Subpoena the Whistleblower and Hunter Biden

jem said:
you lefties typically have trouble distinguishing what your desire to be true with facts.

Trump very much has claimed that this was about an investigation into corruption.
That is a valid defense to the claim by democrats he broke ethical rules or the law because he was doing what he did for personal gain.

Whether Trump assertion (defense) need to be true or if it is true would be determined by the trier of fact... for the later and the trier of fact or the judge for the former...

the media's slant does not matter
your opinion does not matter
nor does mine.

you might not believe him
I might not believe him

But - the dems charged him with doing something
that is not fraud or a crime or really anything.
they are charging him with "abuse of power"
(without a crime alleged is even be impeachable... )

If Trump proffers legitimate reasons...
There are many constitutional reasons why we would not want to question his proffered reason. If you are going to go after him for abuse of power shouldn't a crime have to be delineated.

At the moment based on the lack of evidence of any crime

I would say the democrats case is pretty much a sham
Its... almost a thought crime based because democrats don't like the way Trump thinks.




https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...that-corruption-concerns-held-up-ukraine-aid/


“We have an obligation to investigate corruption. And that’s what it was.”

— President Trump, in an interview on “Hannity” on Fox News, Oct. 21, 2019

“There were two reasons that we held up the aid. We talked about this at some length. The first one was the rampant corruption in Ukraine. Ukraine — by the way, Chris, it’s so bad in Ukraine that in 2014, Congress passed a law making it, making us, requiring us, to make sure that corruption was moving in the right direction. So, corruption is a big deal, everyone knows it. The president was also concerned about whether or not other nations, specifically European nations, were helping with foreign aid to the Ukraine as well.”


— White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, in an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” Oct. 20, 2019

Trump and Mulvaney say they held up $250 million in security assistance for Ukraine this year because of concerns about corruption.




now the post goes on to try and claim those defenses are disingenuous...but that determination is for the trier of fact.

not you.
not the media
More...
Unfortunately you obviously missed keys parts of the House case. Your points were addressed specifically, directly, and convincingly. The House proved that the President's demands could not have had anything whatsoever to do with corruption in Ukraine. The House proved exactly the opposite in fact, i.e., that the President via Rudy was requiring the President of Ukraine to act in a corrupt manner to receive the military assistance the Congress had approved. Fortunately the assistance was released before the Ukraine's President was forces to accede to the President's corrupt demand.

Although the issues you raise were well covered by the house managers earlier on Thursday, I recommend to you specifically Zoe Lofgren's presentation starting roughly around 6:45 pm est on Thursday, and also Jason Crow's presentation immediately thereafter. I'm sure the entire proceeding will be archived for you on either C-Span or YouTube.
 
Last edited:
I watched Garcia lay down the evidence in a clear matter citing facts that I still do not see have been disproven.

Ukraine was not a concern of Trump until the exact month in 2019 when Biden started leading in the polls.

Many officials in Ukraine stated that Burisma was not under investigation at all by the prosecutor that was removed at the time U.S. demanded he be removed.

U.S. and many in Europe were calling for Ukrainian prosecutor to be removed.

Ukraine investigated Burisma after and said Hunter was not involved in any wrong doing.

Hunter got his job on the board through the same cronyism that got Ivanka and Jared their jobs they are not qualified for but Burisma is a foreign company overseas, not the federal government. de Vos was made Secy of Education after giving a huge donation to the Trump campaign. Happens all the time.
 
TreeFrogTrader said:
Mr. Trump had a perfect phone call with the President of the Ukraine.
More...
Right! And not only that! The only people out to get D. John Trump and nullify the 2016 election are "never Trumpers" and "Douche Bags" or "Sleeze Bags" (Not sure which kind of bag is worse, "Douche" or "Sleeze.")
 
piezoe said:
Right! And not only that! The only people out to get D. John Trump and nullify the 2016 election are "never Trumpers" and "Douche Bags" or "Sleeze Bags" (Not sure which kind of bag is worse, "Douche" or "Sleeze.")
More...


