2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Here's more.  This is not a joke.  Actual recording.  There are a lot of players involved and it's highly complex.  Lots of disinformation being created to obfuscate the truth.  A lot of people wielding great influence with much to lose.

 

 

Lots of players involved, highly complex, disinformation to obfuscate, people wielding great influence with much to loose.

 

Exactly true, your pointing directly at Trump.

27 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

What you call allegations I call facts.

 

While you present certain undeniable facts there are many more.  No doubt some news outlets report certain facts while omitting others in order to paint a particular narrative.  All of the available facts need to be considered in order to understand the situation correctly, not just some of the facts.  Dispute the facts within the various links I've posted.  Or debate them, especially if they're contradictory.

 

Keep in mind that there are differing accounts of some of the aspects depending on what sources you use.  Shokin, for example, disputes the claim that he was not investigating Burisma.  Someone is lying.  Question is, who?

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement

 

All in all, though, the left tends to go no further than the spoonfed MSM narrative.  And it appears not even remotely interested in digging deeper as evidenced by the fact that no matter what information is produced the consensus of replies is always the same . . . conspiracy theory, no substantiated evidence, nothing to see here folks, etc.

 

And if you can, explain why Hunter Biden was asked to be on Burisma's board.  No experience with energy, no experience with the Ukraine, can't speak the language, and has drug abuse issues.  What did he bring to the table that made him so valuable?  Connections (as documented evidence in the form of no less than bona fide emails seem to show)?  Why would Burisma not come to his defense, such as issuing a statement or evidence clarifying what it was exactly that Hunter was doing for them?  Job functions?  Seriously, what's your take?

Since pretty much everyone who worked with or near shokin says he's lying, and since it wasn't just joe biden or even the USA pushing for his ouster, but the EU, the IMF, and the World Bank, I'd say taking his affidavit seriously requires a massive suspension of the exercise of one's critical faculties. And it wasn't just Burisma he wasn't investigating. It was virtually all the oligarchs. He got fired because he wasn't producing results.

20 minutes ago, candide said:

I don't understand how Nunes can suit them. They only reported what a lawyer working for Parnas said. This is not illegal, unless they invented it, which is very  unlikely (the lawyer has not denied anything)

 

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/25/20982011/nunes-cnn-daily-beast-lawsuits-parnas-ukraine

nunes has tried this nonsense before and failed. lots of times

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-10-20/abcarian-sunday-column

20 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

What you call allegations I call facts.

 

While you present certain undeniable facts there are many more.  No doubt some news outlets report certain facts while omitting others in order to paint a particular narrative.  All of the available facts need to be considered in order to understand the situation correctly, not just some of the facts.  Dispute the facts within the various links I've posted.  Or debate them, especially if they're contradictory.

 

Keep in mind that there are differing accounts of some of the aspects depending on what sources you use.  Shokin, for example, disputes the claim that he was not investigating Burisma.  Someone is lying.  Question is, who?

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement

 

All in all, though, the left tends to go no further than the spoonfed MSM narrative.  And it appears not even remotely interested in digging deeper as evidenced by the fact that no matter what information is produced the consensus of replies is always the same . . . conspiracy theory, no substantiated evidence, nothing to see here folks, etc.

 

And if you can, explain why Hunter Biden was asked to be on Burisma's board.  No experience with energy, no experience with the Ukraine, can't speak the language, and has drug abuse issues.  What did he bring to the table that made him so valuable?  Connections (as documented evidence in the form of no less than bona fide emails seem to show)?  Why would Burisma not come to his defense, such as issuing a statement or evidence clarifying what it was exactly that Hunter was doing for them?  Job functions?  Seriously, what's your take?

Ok. On the one hand, Shokin, considered as corrupt by the USA, EU, IMF, Ukraine's parliament, and by anti-corruption organisations.

On the other hand, US ambassadors and State Department staff stating (for some of them under oath) that the investigation was dormant.

Who to believe? It looks obvious to me. So this part of the conspiracy doesn't hold.

