Trump Amb. to EU Sondland reverses himself on Ukraine quid pro quo

a reply to: Gryphon66

Most of the republicans and democrats felt comey should be fired.

trump fired him.

Yet you still supported and investigation into trump thats started as a result of that firing.

why on one hand is it ok fro Obama to fire a prosecutor who was in charge of an investigation into his vps sons company because many peopkle said the prosecutor should be fired.

But on the other hand it wasnt ok for trump to fire comey when other people said he should?

Almost sounds like partisan hypocrisy.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Grambler
One, a binch of msm putlets saying Obama and soros allies said shokin was corrupt is not disproving shokins claims.

and bunch of dems and republicans said comey should be fired, yet you still cheered an investigation of Trump that was started as a result of him firing comey.

Good God, man! You're actually playing 4D chess with that one.

It doesnt matter that I out their hypocrisy.

Just like with te russia hoax.

"Getting dirt on opponents from russians is a crime!"

Ok Hillarys team did it.

"Oh that was different it was ok"

Or on another thread.

"What people are saying is that the president can't withhold funds approved by congress as aid to an ally in exchange for a favor - period. That's called extortion

It matters not what Trump's intentions were. Even if he was on a mission from God"

Ok thats what Biden and the Obama admin did.

"He was Vice President, and it was his job. Actual crimes had been committed, and remember - we were trying to help Ukraine - not Russia

He didn't admit to extorting anyone because this wasn't extortion. It was pressure (obviously) and it a was definitely a legitimate threat"

The hypocrisy doesnt matter to these people.

a reply to: Gryphon66

We've had good conversations in the past and this is the first time where you've attempted to twist one of my posts into saying what you wanted it to say rather than actually addressing the points I made (even the inconvenient to your argument ones, to your past credit). I've always found you to be rational and our debates have usually been friendly, don't muck that up over your need to defend a false narrative, Gryph. What you just posted is absolutely NOT what you're trying to say it is, quite the opposite.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I stand by my posts completely.

Did you not claim that Obama paid Ukraine to stop an investigation into Hunter Biden?

Please correct that if it is inaccurate.

Burd we have had decent discussions in the past I look forward to the same in the future.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The GPO/Shokin's office seized some property a year after taking office, 2 months after Biden made his threat and one month before he finally got sacked?

That smells like someone trying to satisfy the masses more than an aggressive prosecution or investigation.

Either way, it was a data point I hadn't seen and appreciate the link.

The Hunter Biden bit actually works against the narrative Rudy is selling.
YES, Burisma's Lobbyist name dropped Hunter Biden (Kind of the only reason they put him on the board)
But reading closer, they reason they were lobbying is because the US Gov was going after Burisma...Doesn't sound much like Biden Sr. Protecting anyone.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Honestly, you refer me to another discussion thread for backup for your claim ... Even looking at your SPECIFIC post doesn't provide ANY evidence that Obama paid Ukraine to drop an investigation into Hunter.

I just went back and read your post in the other thread and tracked your links again in full ... and I still stand by my post.

If that riles you, so be it.

a reply to: Extorris

Strange

They were going after burisma, they got the corrupt prosecutor fired that was holding them back, they got the case kicked to their allies in the NABU, and yet still next to nothing was done to burisma or zlochevsky

Why was this outcome accepted by the very people that were witholding a billion dollars to make sure burisma and zlochevsky were brought to justice?

a reply to: Extorris

Have you been able to parse what Hunter Biden's alleged crime was in all these posts? I keep asking to no avail.

Open to the forum: what is Hunter Biden's crime ?

a reply to: Grambler

Are you discounting the fact that the loan guarantees were to be awarded to Ukraine over the course of 2015 and 2016 to encourage the government to decrease blatant corruption? Shokin was only one part of that effort.

Loan guarantees FUNDED by Congress?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Extorris

Have you been able to parse what Hunter Biden's alleged crime was in all these posts? I keep asking to no avail.

Open to the forum: what is Hunter Biden's crime ?

I answered you before.

and again, a crime wasnt necessary for hunter to have committed in order for an investigation into his dad having obama withhold a billion dollars to get the prosecutor looking into his sons company fired.

There should be an investigation.

If biden and his son are innocent, what is the problem?

If trump used a billion tax dollars to force the firing of a prosecutor looking into his sons company, biden, the media, the dems, and even you would demand an investigation, no matter how many trump allies said he was right to want the prosecutor fired.

So why is the standard different with Biden and Obama?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Are you discounting the fact that the loan guarantees were to be awarded to Ukraine over the course of 2015 and 2016 to encourage the government to decrease blatant corruption? Shokin was only one part of that effort.

Loan guarantees FUNDED by Congress?

Im not discounting that at all.

So what corruption ended? The obama admin said zlochevsky wwas corrupt, he walked away with almost no punishment.

And yet Obama and biden seemed ok with that.

Meanwhile, trump also wants to make sure he is not giving money to a corrupt country. We know Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election for hillary.

We know biden and obama issued a qpq to fire a prosecutor who was looking into his sons company, and no matter what you or others claimed the intentions were, ultimtely the new prosecutors dropped the investigation.

How isnt making sure that wasnt an act of corruption a good thing? We should just giove ukraine the money despite their election interfence, or possibly burying investigations to help the Obama admin?

Burisma cannot in any reasonable way be said to be Hunter Biden's company as you keep repeating in multiple posts.

Hunter was a paid Board member. Paid a lot. He was not part of the administration of Burisma except in that sense.

If you cannot point to any evidence for any crime that Hunter Biden was guilty of, your assertion that Obama is dirty for trying to cover that up is simply nonsense. Cover up WHAT? Hunter was not under investigation by Ukraine.

Was he or not?

