first hand witnesses deny quid pro quo, bribery, extortion

[Jim in CT]

Volker and Morrison who were actually on the call, deny there was any bribery, extortion, or quid pro quo.

contrast that to those who say they “heard from others” that those things took place.

Any evidence these guys were lying under oath?

[Pete F.]

Members of the conspiracy deny they conspired.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Members of the conspiracy deny they conspired.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and a disgruntled former employee, testified that trump is mean. and the guy before, testified that he overheard someone say there was quid pro quo. You want to nullify a national election, for THAT?

at some point, do you require any evidence that this happened? or are you such a partisan ideologue, that the accusation is enough?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

This is blowing up in their face and our local believers are strangely silent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

This is blowing up in their face and our local believers are strangely silent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

deeply disappointed democrats dreams dashed

[Pete F.]

One witness requested by Republicans, Kurt Volker, a former special envoy to Ukraine, said that Trump’s request of an investigation of Joe Biden made him realize that he failed to equate discussions of the gas company Burisma with Biden.
Testimony on Tuesday provided evidence of Trump’s direct role in the plot. Volker and a fellow witness, the National Security Council official Tim Morrison, both testified that Sondland was in regular communication with Trump. Three witnesses confirmed that they had heard the president personally request, in his July call with Zelenskiy, an investigation of Joe Biden and coordination with Giuliani.
“At no time was I aware of or knowingly took part in an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden,” Volker’s statement reads. “ I was not made aware of any reference to Vice President Biden or his son by President Trump, until the transcript of that call was released on September 25, 2019.

“Throughout this time, I understood that there was an important distinction between ‘Burisma’ and ‘Biden’, and urged the Ukrainians to maintain such a distinction. I did not know that President Trump or others had raised Vice President Biden with the Ukrainians, or had conflated the investigation of possible Ukrainian corruption, with investigation of the former Vice President. In retrospect, for the Ukrainians, it clearly would have been confusing.

“In hindsight, I now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption involving the Ukrainian company, ‘Burisma,’ as equivalent to investigating former Vice President Biden.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

One witness requested by Republicans, Kurt Volker, a former special envoy to Ukraine, said that Trump’s request of an investigation of Joe Biden made him realize that he failed to equate discussions of the gas company Burisma with Biden.
Testimony on Tuesday provided evidence of Trump’s direct role in the plot. Volker and a fellow witness, the National Security Council official Tim Morrison, both testified that Sondland was in regular communication with Trump. Three witnesses confirmed that they had heard the president personally request, in his July call with Zelenskiy, an investigation of Joe Biden and coordination with Giuliani.
“At no time was I aware of or knowingly took part in an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden,” Volker’s statement reads. “ I was not made aware of any reference to Vice President Biden or his son by President Trump, until the transcript of that call was released on September 25, 2019.

“Throughout this time, I understood that there was an important distinction between ‘Burisma’ and ‘Biden’, and urged the Ukrainians to maintain such a distinction. I did not know that President Trump or others had raised Vice President Biden with the Ukrainians, or had conflated the investigation of possible Ukrainian corruption, with investigation of the former Vice President. In retrospect, for the Ukrainians, it clearly would have been confusing.

“In hindsight, I now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption involving the Ukrainian company, ‘Burisma,’ as equivalent to investigating former Vice President Biden.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

is anyone denying trump asked for an investigation? He’s the executive branch. That’s in his purview.

You sure are offended at the notion of uncovering the truth of what the bidens did there.
“Gym” Jordan!! that’s a good one, haw haw haw my stomach hurts from laughing.

Wheels coming off the bus.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

is anyone denying trump asked for an investigation? He’s the executive branch. That’s in his purview. Is it really "his purview" to ask for an investigation of a political rival even when his own state dept. says there is nothing there - what a joke.

You sure are offended at the notion of uncovering the truth of what the bidens did there.
“Gym” Jordan!! that’s a good one, haw haw haw my stomach hurts from laughing.There is far more evidence Jordan knew about the perv. then there is that J. Biden did anything wrong.

Wheels coming off the bus.If you listen to Sondland's testimony the wheels are certainly coming off the Trump bus
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your hypocrisy is amazing.

So should your town's police chief investigate your pedophilia?

[Pete F.]

