is it impeachable to ask ukraine to investigate political adversaries?

[spence]

These are the kind of mistakes you make when your world is starting to implode.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/86764...s-nancy-pelosi

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if biden didn’t want the attention, he could have easily avoided what is at a minimum, a glaring appearance of
impropriety.

again, why was it ok for democrats in the us senate to ask ukraine to investigate Trump?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You’re speaking I assume of the letter filed in the Senate record to Ukraine.
Who’s hiding anything there?
What personal gains do the Senators achieve?
I attached the letter, perhaps you could point out where they asked for Trump to be investigated.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/m...estigation.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Here's Trump roping Mike Pence into the Ukraine scandal: "I think you should ask for VP Pence's conversation, b/c he had a couple of conversations also. I could save you a lot of time -- they're all perfect." 👀

When Trump goes down and takes everyone in his cabinet with him, we might get our first female President

Nancy Pelosi


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

These are the kind of mistakes you make when your world is starting to implode.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/86764...s-nancy-pelosi

Unless the whistle blower wants to see mike pence president. Maybe that whistle blower is mike pence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Jim, it was because Ukraine wasn't cooperating with the Mueller investigation, it was about Manafort not Trump and it was made right out in public.

You're having that fruit problem again.

oh. so if our government concludes ukraine isn’t doing its part ( which is subjective, obviously), it’s ok to pressure them
to investigate political
adversaries.

how do you know that’s not what trump did.

the fruit here, is the bananas where your brain is supposed to be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here's Trump roping Mike Pence into the Ukraine scandal: "I think you should ask for VP Pence's conversation, b/c he had a couple of conversations also. I could save you a lot of time -- they're all perfect." 👀

When Trump goes down and takes everyone in his cabinet with him, we might get our first female President

Nancy Pelosi


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

trump is going down? two thirds of the senate is going to vote to remove him? that’s what you’re saying?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

oh. so if our government concludes ukraine isn’t doing its part ( which is subjective, obviously), it’s ok to pressure them
to investigate political
adversaries.

Manafort was the subject of a criminal FBI investigation. You do know he's in Jail right now right?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Manafort was the subject of a criminal FBI investigation. You do know he's in Jail right now right?

i do!

and when obama was caught on a live mic asking a russian official to hold off missile programs
until after his re election, at which time he’d “have more flexibility” to work with them...that wasn’t a president asking russia for a favor for political gain?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i do!

and when obama was caught on a live mic asking a russian official to hold off missile programs
until after his re election, at which time he’d “have more flexibility” to work with them...that wasn’t a president asking russia for a favor for political gain?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't see how that benefited him politically. He's simply saying it will be easier to come to an agreement that's beneficial to our country.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Hearing exurbs from the whistle blower complaint is really damning, you better circle those red wagons closer, this is going to be fun watching Trump and Rudy implode. I have no doubt the witch hunt and presidential harassment lines will be flying on the steps of the White House and in this board.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exurb
Enough is enough for Gods sake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how that benefited him politically. He's simply saying it will be easier to come to an agreement that's beneficial to our country.

if it didn’t benefit him politically, why did he specifically ask them
to wait until after his final
election?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Exurb
Enough is enough for Gods sake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’ve told you many times I couldn’t care less to go hunt down glasses, are you having trouble understanding the meaning, you probably are the worst at crossword puzzles.

You do keep showing how small you are and that in and of itself is worth not hunting down the glasses.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You’re speaking I assume of the letter filed in the Senate record to Ukraine.
Who’s hiding anything there?
What personal gains do the Senators achieve?
I attached the letter, perhaps you could point out where they asked for Trump to be investigated.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/m...estigation.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i do!

and when obama was caught on a live mic asking a russian official to hold off missile programs
until after his re election, at which time he’d “have more flexibility” to work with them...that wasn’t a president asking russia for a favor for political gain?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how that benefited him politically. He's simply saying it will be easier to come to an agreement that's beneficial to our country.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if it didn’t benefit him politically, why did he specifically ask them
to wait until after his final
election?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When you can't answer a question, once again you hypocritically pivot to a new ButObama claim, trying to conflate something, anything with what Trump, whom you don't really like but defend tirelessly, did.

As to your latest distraction, there is a vast difference between saying this is not the time to negotiate that and saying we have a good relationship, not reciprocal, but do me a favor, investigate my opponent and you'll get your missiles that you asked for.
One is normal practice and the other, with the ask and the get, is why Trump will likely be impeached.

[scottw]

this whistleblower is a joke.......guess the dummycraps didn't learn from their Kavanaugh fiasco

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

When you can't answer a question, once again you hypocritically pivot to a new ButObama claim, trying to conflate something, anything with what Trump, whom you don't really like but defend tirelessly, did.

