WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings

I had a link, but can't find it..

Fingers Crossed that an investigation happens.

 

Found my link

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/0...aged-hunter-biden-to-get-state-dept-meetings/

 

Since 1998 there's been a Treaty Between the US and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. That's what puts it into the province of the President.

https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/106th-congress/16/document-text

Regarding Biden, he's everything the Dems are trying to accuse Trump of, except Biden is actually guilty of it.

 

Situation on the ground changed. Remember, the final report blaming the Russians for downing the Malaysian commercial jet didn't come out until after Obama left office, notching up the case against Putin. I think Obama was still trying to get back to the "reset button," but the Putin crimes became just too much. Also...I believe that the GOP platform was AGAINST giving lethal weapons to Ukraine, and pro-Russian Manafort was rumored to have slipped it into the platform. Congress appropriated "lethal weapons." As for the Trump's support, today showed that it came with "a price." Presidential back channels are acceptable, but not those that run against your own stated policy. Who did Giuliani work for? The State Department or the President, as his personal lawyer? Trump is burning both ends of the candle.

 

And yet it was perfectly OK for Obama/Biden to withhold aide from Ukraine over a prosecutor? Funny how its legal for one, and not the other.....

 

Well then, it probably would have been a good idea to say that was the "mission" he considered "accomplished"...

I'm not a Democrat, but on here , I guess I qualify as the other 2... funny, never thought I was any of those things..

Much like Republicans used to believe in Republican stuff..

 

The GOP defense by Jordan contending Trump was combating corruption does not hold a drop of water.Trump never mentioned the word corruption one time during the entire part of the call we have been given access to.He did however say the word BIDEN?????

 

Who are you responding to? You quoted no one and went off on a rant.

Did you mean to respond to someone? Happy to assist you to clear up any confusion you have.

 

Actually, no aid was ever withheld. Biden threatened to withhold it, if they did not fire the pro-Russian Prosecutor, consistent with the World Bank, the IMF and EU policy as well. It took them six hours (according g to Biden) to decide. The Prosecutor was relieved of his duties and the Ukrainian Parliament voted to fire him.

 

Kent made the case today that Hunter Biden should be investigated.

 

Trump ran on a GOP platform that opposed lethal aid to Ukraine. Check it out...Manafort was suspected of changing the amendment Cruz wanted for tougher military assistance. It was Congress that appropriated lethal weapons.

 

The House decides what is, or isn't, a "crime".

This isn't an episode of Law & Order.

Nor is it a legal proceeding.

It is an impeachment.

Learn the difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment#United_States

 

Giuliani works for the president who determines and sets foreign policy. The State Dept. does not set foreign policy despite how much they think they do.

 

Well one is US federal money, and the other was IMF loan guarantees, so there is that.

 

Nor did he ever mention aid.

 

Ambassador Taylor and Kent pointed out that military aid to Ukraine has been bipartisan- the recent addition of javelins, represented less than one fourth of the recent package, and was hardly a Trump initiative- it was supported broadly by democrats in congress. The fact is that at the GOP convention, Trump gutted the GOP's anti-russian plank on Ukraine. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html). The language was changed from calling on the U.S. to provide Ukraine "lethal defensive weapons" to the more benign phrase "appropriate assistance."


Perhaps Congressman Jordan has some selective amnesia on that point.


The fact is that the prior administration spent several hundred million dollars of military aid on more than blankets. Among hundreds of armored vehicles, counter battery radar, UAVs and other high tech equipment, 300 US paratroopers (Operation Fearless Guardian in 2015) were based in Ukraine to transform the newly reforming Ukraine army into a far more lethal force utilizing combined arms. As Fiona Hill explained in her testimony, not all NSC advisors were of Taylor's view that lethal aid should be sent immediately. The argument that prevailed in 2015 was that what Ukraine needed most at the time was the sort of training, equipment, and surveillance/ command and control needed to restore Ukraine's military's structure and combat effectiveness. Lethal aid was needed but highest priority were items like ammunition for arms not manufactured by the US, which the other ex-Soviet sphere countries provided Ukraine for free. Lastly, the ironic thing is that the new lethal aid- the javelin missiles are nowhere near where they can be used against Russian tanks. By congressional requirement, they are required to be kept in the far western region of Ukraine. So what good are they? They are there as a deterrent to Russia. Russians know that within hours of an armored assault they could be redeployed and they would lose countless advanced T-90 tanks in the same way the Israelis did in the Yom Kippur war. The Russians would be made a laughing stock. Arguably, in practical terms of killing more Russian combatants, the increased lethality of the Ukraine forces is ironically in the same "non lethal" aid- More of the same kind of increases in combat effectiveness by incorporating modern combat surveillance, and command & control (communications ) capabilities.

So the entire narrative of blankets and no one else but the US sending aid is another mindless fiction from the right.

 

I bet that post was drummed out of the comments. Say, Trump did not withhold the aid.

 

And if they hadn't fired him? The aid would have been withheld by Obama's order. Doesn't matter what the World Bank, the IMF, and EU policy is. What matters is US law. And if it was illegal per our law to with hold the money for one, then it should be illegal for the other.

But hey, want another example?

LINK: US withholds part of major aid package for Egypt

I can give more if you wish? For multiple Presidents even. History is replete with various Presidents withholding money.

 

On a scale of 1-10, how butt hurt are you going to be when Trump isn't removed from office?

No need to deflect- friendly question.

Are you going to be really sad? Or just slightly sad?

 

No, I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm saying that the lack of anything official in writing suggests that this defense was cooked up after the fact rather than being a legitimate pretense.

 

Yeah, but.
Question:
When Biden acted in Ukraine did he act in accord with official US policy.
Answer:
Yes.

Another one bites the dust.

 

Is this another "Hillary by a landslide" post? Yea lady, we're getting kinda sick of these.

 

You seem to defend only Democrats and condemn Republicans...excuse the rest of the forum for not believing your nonsense.

You're a liberal Democrat. You might be ashamed to be one (no one would blame you) but you are what you are!

Live your best life!

 

please show the congressial resolution that allowed Biden to leverage congressially approved loan guarantees

 

Sen. Graham just said any Senate trial would not allow hearsay evidence, just like any other court in America. Take away that, and there's nothing left.