Just have Gym, Nunes and Stefanik screech some more
Today Sondland testifies
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Such a partisan comment, but that’s the party line, that all the Democrats wanted since the election, was to impeach trump. How many times has the leader and others stated this is not where they wanted to be, that they would have much preferred to get on with the business of governing. They were forced here because Trump has no respect for law, thinks he knows more than the experts and can’t let them do their job and eats conspiracy theories for breakfast during his “executive” time.

If you believe impeaching him is what they want, I’m pretty sure they will succeed in the house, probably not in the senate and if you think wearing the badge of honor of being only one of few presidents to have been impeached in the house is good for his 2020 chances; you probably believe Ukraine interfered in 2016 and not the Russians.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Such a partisan comment, but that’s the party line, that all the Democrats wanted since the election, was to impeach trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

kind of hard to deny that. video evidence of those in congress calling for impeachment, the whistleblowers lawyer saying the coup has started and impeachment was inevitable.

you take nancy pelosi at her word when she says she gets no pleasure from this. fine. why don’t you take yesterday’s witnesses at their word, when they say they were in the call and there was no bribery?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Gordon Sondland: everything Sondland did, "the Ukrainian pressure, the quid pro-quo - was at the direction of Donald Trump".

Sondland also implicates US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former National Security Advisor John Bolton. "They knew what we were doing and why."

Wiggle out of this one....

Cant say never trumper cant say hes a lier can't say he heard it through others . You'll try to say becused the egg never hatched there is no chicken .. Supporters need to just admit they have no issues. With Trump asking for dirt on a us citizen and political rival , from a foreign country or countries.. for personal benfit
willingly putting man (trump) and party before the country and the Constitution usung the excuse he was elected and that somehow excuses what he has clearly done or tried to do ,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Sondland I think just made Nunes crap his pants, everyone in loop, yes QPQ, direction from trump and coordinator Rudy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

It gives me great glee to watch our local #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s watch their ship sink and feign surprise. Time to lay in the bed you have made up and stop throwing poop at the walls to see if it sticks.

See you at the next conspiracy meeting.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Who's ship is sinking?

You understood that Rudy Guiliani spoke for the President, correct?
Sondland: Yes

Sondland is throwing everybody in the Trump administration under the bus, again and again, he's not going to jail for them.

Rudy is looking at his insurance policy right now

"Mike" is realizing that his Senate dreams are over

Pence is getting out of town

Nikki is wishing she had stayed home

Bolton is grinning

And Floridaman is thinking of another trip to Walter Reed

[wdmso]

Again look who refused to honor subpoenas. Perry. Bolton, Rudy. Bolton ... yet all your, Law and order Republicans . Completely ingnore those facts..

Yet keep going to but but Bidens...

Commanders intent provide by Rudy..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Sondland destroyed virtually every Trump defense: Trump didn’t care about Ukraine; there was a quid pro quo; Trump & Rudy demanded the announcement of investigations; everyone was in the loop; Ukraine knew about the linkage; all was directed by Trump
Now that they have resumed, Castor is trying desperately to pin it all on Rudy and get Floridaman out from under the bus.
He's jammed way under the bus

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Sondland destroyed virtually every Trump defense: Trump didn’t care about Ukraine; there was a quid pro quo;

Sondland said very explicitly under oath, that Trump said to him directly, that he wanted no quid pro quo.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Sondland said very explicitly under oath, that Trump said to him directly, that he wanted no quid pro quo.

Yes he did Jim.

Wow who uses quid pro quo. Stating they didnt want one. In sentence.. no less a phone call unless he has knowledge thats the word on the Street . Or they knew what was in the whistleblower report.. and tried to get a head of it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Yes he did Jim.

Wow who uses quid pro quo. Stating they didnt want one. In sentence.. no less a phone call unless he has knowledge thats the word on the Street . Or they knew what was in the whistleblower report.. and tried to get a head of it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

gibberish again...

so if one truly didn’t engage in quid pro quo, but they are accused of it... how in your mind can they deny it, without appearing guilty.

And trump want trying to get sued if it. this guy picked that time to ask trump what he wanted, trump answered. do you answer questions days before they are asked? or when they are asked?

it’s nit trumps fault or doing, that your witness picked that moment to ask trump what he wanted from ukraine.

