corruption and extortion, the more it gets mentioned. Oh dear!

Then let there be a Biden Investigation ???? send them all to jail.

the problem is, every investigation by the White House turns up nothing ????
 

10 hours ago, darksidedog said:

You seem to be missing the fact that the whole of the EU, and many in the US, not just Mr. Biden were trying to get the prosecutor fired, because he was notoriously corrupt.

I have seen absolutely zero evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever by either of the Bidens, only unsubstantiated allegations, which have been debunked as utter rubbish.

If you are in a position to provide any evidence, not hypothesis and general slander, please share it with us.

I am making no judgment on the issue regarding Mr. Trump. It is not my prerogative. The general rule of law is that when someone is suspected of committing a crime, that action is investigated, which is what is happening here. When all of the facts are in, a call will be made.

Trying to smear others while suggesting a legitimate inquiry should not happen, flies in the face of adherence to the legal system.

Here's a FOIA request that has resulted in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations. Enjoy! ????

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

4 hours ago, Dap said:

Extremely well stated!

Here is the requested evidence... A FOIA request resulting in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

9 hours ago, Skallywag said:

 

This type of deflection is what the GOP is best at.  Basically saying, 

"The articles of Impeachment should be dropped, because of what we think the Bidens did 5 years ago."  Perfect GOP logic in their minds

As of now, there are no articles of impeachment and it's looking more and more like there never will be.  Schiff is starting to chicken out.  See post #41.

 

In addition to Schiff, other Dems are starting to chicken out as well. Impeachment will not happen.

 

 

Edited November 25, 20196 yr by Kelsall

7 minutes ago, Tounge Thaied said:

Here is the requested evidence... A FOIA request resulting in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

Thanks, maybe Barr can start an investigation, which is the legal way to handle this.

Edited November 25, 20196 yr by stevenl

6 minutes ago, Tounge Thaied said:

Here is the requested evidence... A FOIA request resulting in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

Are you saying that "evidence" and "accusations" mean the same thing??

25 minutes ago, Tounge Thaied said:

Here is the requested evidence... A FOIA request resulting in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

I guess you're referring to the statements of Shokin and Lutsenko. Lutsenko has already retracted the accusations he made concerning Ambassador Yovanovitch. Shokin's claim that he was investigating Burisma when he was fired has been contradicted by many parties including his deputy. Both of these statements were elicited at the request of Parnas and Fruman as part of their attempt to replace the current reforming head of Naftogaz with someone who would be willing to do business with them. Parnas and Fruman, both under indictment, were also working with Dmytro Firtash, himself under indictment and fighting extradition to the USA. Thanks in part to Ambassador Yovanovitch's efforts, the corrupt Firtash was pushed out of his involvement with Urkainian natural gas imports. This is estimated to have cost him billions. On the other hand, it has profited Ukraine so much that instead of being a burden, Naftogaz now contributes 15 percent of Ukraine's revenues. 

I did notice that John solomon's openly published article, also makes an appearance in that document. That's a shocker.

Even President Trump now looks forward to the impeachment joke. ???? Why? Because it guarantees him winning the 2020 election by an even larger amount.

The bottom line?

Pelosi and the "DNC" have about as much of a chance of impeaching President Trump as Prayut (however, I like Prayut ????) and the junta crew have of getting Yingluck back to Thailand to pay for Thaksin's sins. ✌  

12 minutes ago, RickTik said:

Even President Trump now looks forward to the impeachment joke. ???? Why? Because it guarantees him winning the 2020 election by an even larger amount.

The bottom line?

Pelosi and the "DNC" have about as much of a chance of impeaching President Trump as Prayut (however, I like Prayut ????) and the junta crew have of getting Yingluck back to Thailand to pay for Thaksin's sins. ✌  

 

 

FACTS TIME

 

Not sure anyone can read 45's mind.

 

Getting impeached does not guarantee anything as far as the 2020 election.

 

Thai politics is off topic here.

 

Impeachment and conviction/removal are completely SEPARATE things.

 

Chances of impeachment -- almost definite

Chances of conviction/removal -- almost definitely NOT

16 minutes ago, RickTik said:

Even President Trump now looks forward to the impeachment joke. ???? Why? Because it guarantees him winning the 2020 election by an even larger amount.

The bottom line?

