New Impeachment Transcripts Released Today

a reply to: Gryphon66

No I am not saying it is political, Im saying the opposite. If it was political, they would have waited longer.

I find that the investigation into Biden extorting a country with a billion tax dollars is a big deal.

I also found an investigation into the clinton foundation to be a big deal, or Bush lying about WMD's

Yet seems government in both parties chose not to investigate.

The reason this is such a big deal now is the democrats are saying investigating Biden is reason to impeach. If there was reason to investigate, which clearly I have shown there is, then there i no case for impeachment.

I would have liked to have seen this investigated earlier, but it wasnt. Ok, so what, that means we now cant investigate?

Evidence about the motivations for Bidens actions would certainly not just be in the US, but in the Ukraine as well. Hence why it was important to ask for cooperation with them.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Gryphon66

No I am not saying it is political, Im saying the opposite. If it was political, they would have waited longer.

I find that the investigation into Biden extorting a country with a billion tax dollars is a big deal.

I also found an investigation into the clinton foundation to be a big deal, or Bush lying about WMD's

Yet seems government in both parties chose not to investigate.

The reason this is such a big deal now is the democrats are saying investigating Biden is reason to impeach. If there was reason to investigate, which clearly I have shown there is, then there i no case for impeachment.

I would have liked to have seen this investigated earlier, but it wasnt. Ok, so what, that means we now cant investigate?

Evidence about the motivations for Bidens actions would certainly not just be in the US, but in the Ukraine as well. Hence why it was important to ask for cooperation with them.

Here’s what I know: there is or should be an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden. IF there’s not an ongoing investigation, the sudden urgency makes no sense. You say the previous President of Ukraine was an Obama ally, but surely, he would understand that Trump is and has been President and would have cooperated with any help the investigation needed in Ukraine ... but ... it seems like since Joe is an American citizen, the investigation would be done here, right?

DOJ has no jurisdiction in Ukraine, but Joe’s crimes would have happened here ... I wonder why we haven’t heard anything about that. Surely after two month’s or more of investigation they have something, right?

a reply to: Grambler

How did his salary go from as much as 50,000 a month to 80,000 a month to almost a 100 thousand a month?
Inflation?

Or was the investigation into matters between 2010-2012 before Biden joined the Board in 2014?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, why would that be relevant?

Why would it be relevant? Please... you want to twist every fact and then ask why this is relevant?

Hunter wasnt there when they were under investigation. Why do you keep ignoring that.
He was not there for the time period that they were investigating. Why do you keep ignoring that?
The entire intl community who had an interest wanted this prosecutor fired. Why do you keep ignoring that?
They wanted him gone because he was NOT investigating. Why do you keep ignoring that?
You just want to ignore every fact that stops your argument.
No one should ever read or listen to a word you say because you ignore facts like they are gonna kill you.

Why was the only corruption that trump was interested in this company and these people?
Please. I am not that gullible.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I have no idea what your point is

So according to you, the fact trump didn’t immediately start an investigation into Biden proves there should be no investigation into Biden?

The fact that he discussed possible Ukrainian interference into the 2016 election and of the previous admin possible corruptly forcing a Ukrainian prosecutor the VERY FIRST TIME he talked with the new Ukrainian President s somehow strange timing?

You somehow find it strange if there is an investigation on going details of it haven’t been leaked publicly?



It is very simple; either there is reason to investigate Biden’s quid pro quo or there isn’t

If there is, the timing of the investigation doesn’t change the fact trump did nothing wrong he seeming Ukraine’s cooperation

a reply to: Sillyolme

Silly, the video that they have based most of this on came out in January 2018. That’s Biden supposedly taking full credit for withholding loan guarantees from the Ukraine until they did his bidding to protect his son Hunter.

Of course, Hunter isn’t and wasn’t under investigation for ANYTHING in Ukraine, as they’ve stated multiple times.

Barr became AG a month later, so we have to believe the investigation may have started then ... so a year and a half later, it’s still ongoing. Perhaps to the point that Barr needed Zelensky’s help with wrapping up stuff in Ukraine.

So, my question is ... why haven’t they released any of this information? Surely they want Americans to know that their past VP and future Presidential Candidate is dirty, right?

January 2018 - June 2019. For something this big, SURELY they have their case by now, right?

a reply to: Grambler

Sure you know what my point is.

There must be an ongoing investigation of the Bidens, that Trump asked for help with from President Zelensky since he couldn’t trust the previous President according to you.

SO the investigation is happening. You don’t have to keep arguing for it to happen.

In fact, I’d say if there isn’t an ongoing investigation, then that makes the Trump call even more suspect.

But I’m sure there is, so that’s not an issue.