 

Now about Hunter himself, I think it is unfair that sons of well known people get nicer jobs than others just because of their name. They obviously hired him to improve their public relations. That's unfair but not illegal. Personally, I would not object if the DOJ would open an official investigation into Hunter. It didn't, despite the fact that it is headed by Barr. If he had reliable presumptions, he would have already launched an official investigation.

34 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Lots of players involved, highly complex, disinformation to obfuscate, people wielding great influence with much to loose.

 

Exactly true, your pointing directly at Trump.

What, no comment on the vid?  Kinda informative, ain't it?  But no comment?

30 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

What, no comment on the vid?  Kinda informative, ain't it?  But no comment?

Ever hear of a Rorschach test? But before we even get to that who knows if this recording is genuine? And is the translation accurate And if genuine and accurate has it has been edited? And even if unedited what does it actually say? Sytnyk says he helped Clinton. He also said that Comey helped Trump by reopening the investigation. So it seems likely that what Sytnyk meant was that in the same way the Comey helped Trump by throwing late shade on Clinton, Sytnyk helped Clinton by publicly confirming that Manafort was in the black ledger. Which was true and perfectly legitimate. And openly done. 

Like I have posted, there will be no impeachment.  The next step is censure.

 

Michigan Democratic Rep. Brenda Lawrence, a prominent supporter of Kamala Harris who has previously supported the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, abruptly announced Sunday that she no longer saw any "value" in the process and called for her fellow Democrats to throw their support behind a symbolic censure resolution.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-dem-reverses-course-on-impeachment-as-polls-show-declining-support-i-want-to-censure

Troll/baiting post removed

13 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Like I have posted, there will be no impeachment.  The next step is censure.

 

Michigan Democratic Rep. Brenda Lawrence, a prominent supporter of Kamala Harris who has previously supported the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, abruptly announced Sunday that she no longer saw any "value" in the process and called for her fellow Democrats to throw their support behind a symbolic censure resolution.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-dem-reverses-course-on-impeachment-as-polls-show-declining-support-i-want-to-censure

Funny. The impeach-o-meter says 98 percent chance. That's close to what I would say too -- 99 percent.

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/trump-impeachment-chances-how-it-could-get-worse.html

Quote

 

Today’s Impeach-O-Meter: How Things Could Get Worse for Trump

The first part of the formal impeachment process is finished. How’s our boy Donald looking?

 

 

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by Jingthing

An inflammatory post has been removed, if you want your post to remain up please use politicians correct names not something you just dreamt up

15 hours ago, candide said:

Ok. On the one hand, Shokin, considered as corrupt by the USA, EU, IMF, Ukraine's parliament, and by anti-corruption organisations.

On the other hand, US ambassadors and State Department staff stating (for some of them under oath) that the investigation was dormant.

Who to believe? It looks obvious to me. So this part of the conspiracy doesn't hold.

 

 

The issue here is that their claims are provably false.

 

First, the anti-corruption agencies were the ones under investigation by Shokin. It involved them laundering and misusing IMF and US/EU aid etc. So pretty much everyone calling him out as corrupt was under investigation by him. You hear of 'protests in the street calling for his removal', but then when you actually look for the info you find ..

 

At least 200 people gathered outside the administrative offices of President Petro Poroshenko calling on him to fire Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.

The protest on March 28 followed a Kiev court ruling that authorized Shokin's office to investigate a watchdog organization called the Anticorruption Action Center, over claims that the center embezzled $2.2 million in aid.

 

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-protest-prosecutor-shokin-dismissal/27639981.html

 

200 or so people (totally organic I'm sure) protested after they found out it was ruled Shokin could investigate ACAC. Why on earth would they protest him investigating corruption?

 

Then there's Burisma :

 

Here's Shokin's office seizing the Burisma owners assets, reported Feb 4th : https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/322395.html

 

Then .. Biden called the Ukraine President on Feb 11th.. just 7 days later.

 

Feb. 11, 2016 – Vice President Biden speaks with Poroshenko by phone. A U.S. Embassy statement said the two agreed “that it is essential for Ukraine to continue to take action to root out corruption and implement reforms.” Biden later boasts about the pressure he exerted on Ukraine during that time to address corruption.