You and your ilk need to start working on your next scam. This one is not going to work to remove Trump anymore than your previous ones.

You would not be doing this stupid stuff if you had any good candidates. But you don't.
 
piezoe said:
Your points were addressed specifically, directly, and convincingly. The House proved that the President's demands could not have had anything whatsoever to do with corruption in Ukraine.
More...

The Housed "proved" nothing, they wove a tale of hearsay, opinion and wishes.
Saying it over and over and over, for 24 hours, doesn't make it so.

Most Dems were ready to vote for impeachment before the Ukraine call was even made.
 
DTB2 said:
The Housed "proved" nothing, they wove a tale of hearsay, opinion and wishes.
Saying it over and over and over, for 24 hours, doesn't make it so.

Most Dems were ready to vote for impeachment before the Ukraine call was even made.
More...

Yeh sure. "Proved." We can see where this is headed. The prosecutors proved the case but the jury acquitted the defendant. Whoakay fine.

Another "the operation was a success if you can overlook the fact that the patient died" scenario.

Idiots.
 
Ronald Reagan's speech writer Peggy Noonan says Senate must call witnesses. She also says if Republicans want to call Biden then Dems should call in Trump and Bolton and Mulvany.


Ronald Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan agrees the Senate must call witnesses

noonan_cbs.jpg


In a Thursday evening column, far-right commentator Peggy Noonan agreed that there should be witnesses called in the impeachment trial.



“I believe the president is guilty of shaking down the government of Ukraine for personal political gain, that he has rightly been embarrassed for this, and that the fit final punishment with an election coming was censure, not impeachment,” wrote Noonan. “But we are where we are, and the proceedings can be enriched if both parties unclench and let this thing broaden out.”

The tit-for-tat argument is that both sides should be entitled to whatever witnesses they want. For example, Democrats want to call John Bolton, who called the Ukraine scheme a “drug deal.” It’s that kind of first-hand account of the bribery between Trump and Ukraine that the House managers want to ask questions about.

Republicans, by contrast, want to bring in former Vice President Joe Biden, who was the enforcer of the U.S. policy to get rid of a corrupt actor in Ukraine that the global community agreed was making things worse in the country.

It isn’t exactly a fair, tit-for-tat, as Biden is part of a conspiracy theory that Trump and his attorney Rudy Giuliani has drummed up. If Republicans want to call Biden, a true exchange would be that Trump would also testify.

She also argued that Democrats and “History would want” to hear the testimony of Mick Mulvaney, who admitted on national television that Trump did bribe the Ukraine president, saying, “get over it.”
 
El OchoCinco said:
I watched Garcia lay down the evidence in a clear matter citing facts that I still do not see have been disproven.

Ukraine was not a concern of Trump until the exact month in 2019 when Biden started leading in the polls.

Many officials in Ukraine stated that Burisma was not under investigation at all by the prosecutor that was removed at the time U.S. demanded he be removed.

U.S. and many in Europe were calling for Ukrainian prosecutor to be removed.

Ukraine investigated Burisma after and said Hunter was not involved in any wrong doing.

Hunter got his job on the board through the same cronyism that got Ivanka and Jared their jobs they are not qualified for but Burisma is a foreign company overseas, not the federal government. de Vos was made Secy of Education after giving a huge donation to the Trump campaign. Happens all the time.
More...

Here’s a good explainer the international pressure to remove Shorkin. It’s important to note the IMF was about to pull its funding over Shorkin because his office was basically pillaging their loans. His subordinates were being arrested for bribes and he was not pursuing prosecutions from the previous pro Russian administration.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...orced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/3785620002/

As to the Burisma investigation it was related to some ecological stuff between 2010 and 2012, two years before Biden was recruited for the board. It’s important to note other Americans were brought on the board to straighten out their issues as well.

This whole thing with Hunter Biden and alleging Joe Biden had Shorkin removed to protect his son is a total sham. It doesn’t even make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top