Quote:
Presidential conversations with a foreign leader are circulated among the members of the administration that are affected by them. No one saw it. They buried it. They buried the whistleblowers report. They are stonewalling the investigation. |
What mutual aid treaty do we have with the People's Republic of China?
Or is it, he didn't ask them for a favor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=719N5DJO1Bs |
Bill Taylor, top U.S. diplomat to Ukraine, wrote that he thought it’s “crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign” in newly disclosed text messages shared with lawmakers.
|
Quote:
|
By a 52-21 margin, Americans think asking Ukraine to investigate Biden is an abuse of power, per USAToday poll.
The gap among independents is huge: 45%-16%. It's even close among Republicans: 30%-40%. Doubling down like this is ... unbelievably risky. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The full conversation remain hidden. Until the obstruction stops and all the evidence is produced no one can be definite. |
Quote:
McGhan told him that. |
Quote:
Anyway, I'm just guessing that Trump would have some inclination about that. Certainly more than you. |
Quote:
It's funny, I read an article on this at lunch just today. Bill Taylor is the Chargé d’Affaires of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, and as you say, he said a quid pro quo was crazy. Here's what you so conveniently left out. Gordon Sondland is the US Ambassador to the EU, and when he heard what Bill Taylor said, he texted Taylor and told him this: "Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear: no quid pro quo's of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign." Now, I have never heard of either of these two men. I have no idea who they are, or who is more correct here. One guy feels there is a quid pro quo, the other says there wasn't. That tells me I have no idea what actually happened. It tells you, that Trump is guilty. This is what happens. Conflicting accounts, followed by partisan nuts like you immediately leaping to the conclusion that serves your personal agenda, and you ignore that which doesn't serve your agenda. Try showing a tiny speck of intellectual honesty once in awhile. You ignore everything that could offer a benign explanation, and everything that makes Trump look bad, you suck it up like a Hoover deluxe and question none of it. Destroyed. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fmr...d-door-session |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Rudy met with Zelensky's rep. What did Rudy tell Zelensky's representative? |
Quote:
Trump certainly wasn't immune from being investigated even though he was a candidate for office and his opponents asked for help in discrediting him and finding out if he had committed crimes and interfered with an election. |
Quote:
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/m...estigation.pdf WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), #^^^^& Durbin (D-Ill.), and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)issued the following joint statement in response to President Trump’s reference to a letter they sent to the General Prosecutor of Ukraine in 2018 raising their concerns that the Trump Administration could unduly pressure Ukraine into obstructing the Mueller investigation by withholding funding: “President Trump is desperate to divert attention from his abuse of power. We wrote to the Ukrainian prosecutor general in 2018 regarding press reports that, in order to curry favor with President Trump, Ukraine was considering not cooperating with Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in U.S. elections. “The Ukrainians were justifiably concerned that Trump would exact revenge by blocking security assistance if they did not act in his political favor. It turns out that was truer than any of us could have imagined. Yes, we were worried that the President of the United States would abuse his office and leverage U.S. security assistance for his own personal agenda back in 2018. It looks like we were right then and we are right now. The Senators’ letter was written in response to a New York Times report that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General was considering not cooperating with the Mueller Probe out of concern that President Trump would cut off aid as punishment. The Senators’ letter in no way calls for the conditioning of U.S. security assistance to Ukraine. |
Quote:
As far as who they are one is a career diplomat, the other gave a Million to the Trump campaign and was made ambassador to the EU. Bet you can figure out who's who. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
In a poll this week, 40% of Republicans said they believe that Trump never asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.
He just did it in front of a camera on the South Lawn of the White House. |
Quote:
No principles. Only politics. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
As members of a coequal branch of government what are they prohibited by the Constitution from doing that is in that letter? |
Quote:
What was said? What has happened in Ukraine lately and why? Putin's Puppet is making payments on his last election. |
Quote:
Sondland's nomination received bipartisan support during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on June 21, 2018.[12] Both Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) testified in support of Sondland.[13] Sen. Wyden suggested that Sondland’s "family history is both fascinating and instructive as to why he has the experience and understanding to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the E.U" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Sondland Oh. People who stay in public service either career, are more legitimate than those who succeed in the private sector, and then enter public service. That makes all kinds of sense. How many more of the 10,000 anti Trump articles you posted here, are missing suck vital facts? Can't help but wonder... |
Quote:
I'm not saying what the senators did was wrong. I'm saying what they did, is a lot like what Trump did. I'm saying it was either OK for all of them, or unethical for all of them. You're saying it was acceptable for one, but not the other. And gee whiz, the one you don't exonerate, is Trump. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com