WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings

From Vindman's testimony, it was held up by the Office of Budget Management (Mulvaney)
From Sondland's testimony, to get an investigation of the Biden's.​

 

Amazing how many times he mentions "Biden" in that statement. You got him now!

 

Quote that statement

 

Would you like to argue that Burisma Oil is not affiliated in any way with the Bidens?

 

You said somebody said something.
Quote it

 

It's in the WaPo link I posted earlier. You know. The one you quoted half of.

 

Kent himself said there was an investigation into Burisma corruption in 2014. For some reason it was halted, after Hunter got hired. Kent made the case himself for a full investigation into Biden's son getting a job, and the corrupt Burisma! There is nothing here, after the republicans got finished with those two stooges, they had completely defeated looks on their faces. No more smiling like they were at the beginning. Castro comes out with a pathetic, desperate plea for them to say how wrong it was for the president to do this! The house will not impeach President Trump. The democrats again have lost, and they need to get over it. I wonder if that is possible, as we go into another great, successful four years with President Trump who will ALWAYS fiercely defend and protect America. Get over it, you lost......AGAIN.

 

What is perhaps most interesting about the Shokin affidavit, though, is that it was made, as the former prosecutor says on the first page, “at the request of lawyers acting for Dmitry Firtash (‘DF’), for use in legal proceedings in Austria.”

you may wanna google who Dmitry Firtash is lol

 

That seems to be one of the available paths here... argue that some of the people talking to Ukraine didn't link the company Burisma (Gas, not Oil) to Hunter Biden, and by extension, his father... Hokay...

Interesting strategy... Clearly Sondland knew by September what the 2 specific investigations were... Remembering this classic exchange with Volker



P.S. For those who are having trouble following along (and you know who you are), the Gordon Sondland referenced above is the same Gordon Sondland who is testifying next week... There's only 1, in case you were going to try going for mistaken identity...

 

Ah. You like mustard on your nothingburger.

 

Trump IS a Russian asset...knowingly or unknowingly. I suspect the former. And, no, no-one was advocating going to war with Turkey. They a=were advocating a tougher stance for negotiations, rather than giving Erdogan the green light and betraying the Kurds.

 

No argument there. I had no problem with him stonewalling during the inquiry but we're past that. As I've mentioned before I've stayed away from most of the conversation especially when the closed door leaked stuff was going on since I prefer more complete data to make an assessment so i'm a bit out of the loop on some stuff.

In the end my opinion doesn't matter much, its up to my house rep and senators, that's their job and I can only stress that for an Impeachment vote I want them to make a decision based on what's right and wrong, not based on party or polling support.

 

I pointed out the motive as to why Zalensky is doing what he's doing. I literally posted what Taylor said in his testimony ? How is that attacking a "career CIA officer" ?

Threatening our national security? What are you on about.

Their not taking"greater care", their hiding it. They dont want it to go out because they know the full call is damning. Do you really think Trump is would let himself to be impeached if he knew it would clear him, or even better, would prove the libs are falsely attacking him ?

 

Im all for not quashing an investigation. But first, show me the crime, and then we can investigate who did it. Just show me the crime Paul. and I'll stand behind you in that line

 

Here's a substantive contribution:

Then impeachment hearing is falling apart. The public hearing on Wednesday was a fiasco. The next hearing will be the last one and Pelosi will pull the plug. Trump will go on being re-elected.

It is indicative that today Democrats are no longer talking about impeaching President Trump but instead are talking about expediting Canada Mexico trade deal. Obviously, Democrats need something to run on. Right?

 

You may be correct that the Military aid wasn't the only factor but to be fair is it safe to say it was probably the largest potential leverage point?

To the missile aspect idk it would depend on how the package was authorized. Most authorized aid does have certain clauses that allow things like that but generally the branch that authorized it has to notified. Thats all from the research I've read and lots of it is dense material almost like reading a terms of service agreement lol

 

whoa.... whut? wanna show me the crime of President Trump?

 

What dogma ? Taylor testified that it happened. Thats part of more then one call record, so should be easy to verify.

Ask yourself a couple of simple questions:
1. Why not just release to the committee the actual call record ? Not public, but just to the committee.
2. Why is Trump blocking the State Department from releasing their notes from their employees to the committee ?

 

Mmm.

Let's try some basic logic:

Trump is a "russian asset" who has been harder on Russia than Obama so that makes Obama a....?

 

Seriously ?

Bribery/Extortion........

 

Special attention should be paid to the problem of interference in the political processes of the United States especially with the alleged involvement of some Ukrainian politicians. I want to declare that this is unacceptable. We intend to initiate and complete a transparent and unbiased investigation of all available facts and episodes, including those involving Burisma and the 2016 U.S. elections, which in turn will prevent the recurrence of this problem in the future.

 

Here's more evidence supporting Trump's version of the phone call that the left will ignore...

“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him. I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance. Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.” --- Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...k-biden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister.564323/

 

to my knowledge this is the actual bill

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/3047/text?format=txt

it says that congress shall be notified in 180 from the passage of the bill (5/30/19)

"


(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the
heads of other appropriate United States departments and agencies,
shall submit to Congress a report reviewing United States security
assistance to the Government of Ukraine that includes each of the
following..."

 

Yes and that is true and from everything I have seen the purchase of the missiles was separate from the aid package. But, as I said, Trump does have the authority to unilaterally halt or prevent the sale of those missiles.

And as to whether aid was the biggest leverage point, I think that is probably accurate from a macro and wholistic point of view. That is to say, if everyone had perfect knowledge at the time, then yes it is the biggest piece of leverage. But remember, the lack of perfect knowledge actually appears to have existed on both sides. Ukraine did not know about the pause in the aid at the time of the call, but apparently Trump did not have the legal authority to place a hold on that money either.

 

"Ukraine did not know about the pause in the aid at the time of the call"

^^ Thats from the information we have now which is obviously subject to change and would be more damaging if it changes for trump imo