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

 

So the claim that the investigation was dormant is false, the claim that he wasn't investigating corruption is false, and everyone calling him corrupt or for his removal is involved in what he is investigating. Dude was only in office for a year, madness. It's all kinda sus if you ask me.

 

Also you need to ask yourself why the media and Democrats have lied about this and told you the opposite, that he wasn't investigating corruption or that the Burisma case was not being chased. Also, another lie they're pushing is that Ukraine meddling in the US election is a 'debunked conspiracy theory'. Again, this is provably false. A Ukraine court literally found that meddling occurred.

 

 

From the NYT :

The Kiev District Administrative Court, in a statement issued Wednesday, said that Artem Sytnik, the head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the agency that had released information about the payments, had violated the law. The courtʼs statement said this violation “resulted in meddling in the electoral process of the United States in 2016 and damaged the national interests of Ukraine.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/europe/ukraine-paul-manafort.html

 

 

Why are they lying?

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by mapleleafrag

28 minutes ago, mapleleafrag said:

The issue here is that their claims are provably false.

 

First, the anti-corruption agencies were the ones under investigation by Shokin. It involved them laundering and misusing IMF and US/EU aid etc. So pretty much everyone calling him out as corrupt was under investigation by him. You hear of 'protests in the street calling for his removal', but then when you actually look for the info you find ..

 

At least 200 people gathered outside the administrative offices of President Petro Poroshenko calling on him to fire Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.

The protest on March 28 followed a Kiev court ruling that authorized Shokin's office to investigate a watchdog organization called the Anticorruption Action Center, over claims that the center embezzled $2.2 million in aid.

 

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-protest-prosecutor-shokin-dismissal/27639981.html

 

200 or so people (totally organic I'm sure) protested after they found out it was ruled Shokin could investigate ACAC. Why on earth would they protest him investigating corruption?

 

Then there's Burisma :

 

Here's Shokin's office seizing the Burisma owners assets, reported Feb 4th : https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/322395.html

 

Then .. Biden called the Ukraine President on Feb 11th.. just 7 days later.

 

Feb. 11, 2016 – Vice President Biden speaks with Poroshenko by phone. A U.S. Embassy statement said the two agreed “that it is essential for Ukraine to continue to take action to root out corruption and implement reforms.” Biden later boasts about the pressure he exerted on Ukraine during that time to address corruption.

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

 

So the claim that the investigation was dormant is false, the claim that he wasn't investigating corruption is false, and everyone calling him corrupt or for his removal is involved in what he is investigating. Dude was only in office for a year, madness. It's all kinda sus if you ask me.

 

Also you need to ask yourself why the media and Democrats have lied about this and told you the opposite, that he wasn't investigating corruption or that the Burisma case was not being chased. Also, another lie they're pushing is that Ukraine meddling in the US election is a 'debunked conspiracy theory'. Again, this is provably false. A Ukraine court literally found that meddling occurred.

 

 

From the NYT :

The Kiev District Administrative Court, in a statement issued Wednesday, said that Artem Sytnik, the head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the agency that had released information about the payments, had violated the law. The courtʼs statement said this violation “resulted in meddling in the electoral process of the United States in 2016 and damaged the national interests of Ukraine.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/europe/ukraine-paul-manafort.html

 

 

Why are they lying?

The folks who have been exposed to the facts and understand what's going on know why they're lying.  It's the folks who have been brainwashed by the MSM and suffer from TDS that are clueless.  They're basically unable to now separate fact from fiction and truth from lies.

 

Excellent post, BTW.

Bring it on, I say.

Nothing to fear.

2020 to 2024

2 hours ago, mapleleafrag said:

The issue here is that their claims are provably false.

 

First, the anti-corruption agencies were the ones under investigation by Shokin. It involved them laundering and misusing IMF and US/EU aid etc. So pretty much everyone calling him out as corrupt was under investigation by him. You hear of 'protests in the street calling for his removal', but then when you actually look for the info you find ..

 

At least 200 people gathered outside the administrative offices of President Petro Poroshenko calling on him to fire Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.