Pelosi and the "DNC" have about as much of a chance of impeaching President Trump as Prayut (however, I like Prayut ????) and the junta crew have of getting Yingluck back to Thailand to pay for Thaksin's sins. ✌  

You don't seem to be better informed about Yingluck's case than about Trump's case.....

 

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

I guess you're referring to the statements of Shokin and Lutsenko. Lutsenko has already retracted the accusations he made concerning Ambassador Yovanovitch. Shokin's claim that he was investigating Burisma when he was fired has been contradicted by many parties including his deputy. Both of these statements were elicited at the request of Parnas and Fruman as part of their attempt to replace the current reforming head of Naftogaz with someone who would be willing to do business with them. Parnas and Fruman, both under indictment, were also working with Dmytro Firtash, himself under indictment and fighting extradition to the USA. Thanks in part to Ambassador Yovanovitch's efforts, the corrupt Firtash was pushed out of his involvement with Urkainian natural gas imports. This is estimated to have cost him billions. On the other hand, it has profited Ukraine so much that instead of being a burden, Naftogaz now contributes 15 percent of Ukraine's revenues. 

I did notice that John solomon's openly published article, also makes an appearance in that document. That's a shocker.

There's a real cast of characters here. And if Donald Trump gets his wish, this will play out further in the Senate, with all kinds of interesting people being subpoenaed, the Bidens, Sondlan, Holmes, Adam Schiff and the infamous, anonymous, as of yet unknown, so called whistleblower. The clown show will certainly move to the next act, following this show impeachment inquiry. 

6 hours ago, Tounge Thaied said:

Here is the requested evidence... A FOIA request resulting in the US State Department releasing detailed accusations of corruption against the Bidens – based on interviews with former Ukrainian officials who were in charge of the investigations.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AO_State_Ukraine_Docs_11-22.pdf

Ah! Ah!

 

It is a compilation of various documents, including press articles, some in favour of Trump's debunked claim (Solomon's article), some against it (letters from former ambassadors). You know, the kind of job which is usually attributed to an intern.

By the way, I think I found out which organisation is likely to have filed this document and it's judicial watch, lol!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/judicial-watch/

 

Overall, we rate Judicial Watch Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories and a very poor fact check record.

Edited November 25, 20196 yr by candide
Additional information found

17 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

It's funny, we keep getting told by posters here that this fiasco has nothing to do with the Bidens, and yet every article that covers it makes mention of both Biden sr and jr. It is problematic that the only hard evidence of extortion/bribery/quid pro quo concerning the Ukraine comes from Biden sr with his boasting of witholding aid money until the Ukrainians fired the prosecutor. 

 It's the sticky fly paper syndrome that 3rd graders are familiar with, the harder they try make it off limits to discus the Bidens corruption and extortion, the more it gets mentioned. Oh dear!

First it was "but Hillary", now it "but Binden". Can't you never stay on topic and discuss Trump?

Worst Commander in Chief Ever

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/25/worst-commander-chief-ever/

16 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Worst Commander in Chief Ever

 

"Opinions"

Well the ruling just came down on trumps minions stonewalling they must testify so my guess this is going to go on a bit longer heck maybe we will hear from the big mouth himself lol

Edited November 26, 20196 yr by Tug

14 minutes ago, Tug said:

Well the ruling just came down on trumps minions stonewalling they must testify so my guess this is going to go on a bit longer heck maybe we will hear from the big mouth himself lol

Thanks, good news. Any appeals possible?

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Thanks, good news. Any appeals possible?

Possible and inevitable.

21 minutes ago, Tug said:

Well the ruling just came down on trumps minions stonewalling they must testify so my guess this is going to go on a bit longer heck maybe we will hear from the big mouth himself lol

Yet another nothing burger.  The will simply show up and claim executive privilege.

 

No impeachment, censure only.

5 hours ago, candide said:

Ah! Ah!

 

It is a compilation of various documents, including press articles, some in favour of Trump's debunked claim (Solomon's article), some against it (letters from former ambassadors). You know, the kind of job which is usually attributed to an intern.

By the way, I think I found out which organisation is likely to have filed this document and it's judicial watch, lol!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/judicial-watch/

 

Overall, we rate Judicial Watch Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories and a very poor fact check record.

And actually there's nothing new there. Just filing statements that are already in the public record including a published article from John Solomon. You have to wonder if Tounge Thaied even bothered to read it. Including the statements from the 5 ex ambassadors denouncing the attacks on Yovanovitch.