As to your latest distraction, there is a vast difference between saying this is not the time to negotiate that and saying we have a good relationship, not reciprocal, but do me a favor, investigate my opponent and you'll get your missiles that you asked for.
One is normal practice and the other, with the ask and the get, is why Trump will likely be impeached.

what question can’t i answer?

how am i being a hypocrite? i’m pointing out your hypocrisy. if it was ok for obama to ask the russians forma favor to help him politically, why can’t trump do it?

by the way, if biden didn’t do
Anything wrong, there’s no reason to fear an investigation.

i agree trump will likely be impeached. there’s a real chance this helps him, not hurt him. if
you can’t comcede that possibility, you have no idea why he got elected.

it will reduce the chances biden ( best bet to unseat him) is the nominee, and might make Trump appear to be the victim of a witch hunt to all except people
who weren’t going to vote for him
anyway.

if one genuinely believes it’s an impeachable offense, one has an obligation to impeach. if it’s all
an attempt to keep him from getting re elected ( which al green explicitly admitted to on msnbc) that’s a political gamble. sometimes gambles pay off, sometimes they don’t.

i think trump will happily take house impeachment if it means biden isn’t the nominee.

and if the reason obama
said “now isn't the time” was based on his upcoming re election ( and there’s no other
conceivable conclusion if to listen to what he said), then both are cases of a potus asking a foreign power for a favor that reaped political benefits for the potus. yesterday, all the libs were saying that in and of itself, is an impeachable offense. again, if that’s true, fine, but let’s apply it consistently. if
you refuse to apply it consistently, then it’s not a true principle.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I’ve told you many times I couldn’t care less to go hunt down glasses, are you having trouble understanding the meaning, you probably are the worst at crossword puzzles.

You do keep showing how small you are and that in and of itself is worth not hunting down the glasses.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Crossword puzzles.... use those letters for jumble and see what you come up with.
Haha, you make a point using the “word” exurb! Priceless
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Crossword puzzles.... use those letters for jumble and see what you come up with.
Haha, you make a point using the “word” exurb! Priceless
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe pictures will help you if you are slow in picking up a word meaning, you do know there are adult continuing education classes you can sign up for.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

One is normal practice and the other, with the ask and the get, is why Trump will likely be impeached.

Pete, Jim has a fruit problem. It's been ongoing for years. Maybe he has scurvy

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Pete, Jim has a fruit problem. It's been ongoing for years. Maybe he has scurvy

from the guy who couldn’t bear to come on here for weeks after the election, too busy jerking off to an obama poster.

i can, and have, praised
and criticized both sides. you can’t, not once, not ever.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

from the guy who couldn’t bear to come on here for weeks after the election, too busy jerking off to an obama poster.

God Jim, that’s a new low. Have you been conferring with Raider Ronnie?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

God Jim, that’s a new low. Have you been conferring with Raider Ronnie?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

but your insults aren’t low.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

but your insults aren’t low.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seriously?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

God Jim, that’s a new low. Have you been conferring with Raider Ronnie?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here’s the repressed homosexual fantasies I was talking about a few days ago with conservatives. Let it out Jim !!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

what question can’t i answer?

how am i being a hypocrite? i’m pointing out your hypocrisy.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You’re speaking I assume of the letter filed in the Senate record to Ukraine.
Who’s hiding anything there?
What personal gains do the Senators achieve?
I attached the letter, perhaps you could point out where they asked for Trump to be investigated.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/m...estigation.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

but your insults aren’t low.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he is "doublestandardman"

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

repressed homosexual fantasies

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you have an obsession with this subject...hmmmmm

[Sea Dangles]

Sailor👍🏽
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Sailor👍🏽
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Easy there Chief
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

right out of the democrap play book....I wonder what they will pull next in their 4 year long hissy fit

VDH
"Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”


Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

After nearly three years of this, we know the delivery system that ensues. Along with the sensationalized initial media hype, the promised “smoking gun” leak usually follows. But when the “overwhelming” evidence or “walls are closing in” documents are released, there is no criminal act to be found other than occasional art-of-the-deal bluster from Trump. And then on to the next crude coup attempt"

[scottw]

Originally Posted by scottw

right out of the democrap play book....I wonder what they will pull next in their 4 year long hissy fit

VDH
"Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”


Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

After nearly three years of this, we know the delivery system that ensues. Along with the sensationalized initial media hype, the promised “smoking gun” leak usually follows. But when the “overwhelming” evidence or “walls are closing in” documents are released, there is no criminal act to be found other than occasional art-of-the-deal bluster from Trump. And then on to the next crude coup attempt"