The protest on March 28 followed a Kiev court ruling that authorized Shokin's office to investigate a watchdog organization called the Anticorruption Action Center, over claims that the center embezzled $2.2 million in aid.

 

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-protest-prosecutor-shokin-dismissal/27639981.html

 

200 or so people (totally organic I'm sure) protested after they found out it was ruled Shokin could investigate ACAC. Why on earth would they protest him investigating corruption?

 

Then there's Burisma :

 

Here's Shokin's office seizing the Burisma owners assets, reported Feb 4th : https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/322395.html

 

Then .. Biden called the Ukraine President on Feb 11th.. just 7 days later.

 

Feb. 11, 2016 – Vice President Biden speaks with Poroshenko by phone. A U.S. Embassy statement said the two agreed “that it is essential for Ukraine to continue to take action to root out corruption and implement reforms.” Biden later boasts about the pressure he exerted on Ukraine during that time to address corruption.

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

 

So the claim that the investigation was dormant is false, the claim that he wasn't investigating corruption is false, and everyone calling him corrupt or for his removal is involved in what he is investigating. Dude was only in office for a year, madness. It's all kinda sus if you ask me.

 

Also you need to ask yourself why the media and Democrats have lied about this and told you the opposite, that he wasn't investigating corruption or that the Burisma case was not being chased. Also, another lie they're pushing is that Ukraine meddling in the US election is a 'debunked conspiracy theory'. Again, this is provably false. A Ukraine court literally found that meddling occurred.

 

 

From the NYT :

The Kiev District Administrative Court, in a statement issued Wednesday, said that Artem Sytnik, the head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the agency that had released information about the payments, had violated the law. The courtʼs statement said this violation “resulted in meddling in the electoral process of the United States in 2016 and damaged the national interests of Ukraine.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/europe/ukraine-paul-manafort.html

 

 

Why are they lying?

It's nice to finally have someone arguing based on reliable sources for a change,

Point 1

It is not clear which case is concerned as there have been several cases against him. It is likely to be related to the UK unblocked assets case. In the same source you quote, it is said that this case has been transferred to NABU (created after pressure from the US government) so it was not related to Shokin

https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/312785.html

 

Point 2

Yes, Shokin reacted to criticism from anti-corruption organisations by investigating them instead of oligarchs.

 

Point 3

You try to establish a chronological link between the seizing of assets and Biden's call. The pressure to fire him by the USA, EU and IMF did not start in February 2016.

 

Point 4

There are two components in the Ukraine conspiracy:

- the crowdstrike claim has been completely debunked, i.e. Trump continuously states that it is owned by an Ukrainian boss while the guy in question is of Russian origin, not Ukrainian. Lol.

- the Manafort case: while according to your link it may be assessed as illegal in Ukraine, it should be noted that Manafort had been subject of an official investigation by the FBI since 2014, so there was no hidden conspiracy.

 

Sorry I have no time to develop more.

Cheers

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by candide

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Bring it on, I say.

Nothing to fear.

2020 to 2024

As Paul Ryan said, Trump is depending too much on image and personalities than policies. That’s how to beat him. Biden with a suitable vice who can bring in crucial votes will beat him. Dem will learn from Hillary mistakes to campaign more in states that she took for granted. Fear 2020. 

3 hours ago, candide said:

It's nice to finally have someone arguing based on reliable sources for a change,

Point 1

It is not clear which case is concerned as there have been several cases against him. It is likely to be related to the UK unblocked assets case. In the same source you quote, it is said that this case has been transferred to NABU (created after pressure from the US government) so it was not related to Shokin

https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/312785.html

 

Point 2

Yes, Shokin reacted to criticism from anti-corruption organisations by investigating them instead of oligarchs.

 

Point 3

You try to establish a chronological link between the seizing of assets and Biden's call. The pressure to fire him by the USA, EU and IMF did not start in February 2016.

 

Point 4

There are two components in the Ukraine conspiracy:

- the crowdstrike claim has been completely debunked, i.e. Trump continuously states that it is owned by an Ukrainian boss while the guy in question is of Russian origin, not Ukrainian. Lol.

