"This is a coverup"

Next move for trump should be the old mob move of expising a rat.

Quietly spread some lies to only certain people and see if it comes out the other side.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
prey tell what crime?
also do you think such rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

oh, and I do think the house dems are crazy enough to impeach trump without clear cut evidence of a crime committed

I do think that he violated the public's trust by leveraging national funds to serve as bribery for foreign interference against his political rivals, which itself would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. I think he's taken advantage of his power/position for personal gain and has run afoul of the separation of powers by thwarting the distribution of congressionally approved military aid.

Are you talking about the former Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden and his dealings to get his son from being investigated? Or for having a son of the Vice President of the United States on the board of directors of a Ukrainian Energy Company that has dealing with the United States and accepts military aid?

Are you talking about those type of actions?

What about a pallet full of national funds shipped on a plane bound for Iran?

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Krakatoa

So, what crimes? How is he a criminal?

I listed what I believed his crimes were in my post reply to shooterbrody above.

There's that word again. Strange that I find in here, as well as in climate change debate threads etc.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Wayfarer

So any testimony or information that supports the president is a lie and any that denigrates him or his position must be taken at face value?

Not at all. Where did I give you that impression?

Right here:

Are you saying nobody has ever lied under oath?

The implication in the question is that Shokin was lying under oath whereas those who were merely interviewed by a reporter were telling the truth.

Never mind the fact that the sworn testimony is more recent than the news article you linked.

You keep dancing around the fact that just because its sworn testimony doesn't mean its unequivocally true. Has anybody lied in sword testimony before?

I haven't sifted through all the links yet, but is Shokin to have lied, under oath, prior to all of this with Trump and the whistle blower becoming extremely public?

Trying to get an idea of the timeline here. So far my timeline has the legal counsel for the whistle blower donating to Joe Biden's Presidential campaign earlier this year. hmm.

originally posted by: projectvxn
Democrats are destroying themselves.

This is the most prolific example of mass hysteria I've ever seen.

The Obama-Biden White House chastised the liberal media in 2014 for having the audacity to report on Joe Biden's corrupt methods of helping his son, Hunter Biden.

From October 2014: www.chicagotribune.com...

Hillary Clinton used the "dirt" on Joe as leverage, to keep him from running against her in the 2015/2016 election cycle.

What difference at this point does it make?

Does that not work for the right?

None of this would cut it in a court of law, it'd be thrown out way before a jury got to see it, and if they did, that'd be the end of it too. Also with the fact that there is no confrontation clause, or so it seems, in these circumstances, it wouldn't even be heard. Granted this isn't a criminal proceeding, mostly because there was no crime.

originally posted by: underwerks
Obviously it does have supporting evidence. The Trump appointed IG investigated the allegations in it and found them to be credible. And Maguire agrees with his assessment. Did you miss the hearing yesterday?

The allegations in a whistleblower report like this by law have to be investigated before it's submitted to Congress.

Lmao what a TOOL! As with the rest of you leftists!

"OBVIOUSLY IT DOES HAVE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE"

"And you know this for a fact?"

"YEAH, BECAUSE THE MEDIA SAID SO!"

Gosh, I can start a construction company with all these leftist tools..

Show me the evidence and I'll gladly help you impeach Trump.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a CIA-Clinton era run COUP on our president. Are we forgetting how we had the intelligence communities working for the Clintons for years now? FISA warrants to spy on Clintons political enemy, asking the Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Trump, the exoneration of Clinton and Comey BY THE FBI whom committed actual crimes but instead the law pursuits the president. And now the CIA whistleblower complaint.

One last note, does anyone else find it odd, that the same agency that is responsible for crafting "Operation Northwood" is now here talking about they overheard something wrong the president was doing and felt impelled to say something...? This is coming from one of the greatest and most notorious intelligence agencies out there....

a reply to: JoeGee

It's Brennan and the intelligence community.

The same guys that lied us into several wars, and lied through their teeth about the President being a Russian agent, are now on TV lying about the Ukraine "blackmail" -- just days after Bolton got the axe for sabotaging the North Korea talks and trying to start a war in Iran.

It's a coup, and the left just keeps going after the Impeachment football like Charlie Brown.

There’s a reason why actual evidence has value and why the actual evidence is now being requested and located. And there are strange enough things about how that process is going.

a reply to: JoeGee

It’s not the role of any of us to evaluate the evidence. I’m not claiming to know what the evidence proves. It’s just important for it to be evaluated and I would assume you want the same thing.

originally posted by: Bloodworth
Quietly spread some lies to only certain people and see if it comes out the other side.

He's way ahead of you...

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: hyperlexic
a reply to: Wayfarer
So does the prosecuter saying he was fired for investigating Bidens son and the Ukraine president saying he wasnt pressured at all mean they are both now Trump lackys? And are lying for Trump?

I am loathe to repeat myself but there just aren't a lot of folks positing the facts.

The prosecutor did not say that (or at the very least there is no record of the prosecutor saying that). There are a variety of fake quotes floating around (many having popped up in the last day or so).

WAIT....you are just dismissing this sworn (notorized) government affidavit of the prosecutor from John Solomon as "fake"?
www.scribd.com...

Please explain WHY you think it is fake.

Vitaly Kasko, Shokin's Deputy, disagrees

Your article was from 5 months ago. Please address the recently released SWORN and notorized testimony by Shokin HIMSELF.

What is there to address? Shokin is saying one thing, and his deputy is saying another.

...and which one was under oath?

This is not the gotcha you imagine. Are you saying nobody has ever lied under oath?

Like a whistleblower maybe????