Impeachment notes & tidbits

[wickedsolo]

I know. I wanted to give my opinion of RCP. That site has been around for a long time. It's probably the best political news, opinion and polling aggregation site on the net.

I dont disagree. Probably one of the more impartial sites out there...

[boller4president]

I dont disagree. Probably one of the more impartial sites out there...

Also despite their budget they do great investigative work. They are one of the few willing to look into Ford's claims and used her building records to prove she lied about her relationship with the so-called person she told her personal story to.

[blueridgemtnman]

I know. I wanted to give my opinion of RCP. That site has been around for a long time. It's probably the best political news, opinion and polling aggregation site on the net.

[DitkasSausage]

Swallwell: A meeting at the White House. If someone really needs a meeting at the White House to show their legitimacy to their people, that leveraging that meeting and asking for an investigation would be wrong.

Sondland: To be candid, Congressman, every meeting at the White House has conditions placed on it. I have never worked on a meeting at the White House that doesn’t have a host of conditions placed on it.



So, what Schiff, the MSM, and the entire DNC has done is conflate THIS quid pro quo w/the "investigate Joe or you're not getting the aid" fantasy accusation. They're clearly not the same thing. During the hearings, I remember calling this out saying that the press is going to conflate the two on purpose. They have. Their viewers believe it. It's sad.




Correct.

Ukraine was supposed to investigate the Bidens in order to get the money. That is the lie, right? That is what this whole pointless charade is about, right? Ukraine got their money and they didn't open up an investigation to get it. End of story.

Obama withheld aid to Egypt. Trump withheld aid to Pakistan. This isn't anything new, but..."orange man bad."

Funny enough, I disagree with you because you actually don't go far ENOUGH into how the accusation is a bold faced lie itself. Obama, while Ukraine was in a hot-conflict with Russia, was holding back military aid, and instead, diverting the money to blankets and food for those displaced by the war going on. We are currently being told that this is a crime by the GAO so I wonder how they missed it. In comes Trump, who, according to Democrats, is in bed with Russia: His first change to the Ukrainian assistance is that he immediately starts providing them weapons systems to fight back against Russia... which doesn't seem like a very "pro-Russia" move. THEN, the Democrats argue that Trump was asking them to do this because Biden was a political rival, which is also a lie. For nearly a YEAR prior to Biden announcing he was running, Trump associates were in Ukraine trying to get to the bottom of the corruption issues, and the one thing that kept popping up was Burisma. They actually weren't even there to investigate Biden at all, but Burisma and Hunter Biden's involvement were so over-the-top corrupt that it kept popping up. 6-months prior to Biden announcing himself running, Ukrainian officials started assisting the investigation, and uncovered a lot of evidence regarding Ukrainian interference into the election in FAVOR of Hilary Clinton. At this point, Rudy Guiliani is getting a meeting set up with Shokin to find out what the hell happened. 1-3 days prior to Biden announcing (which his timing was odd because even his staff was surprised that he announced so early in the process btw) was when Shokin met with Guiliani and told him the entire story about Burisma, the Steele Dossier, and the DNC's pressure to open up the Manafort case. Then just as Biden was announcing his campaign was when the video of him saying publicly that he threatened to remove foreign aid unless they fired Shokin, who had an open investigation into his son's company Burisma. So most of this "Quid Pro Quo" was taking place BEFORE Biden was even a Political Rival. As for Yovanovitch... Trump was trying to fire this lady for nearly two years prior to Zelensky even being elected... so what would that have to do with any of this... he was openly trying to fire her because she was corrupt, and had too deep of ties to the corruption that was already taking place in Ukraine.

So... Trump initially didn't want to even have the call with Zelensky... that was documented. He stated that his reason for not wanting to talk to them was that they were too corrupt and too involved in the 2016 election interference... that is documented. He was convinced to take the call because of the year's prior investigation leading that stated that Zelensky is a guy looking to clean house and drain their swamp... that is documented. He calls the guy, says, "Hey... you need to look into all of this stuff that we know is going on, and by the way, we know you still have a lot of those corrupt guys in your administration... clean house soon because we want to work with you, but can't because we are VERY aware of the corruption that surrounds you". This is 100% the RIGHT call to make to this country. Trump, based on Obama's precedent, had the absolute right to delay aid until the Zelensky made a commitment to clean house. Based on our treaty with Ukraine... Trump HAD to do this. Biden wasn't even a political rival when 95% of this was going on... and still isn't since he isn't the nominee yet, and is currently a private citizen.

That's it... the ENTIRE case put forth by the democrats isn't just a "legal miscalculation"... it is EASILY provable as false. None of it even makes sense when you look at actual timelines. They are intentionally lying with no care of the legal precendent because they don't care and they just want to make a newsworthy spectacle of themselves. This impeachment has FAR more to do with elevating Schiff than it has to do with Trump... and that should be a crime.

[bacchys]

Did Schiff mention that a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Burisma was fired because Biden held back foreign aid? THAT Quid Pro Quo?

Because Biden did that.

In case you missed it:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...rosecutor.html

ENJOY!

