Its Looking Like Schiff - Vindman - Ciaramella Conspired to Impeach President Trump.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

No they are not the same at all.

One is reciprocal and the other is revenge.

Precisely Silly.

ETA: I’m willing to state up front that hanging impeachment on the Ukraine call was not the Democrats strongest play. Not because I don’t think Trump held up aid to the Ukraine until he got what he wanted (even though, he didn’t get it, another example from the master of The Deal) and what he wanted was political dirt. He hasn’t been shy about asking for it in the past, so it’s not hard to see what it was ... EXCEPT that as President he has a wide-berth to negotiate as he pleases with foreign powers.

What some are trying to do to Hunter Biden and Joe Biden is just revenge pure and simple, and it may backfire.

originally posted by: carewemust
*snip*
Spineless MSM...FoxNews Included.

Finally, after seven years, we agree on something.

I know it’s off-topic, but i had to commemorate it.

originally posted by: angus1745
Some of you are mentally ill. The Impeachment is a 100% legal action against Trump's corrupt self-serving and underhanded scheme ... People have died because of this. It is no accident. This is pre-meditated abuse of power and a betrayal of our allies.

Uh, Benghazi anyone?

Never mind. I'm talking to a wall.

A lot of us know Trump is morally and ethically bankrupt but prefer his policy towards trade and pro-business. Warren and Bernie are fine people and I like them personally but their policies terrify me. So not like some of his supporters are blind to his obvious flaws but good God the left have taken a turn I never saw coming. I thought Dems would move to center after Trump. I was wrong. So a lot of moderates are stuck between Orange man and the AOCs of the world. Also I didn’t vote for Trump knowing he was way too inexperienced and would make mistakes like Ukraine call. But we all know now that the Dems are marxists agents who have revealed their true ideology since Trump took office. I think it’s sad times going forward for Amerika.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

No they are not the same at all.

One is reciprocal and the other is revenge.

Precisely Silly.

ETA: I’m willing to state up front that hanging impeachment on the Ukraine call was not the Democrats strongest play. Not because I don’t think Trump held up aid to the Ukraine until he got what he wanted (even though, he didn’t get it, another example from the master of The Deal) and what he wanted was political dirt. He hasn’t been shy about asking for it in the past, so it’s not hard to see what it was ... EXCEPT that as President he has a wide-berth to negotiate as he pleases with foreign powers.

What some are trying to do to Hunter Biden and Joe Biden is just revenge pure and simple, and it may backfire.

You don't think it is actually the Dems who tossed Biden and son out to be hung? I mean, they really would not be a thing if they didn't force this issue in the first place.

I do believe the Biden's are minor in the actual scope of things. They want focus on the Biden's rather than what Trump's main listed focus was after he asked for a favor. (page 3 of the transcript) then Biden's are not mentioned until after other discussions top of page 4? Doesn't seem like he was the big concern...more like just Trump was disgusted at the rumor.

read the definition of "bribery" in a dictionary...trump fits the definition, in his own words, in his "perfect letter" and publicly admitted to by his own chief of staff in a televised news conference....case closed, it's that simple...all the rest is trumpian ass-covering

a reply to: Gryphon66

Obstruction of justice will be one of the articles of impeachment.
Abuse of power will be another.
The phone call isn't even their strongest card.
This testimony is showing a continuing effort to get the Ukrainian government to lie and to open unwarranted investigations for the privilege of a white house visit.
The prize was dangled over and over. It was not just the phone call.
Rudy Giuliani played a big part and so did Mick Mulvaney. The story is still unraveling.

originally posted by: jimmyx
read the definition of "bribery" in a dictionary...trump fits the definition, in his own words, in his "perfect letter" and publicly admitted to by his own chief of staff in a televised news conference....case closed, it's that simple...all the rest is trumpian ass-covering

So I guess if this inquiry reaches the conclusion that 'he was careless and had no intent' You will be the first to accept that and just move on right?

a reply to: CynConcepts

At the level far beyond what the public is allowed to know, who can say?

Let me make sure I understand your point. You’re saying that the decision on the part of House Leadership to pursue impeachment based on the Whistleblower complaints, etc., was actually a move to hurt the Bidens?

I’ll assume so.

No, as there is zero indication that Hunter or Joe Biden have broken any laws. I realize that many have constructed a case, or more accurately, accepted a case that was structured for consumption that convicts Obama, Biden, Hunter etc. but it really doesn’t do that for reasons I’ve gone over a dozen times now.

Mr. Trump focuses on what he is focused on. He has handlers in the WH. The fact that he was willing to pressure Ukraine and involve SO MANY people in that pressure not for national security concerns but for DEBUNKED THEORIES (and yes, I know where we are and what we do) like “the Crowdstrike Server is in Ukraine” and “the Biden’s are guilty of .... something” tells me that Mr. Trump is being used. This was as dumb for him to use his political power/capital on as it was for the Dems to hang impeachment on it.

Now, as to the real power dynamics playing out behind the scenes? Who can say. None of that.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

Obstruction of justice will be one of the articles of impeachment.
Abuse of power will be another.
The phone call isn't even their strongest card.
This testimony is showing a continuing effort to get the Ukrainian government to lie and to open unwarranted investigations for the privilege of a white house visit.
The prize was dangled over and over. It was not just the phone call.
Rudy Giuliani played a big part and so did Mick Mulvaney. The story is still unraveling.