You seem to keep acting like the Democrats are going to drop the impeachment becuase you don’t think it’s just. You keep repeating this over and over ... fine! You don’t think there’s a reason in the Ukraine call to impeach Trump. Neither do I!

What’s to understand? What’s so difficult for you to grasp in what I’m saying? Why do you think this realization on your part is so ... important?

You don’t think there’s a reason to impeach Trump. All due respect, but SO?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

How did his salary go from as much as 50,000 a month to 80,000 a month to almost a 100 thousand a month?
Inflation?

It was first reported he recieved 50 thousand, now its over 80 thousand.

Between April 2014 and November 2015, Biden and Archer each received monthly payments of $83,333 for “consulting services."

www.foxnews.com...

Thats near 100 thousand a month.

Unlike you, who claimed

BIden saying he would walk with his million dollars

Thats a lie, it was a Billion, and it wasnt his money, it was the tax payers.

Hunter wasnt there when they were under investigation. Why do you keep ignoring that.

Yes he was.

Hunter joined Burisma in 2014. there were active investigations into burisma going on at that time, which ended when the Obama allied NABU finally let the case go with a small fine in 2017.

He was not there for the time period that they were investigating. Why do you keep ignoring that?

Thats irrelevant as to whether or not they would have possibly found corruption that would have affcted Hunter, whether it be evidnce of him recieving illegal moneies, or just shutting donw burisma that would have cost Hunter a lot of money.

The entire intl community who had an interest wanted this prosecutor fired. Why do you keep ignoring that?

Prove the entire intel community wanted that? Even if some did, that doesnt mean it wasnt a conflict of interest for Biden to issue his quid pro quo

They wanted him gone because he was NOT investigating. Why do you keep ignoring that?

Then why didnt Obama, biden, and the entire intel community voice outraged when the Obama allied NABU basically buried the investigation inot zlochevsky?

Also, republicans, democrats, and rosenstein all wanted comey fired, yet I dont recall you saying there didnt need to be an investigation inot trump for him firing comey.

You just want to ignore every fact that stops your argument.
No one should ever read or listen to a word you say because you ignore facts like they are gonna kill you.

Coming from someone who has been probably more wrong trhan anyone else on this site, Ill take what you say here with a grain of salt.

Why was the only corruption that trump was interested in this company and these people?
Please. I am not that gullible.

That a lie, he asked specifically about corwdstrike as well.

Meanwhile, why didnt you ask that question about Biden? They were so worried about Zlochevsky not being investigated and corruption in ukraine, yet they only demanded one prosecutor get fired? Then when their allies at the NABU buried the case, they said nothing?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Sure you know what my point is.

There must be an ongoing investigation of the Bidens, that Trump asked for help with from President Zelensky since he couldn’t trust the previous President according to you.

SO the investigation is happening. You don’t have to keep arguing for it to happen.

In fact, I’d say if there isn’t an ongoing investigation, then that makes the Trump call even more suspect.

But I’m sure there is, so that’s not an issue.

You seem to keep acting like the Democrats are going to drop the impeachment becuase you don’t think it’s just. You keep repeating this over and over ... fine! You don’t think there’s a reason in the Ukraine call to impeach Trump. Neither do I!

What’s to understand? What’s so difficult for you to grasp in what I’m saying? Why do you think this realization on your part is so ... important?

You don’t think there’s a reason to impeach Trump. All due respect, but SO?

Why are you on this message board

Do you think your comments will change law makers minds on anything?

Yet still you comment

I am pointing out there is no reason to impeach trump because

1. I feel like it

2. Some people may be interested in hearing what I have to say

If you find my posts so meaningless you don’t have to respond

a reply to: Grambler

Aww, you mad bro?

Please continue to tell everyone what you think.



You've conclusively established that you don't agree with impeachment, and that there should be an investigation of Biden.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Aww, you mad bro?

Please continue to tell everyone what you think.

You've conclusively established that you don't agree with impeachment, and that there should be an investigation of Biden.

Not mad at all, I like the conversation.

Im not the one asking people on a message board why they make posts if politicians wont listen to them.

a reply to: Grambler

Yeah.

You do seem real touchy about that.

Well, you've apparently got your investigation of Biden and you'll get over the Impeachment.

I look forward to your next point.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Yeah.

You do seem real touchy about that.

Well, you've apparently got your investigation of Biden and you'll get over the Impeachment.

I look forward to your next point.

Thanks.

I will continue to show how the media and democrats is lying saying there is no reason to investigate Biden, and showing how the impeachment hearing is a sham.

I will also continue to show this deep state corruption in other ares where it shows up.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: ChefFox
I still fail to see any crime that Trump has committed.

I have asked so many people here in ats, none can site one

They just say things like “everyone knows it’s obvious”

One person did say all quid pro quo’s are extortion and a crime, but then quickly said Biden’s was ok

This has been answered so many times it’s redundant at this point. It’s asked so much I’ve memorized it by now.

18 USC 601

That isn’t an opinion. It’s a clear violation of this law. And we aren’t even getting into the laws that were broken if it turns out Trump hid politically damaging information on that classified server.

Might I suggest you read through older threads about this you may have missed in your absence.

Joe won the primary? Noope sure hasn't as a matter of FACT he only entered the race after an investigation into him for corruption had already begun. So if Trump was already investigating a creepy, hair sniffing, very feely around children, corrupt pos like Biden before he started to his laughable campaign (last seen speaking to a blank screen and thinking he was in Ohio) and is trying to get more information from the ead of state where the corruption "allegedly" took place (allegedly is in quotes even though Joe was videotaped bragging about it) it means nada. The primary has not been run true or false? Since obviously it is true then Joe could not have been selected to represent the Democratic party to be their candidate since it has not been run.

If Joe had won the primary and was a political opponent of Trump in the 2020 elections the law you quoted would mean something but since at best he is a laughingstock and an embarrassment to senior citizens then the law you quoted I think like a gazilliuon times in different threads means SQUAT yet you keep saying it like it is the truth but it is not it is a lie. You know who coined the phrase if tell a lie enough it becomes truth? Here is a hint it was the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Why take a page from their book? Do you suport their other ideals as well? Quit spreading lies and disinformation or run the risk of being compared to the National Socialist German Workers' Party your choice. All you have to do to prove me wrong is show everyone where a former 2 time loser in the primaries won the one that has not been run yet. Good luck with that

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Wrong but hey if you want to look at Russian roads why not look at U1, Hillary's campaign paying for the "Steele Dossier" from Russian sources, don't look at the Mueller report though because after like 2+ years they could find no evidence of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia. Facts make on smarter try it sometime

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Boadicea

I didn't link corruption with the Biden's. I also didn't suggest that Russia is innocent.

Merely repeating Trump's insane conspiracy theory is not an endorsement of its validity.

Trump's obsession with Crowdstrike is all about clearing the Russians, for interfering in the 2016 election, and blaming the Democrats.

ETA: "Do whatever you can" is part of the phone call transcript/memo.

It was already posted here where it was impossible for the Russians to do it at that speed but facts again. If the Russians did it why didn't the DNC allow the FBI access? Please explain why they thought it was ok to use an outside source to allege foreign meddling into our elections (one could consider that an act of war ftr) instead of our own gov't. Who cares who hackedleaked the server anyway shouldn't we be focused on what was in those "hacks/leaks" when one looks at what they reveal one might realize they are defending pond scum and be forced to look in the mirror real hard to condone the amount of corruption revealed. NOPE instead fight over who leaked it glossing over the crimes revealed by it.

To put it another way look over here while instead of here where the criminality is. Appalling

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Boadicea

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Bidens acted corruptly regarding Ukraine affairs. Is there an appearance of conflict of interest, sure. But, if conflict of interest was a crime, Trump would have been impeached a long time ago.

Trump is being impeached for trying to extort the Ukrainian president into legitimizing his wild and crazy conspiracy theory, to benefit him in his 2020 re-election bid.

Except Joe Bragging about it. In no way does it help Trump's campaign to look into corruption it does help the USA though and that is a bad thing right.

Joe has not and will not win the Primary election (same one he has tried for twice and failed miserably.) Polls don't count because well they are worthless and slanted to prove whatever the pollster wants it to. look at the last election. Interesting no one talks about that part of the election (the part where the polls were so terribly wrong) only that Hillary won the popular vote (with help of the Dead voting in Chicago and illegals in California already proven) How it was her turn etc etc no one mentions that if she was president we would be at war with Russia already (with Russia using the Uranium sold by us on us.)

a reply to: Sillyolme

Not enough time and I do not want to fill up this thread with examples plus I don't do "Left wing conspiracies"

a reply to: Gryphon66

Because of the BS Mueller investigation that held up the storm. "You know what this is? It is the quiet before the storm"

Then the investigations into Trump began. Why is it because he was going to root out corruption it appears so since everyone attacking Trump is "allegedly" corrupt nah drop the allegedly their corrupt as all get out and those that defend them are just as guilty of condoning it. This must never happen again. TGFT

oopsy

originally posted by: CrazyFox
a reply to: Gryphon66

Because of the BS Mueller investigation that held up the storm. "You know what this is? It is the wuiet before the storm"

That really doesn’t make a lot of sense. I’m sure the BIdens have been investigated for at least a couple of years.

It’s a vital question of national security after all.