Biden didn't do that. Shokin wasn't investigating Burisma. Part of the reason the U.S., the EU, the IMF, and many, many others wanted him out of office is he wasn't investigating Burisma and its founder Mykola Zlochevsky.

The only "evidence" supporting the claim Shokin was investigating Burisma is an affadavit by Shokin filed on behalf of Russian mob associate Dmitro Firtash in his efforts to fight extradition to the U.S. on corruption and bribery charges in the Southern District of Illinois. Even that affadavit undercuts its internal claim that Shokin was actually investigating: it lists no investigative act taken by anyone. His account is disputed by his deputy at the time, Kasko and by his successor, Lutsenko.

There are still a lot of articles online from 2014, 2015, and 2016 when all this was going on which show the Giuliani-Firtash scam that Shokin was fired to stop an investigation into Hunter Biden is false.

[ravenmaniac4life]

Funny enough, I disagree with you because you actually don't go far ENOUGH into how the accusation is a bold faced lie itself. Obama, while Ukraine was in a hot-conflict with Russia, was holding back military aid, and instead, diverting the money to blankets and food for those displaced by the war going on. We are currently being told that this is a crime by the GAO so I wonder how they missed it. In comes Trump, who, according to Democrats, is in bed with Russia: His first change to the Ukrainian assistance is that he immediately starts providing them weapons systems to fight back against Russia... which doesn't seem like a very "pro-Russia" move. THEN, the Democrats argue that Trump was asking them to do this because Biden was a political rival, which is also a lie. For nearly a YEAR prior to Biden announcing he was running, Trump associates were in Ukraine trying to get to the bottom of the corruption issues, and the one thing that kept popping up was Burisma. They actually weren't even there to investigate Biden at all, but Burisma and Hunter Biden's involvement were so over-the-top corrupt that it kept popping up. 6-months prior to Biden announcing himself running, Ukrainian officials started assisting the investigation, and uncovered a lot of evidence regarding Ukrainian interference into the election in FAVOR of Hilary Clinton. At this point, Rudy Guiliani is getting a meeting set up with Shokin to find out what the hell happened. 1-3 days prior to Biden announcing (which his timing was odd because even his staff was surprised that he announced so early in the process btw) was when Shokin met with Guiliani and told him the entire story about Burisma, the Steele Dossier, and the DNC's pressure to open up the Manafort case. Then just as Biden was announcing his campaign was when the video of him saying publicly that he threatened to remove foreign aid unless they fired Shokin, who had an open investigation into his son's company Burisma. So most of this "Quid Pro Quo" was taking place BEFORE Biden was even a Political Rival. As for Yovanovitch... Trump was trying to fire this lady for nearly two years prior to Zelensky even being elected... so what would that have to do with any of this... he was openly trying to fire her because she was corrupt, and had too deep of ties to the corruption that was already taking place in Ukraine.

So... Trump initially didn't want to even have the call with Zelensky... that was documented. He stated that his reason for not wanting to talk to them was that they were too corrupt and too involved in the 2016 election interference... that is documented. He was convinced to take the call because of the year's prior investigation leading that stated that Zelensky is a guy looking to clean house and drain their swamp... that is documented. He calls the guy, says, "Hey... you need to look into all of this stuff that we know is going on, and by the way, we know you still have a lot of those corrupt guys in your administration... clean house soon because we want to work with you, but can't because we are VERY aware of the corruption that surrounds you". This is 100% the RIGHT call to make to this country. Trump, based on Obama's precedent, had the absolute right to delay aid until the Zelensky made a commitment to clean house. Based on our treaty with Ukraine... Trump HAD to do this. Biden wasn't even a political rival when 95% of this was going on... and still isn't since he isn't the nominee yet, and is currently a private citizen.

That's it... the ENTIRE case put forth by the democrats isn't just a "legal miscalculation"... it is EASILY provable as false. None of it even makes sense when you look at actual timelines. They are intentionally lying with no care of the legal precendent because they don't care and they just want to make a newsworthy spectacle of themselves. This impeachment has FAR more to do with elevating Schiff than it has to do with Trump... and that should be a crime.

What’s funny about the Sondland comment about the meeting @ the WH having preconditions...he said that was simply his assumption.

What a colossal waste of time.

[bacchys]

I see a lot of folks here spend all their time reading rightwing nutjob sites.

Obama didn't "divert" aid to blankets and MRE's or whatever else the idiot bleating point is. He did rule out lethal aid. One can agree or disagree with the policy decision (I disagreed with it), but it was a deliberate policy choice arrived at by normal processes.

Ukraine didn't get all of the aid, and if Congress hadn't acted to extend the authority on the aid they would have gotten even less of it. Trump's delay meant DOD couldn't release the aid fast enough to get it all out, and Congress passed another bill authorizing the aid into the new fiscal year. Even so, millions still haven't been paid to Ukraine from that appropriation.

The circumstantial evidence shows the aid was tied to the investigations. Sondland didn't say it was his "assumption." He said it was his understanding. The aid was released (late) without anything changing, moreover, except Trump's withholding of the aid had become a public scandal. If this was on the up-and-up with legitimate concerns the Trump Administration wouldn't have gone to such pains to hide it and they wouldn't have lied about it repeatedly. They continue to lie about it. To date not a single reason has been given to justify it, and they certainly never informed Congress as required by the Impoundment Act.