Your whole argument FAILS on that point.

a reply to: Grambler

Most of this post is your anecdotal impressions.

Do you have an argument or a fact-based question for me? If not, I cannot assist.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The company hunter biden was on the board of directors for was under investigation.

Claiming he didnt own it so it doesnt matter is absurd.

Even the prosecutor who followed up shokin, who Biden called a solid up guy, Lutsenko, admitted he felt the payments to hunter biden ought to be investigated,

But then, as Biden’s 2020 campaign ramped up over the past year, Lutsenko — the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden once hailed as a “solid” replacement for Shokin — began looking into what happened with the Burisma case that had been shut down.

Lutsenko told me that, while reviewing the Burisma investigative files, he discovered “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

Lutsenko said some of the evidence he knows about in the Burisma case may interest U.S. authorities and he’d like to present that information to new U.S. Attorney General William Barr, particularly the vice president’s intervention.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Biden had correlated and connected this aid with some of the HR (personnel) issues and changes in the prosecutor’s office,” Lutsenko said.

...

Lutsenko said Ukrainian company board members legally can pay themselves for work they do if it benefits the company’s bottom line, but prosecutors never got to determine the merits of the payments to Rosemont because of the way the investigation was shut down.

As for Joe Biden’s intervention in getting Lutsenko’s predecessor fired in the midst of the Burisma investigation, Lutsenko suggested that was a matter to discuss with Attorney General Barr: “Of course, I would be happy to have a conversation with him about this issue.”

thehill.com...

You keep demanding to see evidence, yet when trump tried to review the evidence to see if a crime was committed, the dems say trump committed a crime.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Most of this post is your anecdotal impressions.

Do you have an argument or a fact-based question for me? If not, I cannot assist.

Sure i have many

First, if trump used a billion tax dollars to force a country to fire a prosecutor that was investigating a company that his son was on the board of directors, would you want an investigation into that? Do you think the dems and media would want an investigation into that?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Extorris

Have you been able to parse what Hunter Biden's alleged crime was in all these posts? I keep asking to no avail.

Open to the forum: what is Hunter Biden's crime ?

His entire career has consisted of working 6, 7, 8+ figure salary jobs for banks and companies run by his father's supporters, lobbyist firms, or with corporations that were politically connected and cozy to his father's political position.

In fact, if Obama had used the same standard of judgement as his DOJ used to rationalize a FISA warrant against Carter Page, then Hunter Biden would have also had a FISA warrant placed on him.

Was a crime committed by Hunter Biden? Hmm... we would need an investigation to know that for sure, but Elizabeth Warren certainly is concerned about it.

Elizabeth Warren became flustered when asked an ethics question that was an indirect reference to Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, serving on a Ukrainian gas company board.

The Massachusetts senator and 2020 Democrat asserted that a similar kind of behavior would not be allowed under a Warren administration, before saying that she did not know whether the situation would violate her ethics plan.

When a reporter asked Warren whether her ethics plan would allow her vice president's son or daughter to serve on the board of a foreign company, but without directly referencing the Bidens, Warren responded "no" before quickly walking back her assertion.

"I don't know. I mean, I'd have to go back and look at the details," Warren said.

When he was vice president, Biden threatened to withhold U.S. aid to Ukraine if that country did not fire a prosecutor who was investigating a gas company that had Hunter Biden on its board.

*Additionally pertinent information, news, facts bolded by myself for the sake of clarity.*

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Burisma cannot in any reasonable way be said to be Hunter Biden's company as you keep repeating in multiple posts.

Hunter was a paid Board member. Paid a lot. He was not part of the administration of Burisma except in that sense.

If you cannot point to any evidence for any crime that Hunter Biden was guilty of, your assertion that Obama is dirty for trying to cover that up is simply nonsense. Cover up WHAT? Hunter was not under investigation by Ukraine.

Was he or not?

Your whole argument FAILS on that point.

You need to know one thing about these nutty conservative youtubers. They think that their opinion are facts and evidence.
Bombshell after Bombshell and 0 democrats behind bars. The best thing the Orange god can come up with is getting himself impeached by going after Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden, lol.

a reply to: Grambler

Burisma was under investigation for activities in 2010-12.

Biden joined the Board in 2014.

Your source seems to be an opinion article. I can't argue with opinion theirs or yours.

And won't try. Your claim is that President Obama held loan guarantees (not as you continue to claim 'a billion dollars') to stop an investigation into Biden's son.

You have yet to prove that.

originally posted by: XCrycek

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Burisma cannot in any reasonable way be said to be Hunter Biden's company as you keep repeating in multiple posts.

Hunter was a paid Board member. Paid a lot. He was not part of the administration of Burisma except in that sense.

If you cannot point to any evidence for any crime that Hunter Biden was guilty of, your assertion that Obama is dirty for trying to cover that up is simply nonsense. Cover up WHAT? Hunter was not under investigation by Ukraine.

Was he or not?

Your whole argument FAILS on that point.

You need to know one thing about these nutty conservative youtubers. They think that their opinion are facts and evidence.
Bombshell after Bombshell and 0 democrats behind bars. The best thing the Orange god can come up with is getting himself impeached by going after Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden, lol.

Meanwhile you dems are so much better.

Comey was going to birng down trump, then mueller, it was pee tapes, and collusion.

All nothing.

Then it was he is going to be removed for obstruction, mueller will prove it.

Nothing

Or don jr would be in jail for his meeting in trump tower.

Nothing.

Now its impeach trump for daring to investigate biden using a billion tax dollars to get the prosecutor looking into his sons company fired.

Thaqts the best you can come up with.

lol

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I agree that nepotism sucks.

An "ethics question" is hardly a criminal investigation.

And you're citing Warren? Wow.