- the Manafort case: while according to your link it may be assessed as illegal in Ukraine, it should be noted that Manafort had been subject of an official investigation by the FBI since 2014, so there was no hidden conspiracy.

 

Sorry I have no time to develop more.

Cheers

In any event. What bidens are alleged to have done is not relevant to what trump is being investigated for, its just s look over there deflection.

And there goes Giuliani under the bus:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-distances-himself-from-giulianis-ukraine-efforts/ar-BBXomhl?ocid=spartanntp

Link: New revelations put Trump on shakier ground

 

"New transcripts of witness testimony and news reports revealing key details on the Ukraine scandal timeline show in vivid detail the way President Donald Trump and top officials maneuvered behind the scenes to block aid to Ukraine as the President sought an investigation into his political rival Joe Biden.
The President's claims of innocence looked even more incredulous Tuesday night after The New York Times reported that Trump released the hold on Ukraine aid after he was briefed on the whistleblower report outlining his dealings with Ukraine."

17 minutes ago, Becker said:

The President's claims of innocence looked even more incredulous Tuesday night after ...

I pegged this as a CNN piece as soon as I hit this sentence.

 

Lets wait for the news.

 

5 minutes ago, rabas said:

I pegged this as a CNN piece as soon as I hit this sentence.

 

Lets wait for the news.

 

You mean the Fox/45 propaganda? 

1 hour ago, FritsSikkink said:

And there goes Giuliani under the bus:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-distances-himself-from-giulianis-ukraine-efforts/ar-BBXomhl?ocid=spartanntp

I wouldn't say so.  Trump just isn't showing his cards.

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

I wouldn't say so.  Trump just isn't showing his cards.

Is this you going back to your ‘Trump is setting a cunning trap’ again?

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

In any event. What bidens are alleged to have done is not relevant to what trump is being investigated for, its just s look over there deflection.

LOL.  Keep telling yourself that.  Not much else to say at this point since nothing will dissuade you.  Slowly but surely the facts are coming out.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Is this you going back to your ‘Trump is setting a cunning trap’ again?

LOL.  Look at the impeachment disaster and ask yourself.  Dems opened Pandora's box with that one and there's no going back for them.  I'm enjoying it.

47 minutes ago, rabas said:

I pegged this as a CNN piece as soon as I hit this sentence.

Was it the use of "big" words that did it?

56 minutes ago, Becker said:

Was it the use of "big" words that did it?

No, simple floccinaucinihilipilification.

 

Look it up...

 

6 minutes ago, rabas said:

No, simple floccinaucinihilipilification.

 

Look it up...

 

Sorry, can't be bothered.

Impeachment hearings so far have been a dud.  From the left-leaning Huffington Post no less.

 

"Days of televised impeachment hearings have left Americans largely dug into their original opinions, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds, dashing Democrats’ hopes that the testimony might finally splinter the president’s base of support"

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/impeachmen-hearing-poll-sondland_n_5dd86d52e4b00149f71cdf37

3 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Impeachment hearings so far have been a dud.  From the left-leaning Huffington Post no less.

 

"Days of televised impeachment hearings have left Americans largely dug into their original opinions, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds, dashing Democrats’ hopes that the testimony might finally splinter the president’s base of support"

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/impeachmen-hearing-poll-sondland_n_5dd86d52e4b00149f71cdf37

Only if you think that the hearings were just a show to increase or decrease  public support. In that case the republicans were equally unsuccessful. If the hearings were to also gather evidence , Mission accomplished.

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

LOL.  Look at the impeachment disaster and ask yourself.  Dems opened Pandora's box with that one and there's no going back for them.  I'm enjoying it.

 

So far it has been an unmitigated disaster for the dems. It is to the point where they just had a debate and there was not even a story about it here. Even if they could impeach and remove the president the dems wouldn't know what to do at that point. Suddenly they would need to have a message for the people. As I just said nobody even listens to their debates anymore so aside from impeachment they have no accomplishments or ideas of any kind.

 

Let them take the vote every dem voting to impeach in a red state is one step closer to clawing the speaker's gavel right out of Pelosi's hand.

 

This is turning into the biggest political blunder of all time.