[NCRAVEN]

I see a lot of folks here spend all their time reading rightwing nutjob sites.

Obama didn't "divert" aid to blankets and MRE's or whatever else the idiot bleating point is. He did rule out lethal aid. One can agree or disagree with the policy decision (I disagreed with it), but it was a deliberate policy choice arrived at by normal processes.

Ukraine didn't get all of the aid, and if Congress hadn't acted to extend the authority on the aid they would have gotten even less of it. Trump's delay meant DOD couldn't release the aid fast enough to get it all out, and Congress passed another bill authorizing the aid into the new fiscal year. Even so, millions still haven't been paid to Ukraine from that appropriation.

The circumstantial evidence shows the aid was tied to the investigations. Sondland didn't say it was his "assumption." He said it was his understanding. The aid was released (late) without anything changing, moreover, except Trump's withholding of the aid had become a public scandal. If this was on the up-and-up with legitimate concerns the Trump Administration wouldn't have gone to such pains to hide it and they wouldn't have lied about it repeatedly. They continue to lie about it. To date not a single reason has been given to justify it, and they certainly never informed Congress as required by the Impoundment Act.

How exactly does one come to an understanding of something they were never told if they didn’t make some assumptions?

[ravenmaniac4life]

Sondland didn't say it was his "assumption." He said it was his understanding.

“No one on this planet told you POTUS was tying aid/political investigations?”

Sondland: “Yes”

“So you have no evidence”

Sondland: “Other than my presumption”

[FadeToBlack]

The biggest political scandal in U.S. history was when the FBI used an unverified dossier bought by the DNC in a FISA application to surveil and investigate their political rivals, in order to annul an election. We're talking about the FBI violating the 4th Amendment rights of likely thousands of people who were 2 degrees of separation from Carter Page (using the FISA two-hop rule).

The people who buried and distracted us from this scandal were front and center for "Russian collusion" and now impeachment. Impeachment is the media's newest effort to obfuscate this scandal. "Russian collusion" was previously the red herring they used to distract us from Spygate, but even Robert Mueller poured cold water on that, so they needed to transition quickly to a new "bombshell" to keep us from noticing what happened.

To this day, we still have no concrete evidence the Russians hacked the DNC email server. All the "evidence" the Russians hacked the DNC came from a DNC contractor named CrowdStrike, who provided the government server images and a forensic report that they redacted FROM the government. There was never an independent forensic analysis conducted by the government because they never gained custody of the physical DNC email servers. In fact there's more evidence of a leak than a hack, as VIPS, Bill Binney and Forensicator have demonstrated.

Russia was the US intelligence community's attempt to distract the public from their own election meddling by using the trusty "red scare" propaganda that worked during the Cold War. The "DNC hack" is this generation's "weapons of mass destruction" and is the latest example of the US intelligence apparatus lying (see: Dancing Israelis, Gulf of Tonkin incident, JFK's assassination and so many other examples). We're witnessing the collapse of the American empire before our eyes because our elections are now actively under assault by unelected intelligence operatives.

[CarrollCoRaven]

The biggest political scandal in U.S. history was when the FBI used an unverified dossier bought by the DNC in a FISA application to surveil and investigate their political rivals, in order to annul an election. We're talking about the FBI violating the 4th Amendment rights of likely thousands of people who were 2 degrees of separation from Carter Page (using the FISA two-hop rule).

The people who buried and distracted us from this scandal were front and center for "Russian collusion" and now impeachment. Impeachment is the media's newest effort to obfuscate this scandal. "Russian collusion" was previously the red herring they used to distract us from Spygate, but even Robert Mueller poured cold water on that, so they needed to transition quickly to a new "bombshell" to keep us from noticing what happened.

To this day, we still have no concrete evidence the Russians hacked the DNC email server. All the "evidence" the Russians hacked the DNC came from a DNC contractor named CrowdStrike, who provided the government server images and a forensic report that they redacted FROM the government. There was never an independent forensic analysis conducted by the government because they never gained custody of the physical DNC email servers. In fact there's more evidence of a leak than a hack, as VIPS, Bill Binney and Forensicator have demonstrated.

Russia was the US intelligence community's attempt to distract the public from their own election meddling by using the trusty "red scare" propaganda that worked during the Cold War. The "DNC hack" is this generation's "weapons of mass destruction" and is the latest example of the US intelligence apparatus lying (see: Dancing Israelis, Gulf of Tonkin incident, JFK's assassination and so many other examples). We're witnessing the collapse of the American empire before our eyes because our elections are now actively under assault by unelected intelligence operatives.

[Ortizer]

Honestly, who cares? Abuse of power? Obstruction of congress? Give me a break. They'd be better off saying "we don't thing we can beat you in November and we don't like you, so we're using our power to get rid of you"

I'd at least respect the honesty.

Even if he's removed, do you think he'd withdraw from November?

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk