WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings (Vindman/Williams)

It was... the State Department coordinated with Giuliani.

Vindman just stated, "the president has the right to do."

In other words, Vindman justified the president's prerogagtive to coordinate both policy and investigation, if parallel, but not necessary to be the same.

 

So Vindman in his previous testimony said he does not know who is the whistleblower but cannot name who he discussed the call with because it would expose the whistleblower.

Both cannot be true so which is the lie?

 

This is a fact finding exercise. The allegations evolved as the facts came in and it is arguably inappropriate to ask an individual witness, one who does not have access to all of the information, to make a legal conclusion.

 

But it clearly proves that he thinks he is above the chain of command

 

No, he said revealing the names of those to whom he spoke could reveal the identity of the whistleblower.

 

The articles would have to include an analysis No, I am commenting on the right hearing.

 

Probable cause of an illegality and we now know that during Yavonivich's testimony she was given talking points on it the Obama administration was so concerned about it.

 

Vindman was squared in. The Biden tape questions confirmed his partisanship.

 

Can be in this case considering the board member, their qualifications and their family tie to the second highest office in the country and the concern shown by the previous administration and the fact it was to one of the most corrupt companies in one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Why did you leave out those details?

 

What it is, is the democrats continuing to move the goal post. It's absolutely embarrassing and the longer this goes on, the more embarrassing it becomes.

What the democrats might just have accomplished is that the republicans might gain control of all branches of government.

 

How would he know that if he doesn't know who is the whistleblower and testified he never spoke with the whistleblower.

 

As Ratcliff is noting that in all the transcripts released, the entire stack of them only one time is bribery even uttered and it has to do with Biden not Trump.

 

nitpicking here but its pretty common to use the word bribery when describing someone committing bribery.

and frankly I agree with the side comments made about "favor" vs demand as well. Its quite different in the military.

 

1789

 

Because all of those details were known to the Trump administration and the public - for years - and yet none of those facts amounted to a probable cause, especially in light of the fact that all of the allegations of wrongdoing were found lacking and without substance.

 

Not for long.

 

No, they didn't move anything... Trump set the goalpost as QPQ.... The D's have decided that they don't need to abide by that... they renamed the goalpost.

Either works for me, but extortion sounds more accurate...

Your second statement is speculation and not backed up by polling...

 

Cool beans. Did Ratcliffe ask either witness for their opinion on bribery?

 

Yes they do and with the ending of the Mueller investigation which we found did not look into that corruption or Russian influence the Trump administration did and should continue to do so through the DOJ.

 

He did not testify that he "never spoke with the whistleblower."

 

Did he name anyone else?

 

Valid point... Vindman is toast if this goes to the Senate.

 

Swallwells analogy was beyond moronic.

 

While holding up hundreds of millions of military aid as collateral to ensure that investigation into trump's domestic political opponents take place.

Why didn't Trump ask the Ukrainian President to investigate known instances of wrongdoing by Trump associates? Parnas? Giuliani? Fruman? Wrongdoing that took place much more recently in Ukraine?

 

Correct answer to that is never...