Gibberish. If trump
confesses he’s guilty, if he proclaims his innocence he’s guilty. Your side did the same thing with Kavanaugh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Enjoy your victory and have a cold beer gents. Surely the greatest president of our lifetime MUST be worried sick about these very serious allegations. When all of this hard work and taxpayer dollars amounts to nothing I hope you stay vigilant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Volker and Morrison who were actually on the call, deny there was any bribery, extortion, or quid pro quo.

contrast that to those who say they “heard from others” that those things took place.

Any evidence these guys were lying under oath?

"We now know that the president in fact committed the crime of bribery...

I think articles of impeachment are being drawn up if they haven't already been drawn up." —Ken Starr

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"We now know that the president in fact committed the crime of bribery...

I think articles of impeachment are being drawn up if they haven't already been drawn up." —Ken Starr

shocker. you believe everyone who says he did it, and dismiss everyone who says he didn’t.

if the impeach trump, i hope they also file perjury charges against the guys who testified yesterday.

the articles of impeachment were drawn up before Hilary’s concession speech was drawn up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"We now know that the president in fact committed the crime of bribery...

I think articles of impeachment are being drawn up if they haven't already been drawn up." —Ken Starr

You left out that Starr is talking about Trumps obstruction into this impeachment inquiry, that's the impeachable offense Starr sees.

If Trump broke the law by obstructing the impeachement inquiry, prove it and kick him out. The accusation of quid pro quo, extortion, bribery, whatever other name du jeur the libs want to assign, is as of now, baseless.

Sondland said under oath, that Trump told him he didn't want anything from Ukraine.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You left out that Starr is talking about Trumps obstruction into this impeachment inquiry, that's the impeachable offense Starr sees.

If Trump broke the law by obstructing the impeachement inquiry, prove it and kick him out. The accusation of quid pro quo, extortion, bribery, whatever other name du jeur the libs want to assign, is as of now, baseless.

Sondland said under oath, that Trump told him he didn't want anything from Ukraine.

It's important to note the timing of Trump's "I want nothing..I want no quid pro quo" statement to Sondland: It occurred on September 9, the exact same day the House Intel Committee received the whistleblower's complaint....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

It's important to note the timing of Trump's "I want nothing..I want no quid pro quo" statement to Sondland: It occurred on September 9, the exact same day the House Intel Committee received the whistleblower's complaint....

But that’s when Sondland asked the question of what Trump
wanted.

See Pete, the way human conversations work is, someone asks you a question, and then you answer it. It’s not easy to answer a question before it’s asked, even if that would be politically preferable.

So to you, the fact that Trump didn’t answer the question until
it was asked, is evidence of guilt. Trump should have preemptively told him that he didn’t want anything.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But that’s when Sondland asked the question of what Trump
wanted.

See Pete, the way human conversations work is, someone asks you a question, and then you answer it. It’s not easy to answer a question before it’s asked, even if that would be politically preferable.

So to you, the fact that Trump didn’t answer the question until
it was asked, is evidence of guilt. Trump should have preemptively told him that he didn’t want anything.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

See Jim, the way conspiracies work is the boss gets the people who work for him to do the dirty work, they never know all the parts of the conspiracy and the boss knows it all. It does make it harder to investigate, but it can and has been done under RICO many times.
That's why the hearsay rules for a conspiracy differ from typical.

Obstructing the investigation by withholding testimony and documents will make it harder to obtain the truth.

Has the WH let anyone testify?

Has the WH released any of the subpoenaed documentation?

Did Zelensky go to the White House already?

Was the money released before the White House learned of the whistleblower?

Did Ukraine's new government get all the Trump and Pence meetings it was first promised?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"We now know that the president in fact committed the crime of bribery...

" —Ken Starr

what you very conveniently left from this quote, is that Starr was speculating what Schiff was thinking. How deceptive is that? One needn’t resort to that dishonesty, when one has the facts on their side.

Starr also said it was “shocking” that Saldmans opening statement didn’t include the fact that he heard Trump say he didn’t want a quod pro Quo.

cherry picking and slight of hand. it’s all you got.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

pretty sure pete just committed a crime

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

what you very conveniently left from this quote, is that Starr was speculating what Schiff was thinking. How deceptive is that? One needn’t resort to that dishonesty, when one has the facts on their side.

Starr also said it was “shocking” that Saldmans opening statement didn’t include the fact that he heard Trump say he didn’t want a quod pro Quo.

cherry picking and slight of hand. it’s all you got.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Cherrypicking and slight of hand is all Nunes, Castor, Jordan and Ratcliffe did today.
You’re just easily led
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device