Jump to content

U.S. Senate rejects Democratic bid for documents in Trump impeachment trial


webfact

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

So are you saying that the Obama administration did not initiate spying on an opposition campaign prior to an election and govt agencies did not leak it to the media? 

 

Please tell me if you think this did not occur and why. 

Please tell me what you are posting about.

 

You suggested in an earlier post that the Obama administration solicited foreign interference in an election.  Is the above in any way related?

  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, riclag said:

You have been told before Z had other channels to get his aid if threaten ! Try the US diplomats or the Foreign aid reps in the congress. It's a dem talking point your using . The aid was never denied anyway! Try something else that's more believable that deny's the key witness no, push .no pressure,no blackmail  

No, I haven't been told of "other channels to get his aid". 

 

The aid was approved by Congress, held up (illegally) by Trump, then released after he learned about the whistleblower report.  If you don't think that's suspicious you have serious Trump blinders in place.

Edited by heybruce
  • Confused 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

nobody is interested in your thoughts and opinions..... lah!

Facts only please.

Fact:  Ukraine is at war with its much more powerful neighbor.

Fact:  Russia has annexed part of Ukraine.

Fact:  Russia is supporting rebel forces that control part of Ukraine

Fact:  Ukraine needs US aid and international support to have any chance of surviving this war and negotiating some kind of reasonable end.

Fact:  Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and freaks out at anything that offends him.

Fact:  Confirming that Trump attempted to pressure Zelensky into publicly announcing investigations would have caused Trump to freak out.

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A post in violation of fair 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.

 

Some inflammatory posts have been removed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Please tell me what you are posting about.

 

You suggested in an earlier post that the Obama administration solicited foreign interference in an election.  Is the above in any way related?

It is a reply to this previous post to illustrate the double standards :

 

you think asking for foreign interference in US elections is not an impeachable offense.  I disagree

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

I guess that the DOJ Inspector General is delusional too

DOJ inspector general refutes Trump claim that Obama tapped his wires

Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael Horowitz said Wednesday that he found no evidence the FBI wiretapped anyone other than former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in connection with its Russia investigation.

Horowitz’s comments at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing refuted a series of tweets sent by President Trump in March 2017 in which he claimed that Obama had his “wires tapped” at Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/474134-doj-inspector-general-refutes-trump-claim-that-obama-tapped-his

Funny.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

Are you actually trying to deny the Obama administration and govt agencies did not have govt agencies spy on an opposition campaign? The reports and evidence is everywhere. You can't deny that in any way. Unless you are delusional 

Way off-topic, but:

The Obama administration and government agencies did not spy on opposition campaigns.  Some people who worked on opposition campaigns were investigated by the FBI for legitimate reasons unrelated to the campaign.

 

Are you stating that criminals and traitors should be left alone when they work for an election campaign.

7 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

It is a reply to this previous post to illustrate the double standards :

 

you think asking for foreign interference in US elections is not an impeachable offense.  I disagree

No, I'm the one consistently maintaining that asking for foreign interference in a US election is an impeachable offense.  I'm also challenging you to provide a credible source that the Obama administration did this, as you strongly suggested in post #515.

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

Facts 1,2,3 were done under the weak Obama administration. 

 

Facts 4,5:the only lethal defense aid was given under the Trump administration. 

 

It completely obliterates the points you've tried to make. 

Under "the weak Obama administration", the Ukrainian people overthrew a corrupt pro-Russian government.  That's what caused Russia to annex territory and start the war.

 

The Obama administration supplied significant non-lethal aid.  Under Trump lethal defense aid was provided, then withheld for the illegal purpose of initiating an investigation against a political opponent.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, riclag said:

Why would he find evidence! He is limited in scope as to who he can interview and investigate!

Anybody who touched the fisa's  is subjected to more scrutiny  by Durham not to mention they shouldn't feel exonerated . 

Funny that immediately after a post in which you championed the use of Executive Privilege to limit who can be interviewed in an investigation, you complain about limiting the scope of an investigation and who can be interviewed.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, riclag said:

Why would he find evidence! He is limited in scope as to who he can interview and investigate!

Anybody who touched the fisa's  is subjected to more scrutiny  by Durham not to mention they shouldn't feel exonerated . 

What nonsense are you on about? If there was anything that Horowitz had license to do, it was to thoroughly investigate FISA and the FBI. And he found plenty to find fault with. But he specifically found that political bias played no part in the FBI investigation. 

Review of FBI's surveillance of Trump campaign aide doesn't 'vindicate anybody,' inspector general says

The report identified more than a dozen errors in the FBI's applications to monitor Page, including omissions and inaccuracies. However, Horowitz concluded the FBI was legally justified in launching the counterintelligence investigation into Russia and the Trump campaign.

His report debunked claims by President Donald Trump and his allies that political bias played a role in the FBI’s decision to investigate members of his campaign for possible coordination with Russia.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/11/ig-report-horowitz-testify-his-fisa-findings-russia-probe/4387545002/

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...