timschochet
Footballguy
What you quoted? "I'm not going to discuss it!"? How exactly does that bolster your argument?And that was his reply.
What you quoted? "I'm not going to discuss it!"? How exactly does that bolster your argument?And that was his reply.
Well lets get him in front of the Senate. He claims no one reached out to him. He seems like he'd be a good one to call to establish this.Let's go down the list:
1. Obviously Sondland, but you know that.
2. Ambassador Taylor, based on his conversation with Danyliuk, which he testified to.
3. Vindman, based on emails he and Cooper received, indicating Ukraine's knowledge of the quid pro quo, which he testified to.
4. New York Times' reporter Andrew Kramer, based on his interview with deputy foreign minister Olena Zerkel, reported on December 1.
5. David Holmes, testifying that the Ukrainians indicated their knowledge.
There is also Fiona Hill, though that's more indirect in terms of what Ukraine was aware of. But you have to dismiss all of these people in order to accept what Yermak is saying now. Perhaps you're willing to do so, because it might exonerate the President. But I think it's stretching logic just a bit too far to do so.
I can't blame Ukraine. What choice did they have? What choice do they have now? It was brave enough of them simply to resist what Trump demanded of them at all.Zelinskyy campaigned on anti-corruption. This whole thing is corrupt, and not just on the U.S. side.
Reads like a guy who just American's infer meaning into every word someone said or wrote and doesn't need any more of that."I'm not going to tell you what I wrote."
"I already know what you wrote"
"All I can say is I followed the law, what I did was legal."
That all reads to you like a guy giving the whole story and not trying to stay out of a scandal?
How about we get Bolton, Giuliani, Pompeo, and Mulvaney? Surely they can get to the heart of the matter. Do you agree they should be compelled to testify?Well lets get him in front of the Senate. He claims no one reached out to him. He seems like he'd be a good one to call to establish this.
He said they don't give the full picture. Context.What you quoted? "I'm not going to discuss it!"? How exactly does that bolster your argument?
...and so he is avoiding telling the whole story?Reads like a guy who just American's infer meaning into every word someone said or wrote and doesn't need any more of that.
Sure, it's not my call though.How about we get Bolton, Giuliani, Pompeo, and Mulvaney? Surely they can get to the heart of the matter. Do you agree they should be compelled to testify?
Lets get him as a witness...and so he is avoiding telling the whole story?
You're not fooling me, President Trump!Sure, it's not my call though.
Okay. How do you propose to do that? And enforce perjury laws, etc?Lets get him as a witness
Does President Trump's refusal to allow those four to testify make you suspicious at all of his guilt?Sure, it's not my call though.
So the answer is just to discount it? The same way the report did with Zelensky?Okay. How do you propose to do that? And enforce perjury laws, etc?
Why would the president use the power of his office to have another country make such a statement that isn't for his personal benefit?By the way, since we had this discussion the President called a press conference at the White House to let Sergey Lavrov go on camera to the American people and deny that Russia had any involvement whatsoever. In a joint presser with Mike Pompeo.
NopeDoes President Trump's refusal to allow those four to testify make you suspicious at all of his guilt?
If that's the case, then I would suggest that when you wrote "you're mind's made up" earlier about me, perhaps your criticism is better off self-reflected.Nope
Yes, you discount quotes not under oath when compared to sworn testimony.So the answer is just to discount it? The same way the report did with Zelensky?
Not very normal behavior for a US President.Why would the president use the power of his office to have another country make such a statement that isn't for his personal benefit?By the way, since we had this discussion the President called a press conference at the White House to let Sergey Lavrov go on camera to the American people and deny that Russia had any involvement whatsoever. In a joint presser with Mike Pompeo.
I feel the same way about them I do the Dems not letting the R's get their full list of witnesses. They are both just doing the politics dance.If that's the case, then I would suggest that when you wrote "you're mind's made up" earlier about me, perhaps your criticism is better off self-reflected.
He just contradicted Sondlond who has already contraindicated himself. Sondlond is their money witness and he is horrible and now there is even more doubt.Yes, you discount quotes not under oath when compared to sworn testimony.
He sort of contradicts him but also his own messages which back up Sondland.He just contradicted Sondlond who has already contraindicated himself. Sondlond is their money witness and he is horrible and now there is even more doubt.
Why do you believe that isn't for his personal benefit?Why would the president use the power of his office to have another country make such a statement that isn't for his personal benefit?
If you can't make someone testify under oath, do you just take whatever they say to a reporter as true?So the answer is just to discount it? The same way the report did with Zelensky?
It may make people dig a little deeper on Sondland's statements. At least they will have the line of questioning ready for him now.If you can't make someone testify under oath, do you just take whatever they say to a reporter as true?
I don't. That's why I'm asking what other reason there could be.Why do you believe that isn't for his personal benefit?
Corey Lewandowski, ladies and gentlemen, a former campaign manager for President Trump, then candidate Trump.If you can't make someone testify under oath, do you just take whatever they say to a reporter as true?
During an interview on MSNBC in February, Lewandowski, President Trump’s former campaign manager, said, “I don’t ever remember the president ever asking me to get involved with Jeff Sessions or the Department of Justice in any way, shape or form ever.”
Which is not what Lewandowski told special counsel Robert S. Mueller III under oath in 2017. Lewandowski said then that Trump had instructed him twice to tell Sessions, then the attorney general, to curtail Mueller’s investigation of Trump, and Lewandowski failed to do so, perhaps saving Trump from an overt act of obstructing justice.
So how to square the two conflicting statements? During testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Lewandowski said something that sparked an audible reaction from onlookers in the hearing room: “I have no obligation to be honest with the media because they’re just as dishonest as anyone else.”
We have a President who paid hush money to an adult film star who he cheated on his wife with. This stuff with Hunter is irrelevant.Hunter Biden Baby Momma Stripper Asking How Much Hunter Was Paid In Ukraine
I'm sure the Biden's will do everything possible to keep this info from going public.
"The Bidens"? Hunter probably will. Why would Joe care if his screw-up son has to pay appropriate child support?Hunter Biden Baby Momma Stripper Asking How Much Hunter Was Paid In Ukraine
I'm sure the Biden's will do everything possible to keep this info from going public.
My computer security system sent off a warning within a few moments of opening your link.Hunter Biden Baby Momma Stripper Asking How Much Hunter Was Paid In Ukraine
I'm sure the Biden's will do everything possible to keep this info from going public.
"Both sides" are not refusing to comply with subpoenas.I feel the same way about them I do the Dems not letting the R's get their full list of witnesses. They are both just doing the politics dance.
He doesn't care. Knows he will probably be impeached but won't be convictedPretty ballsy to have another closed door meeting with the Russians inside the Oval Office while you're getting impeached.
This makes me think Biden's campaign is in trouble. The stripper only wanted child support and this all could have gone away. Instead it's drawn out in court and now Hunter's financial records are in play.Hunter Biden Baby Momma Stripper Asking How Much Hunter Was Paid In Ukraine
I'm sure the Biden's will do everything possible to keep this info from going public.
I know, one side wouldn't even entertain the idea."Both sides" are not refusing to comply with subpoenas.
Correct as far as I know. One side complied with subpoenas about Benghazi, emails, etc.I know, one side wouldn't even entertain the idea.
All of the documents you requested show I'm innocent."I'm not going to tell you what I wrote."
"I already know what you wrote"
"All I can say is I followed the law, what I did was legal."
That all reads to you like a guy giving the whole story and not trying to stay out of a scandal?
Yeah taking care of your kids is corrupt. It's doing the right thing. Paying the lady so she doesn't take the deadbeat to court is not corrupt.So good campaign = corrupt, and one is dumb not to be. Great America you envisioned.
If that's the America my kids have to grow up in, I may have to consider the Bahamas.So good campaign = corrupt, and one is dumb not to be. Great America you envisioned.
This makes me think that Hunter Biden is not tethered financially to Joe Biden.This makes me think Biden's campaign is in trouble. The stripper only wanted child support and this all could have gone away. Instead it's drawn out in court and now Hunter's financial records are in play.Hunter Biden Baby Momma Stripper Asking How Much Hunter Was Paid In Ukraine
I'm sure the Biden's will do everything possible to keep this info from going public.
A good campaign manager would have cut this story off before it made headlines. Now it's out there as Hunter is a broke deadbeat dad from a mult-imillion dollar family that doesn't take care of his child.
Just to be clear, are you and @Don't Noonan posting this in the whistleblower thread because you think trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars of aid from Ukraine because he wanted zelensky to look into things like Hunter Biden's sexual relationships and failure to pay child support? Or are you just going off topic?This makes me think Biden's campaign is in trouble. The stripper only wanted child support and this all could have gone away. Instead it's drawn out in court and now Hunter's financial records are in play.
A good campaign manager would have cut this story off before it made headlines. Now it's out there as Hunter is a broke deadbeat dad from a mult-imillion dollar family that doesn't take care of his child.
I lose track of where I am sometimes. I'll take it to the Biden Thread.Just to be clear, are you and @Don't Noonan posting this in the whistleblower thread because you think trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars of aid from Ukraine because he wanted zelensky to look into things like Hunter Biden's sexual relationships and failure to pay child support? Or are you just going off topic?
Ok. I honestly thought you meant that it would be a valid use of presidential power to ask a foreign president for that kind of dirt. But obviously that wouldn't be ok.I lose track of where I am sometimes. I'll take it to the Biden Thread.
It's a wash if anything. The public is not monolithic on impeachment. They could be just as likely to view the Democrats as the good guys for impeaching, as viewing the Republicans as good guys for 'respecting the will of voters.'But I do want to make one point: in November of 2020, the public will not be thinking "A year ago, the Democrats in the House voted to impeach President Trump"; they will be thinking "a year ago, the Democrats in the House voted to impeach President Trump and then the Republicans in the Senate voted to acquit him." This is a significant difference.
Looking into sketchy folks like Hunter Biden getting paid $70k a month for a job he is unqualified for because his Dad is VP.Just to be clear, are you and @Don't Noonan posting this in the whistleblower thread because you think trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars of aid from Ukraine because he wanted zelensky to look into things like Hunter Biden's sexual relationships and failure to pay child support? Or are you just going off topic?
Professor Turley also said
That’s not an accurate description of the separation of powers.Co equal. You know what you when there is a dispute?
The third coequal.