Right. All of that is countered with the fact that Trump is the President of the United States, with considerable if not unlimited powers to negotiate with foreign powers which off-sets any indication that he transgressed campaign finance laws. Yes, Trump had begun his 2020 campaign in June 2019, but, at this moment, Biden is not the Democratic Candidate, in fact, not ONE primary has been held.

That argument would not hold water in court. It can hold water in an impeachment, because that is not a criminal trial, but even from a factual basis, it’s a very weak case ... and the Senate is not going to remove Trump over it.

IMO

a reply to: Gryphon66

Let me make sure I understand your point. You’re saying that the decision on the part of House Leadership to pursue impeachment based on the Whistleblower complaints, etc., was actually a move to hurt the Bidens?

Nope. I am stating that it seems coincidental that Biden decides to run for President back in April. Obama doesn't even support his run. Yes, there are a lot of strange coincidences.

I do believe the Dems were and are clutching at any and every straw believing Trump will assist them in making himself look bad. It surprised them when Trump released the transcript and then President Zelensky came to the UN and said publicly that he never felt pressured or even knew that the aid was held up.

So I believe they did not want to hurt the Biden's, they believed they could cover since Biden's didn't break the law...just had a sweet loophole in the system. They actually thought that Trump would not be transparent and they would have complete control of optics right before an election that they do not stand a chance of winning. Especially since they just do not have the funding the GOP has to compete.

So yes, it does have the optics of a marketing strategy of partisan politics. Basically, they seem to be doing what they are accusing Trump of. Attacking a political foe to smear him right before an election. It is all just BS and both sides are manipulating their voters.

a reply to: CynConcepts

That’s actually a very tight analysis Cyn. I think the DNC play, fostered by Pelosi/Schiff, is simply to dazzle and distract those members of the public who can be dazzled and distracted by IMPEACHMENT.

“Here you go kids, this is what you elected us for, but we’re going to stake everything on the dumbest possible circumstance, go out of our way to look sneaky and untrustworthy, ignore the protocols established during the Nixon/Clinton impeachments, etc. all for nothing because Trump is not going to be removed by the Senate.”

SO, their base and a certain percentage of independents will be left with two options ... vote again for “hope and change” or stay home and be depressed that the 220+ year trend in US politics held and that the President was not removed from office.

Knowing the Dems, they’re going with “hope and change” ... their playbook is almost as thin as the Republicans.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Color me silly for wanting evidence to remove a president, or even try to remove a president.

The line of questioning that got Clinton may have been stupid but there is no doubt he lied.

Silly me for wanting actual evidence, not believed the president was involved.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Gryphon66

Color me silly for wanting evidence to remove a president, or even try to remove a president.

The line of questioning that got Clinton may have been stupid but there is no doubt he lied.

Silly me for wanting actual evidence, not believed the president was involved.

I don’t think you’re silly at all for wanting evidence in general or specifically in the case of Trump’s impeachment. I think I may not have been clear in my question to you, but I do appreciate your response.

Vindman seemed if anything else a reliable witness. His testimony has both corroborated and been corroborated by other testimony.

You said that your opinion of his testimony changed because of something he said at the end of the testimony, that he believed Trump was guilty etc.

What I’m saying is that after all the evidence that was presented, the statement of VIndman’s opinion (probably in response to a question) invalidated the whole thing?

That’s what I don’t understand about your earlier post.

originally posted by: ChefFox
a reply to: angus1745

And on whose in their right mind would be voting for a PedoCreep like Joe Biden and Crazy Warren? or Socialist Ben?

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” Just sayin.

Another interesting twist the the never ending story...

Bolton released the money before trump decided to.

Bloomberg: State Department Freed Ukraine Money Before Trump Says He Did.
www.bloomberg.com...

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: Gryphon66
I remember the hot mic incident before the 2012 election. Obama did say he would be able to do more regarding Russia after he won. So, just trying to figure out timelines to understand how we all arrived where we are at today.

(IMO) If Obama wasn't an African American, Republicans would have demanded that Obama explain himself. They allowed him to get away with a lot for that reason.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The Whistleblower's handler(s) knew that what he complained about wasn't ILLEGAL, but it was IMPEACHABLE.

Anti-Trump Democrats got smarter, after the Mueller witch-hunt for CRIMES came up empty.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Gryphon66
The whistleblower’s information was reviewed by the IC independent counsel found to have merit and was passed on to the Intelligence Committee.

More than a dozen individuals have corroborated that testimony.

Only a zealot can continue to deny the mounting evidence against Trump and his Administration.

yes, and the phone call has also been released. Which took the wind out of the sail of the whistleblower. We know what was said, we don't need your cousin's brother's girlfriend's account.

It's important that Republicans keep the focus on what started this Impeachment investigation. Schiff and his MSM co-conspirators are now planning to use the "pattern of misdeeds" as their primary talking point.

originally posted by: dawnstar
Another interesting twist the the never ending story...

Bolton released the money before trump decided to.

Bloomberg: State Department Freed Ukraine Money Before Trump Says He Did.
www.bloomberg.com...

There are top-level government people who do things, and don't do things, without telling President Trump.

President Trump orders release of military-related funds to Ukraine, not knowing that it had been done already. If he didn't want the money released, I wonder what these folks (Bolton) would have told him?

The Declassification of the FISA Spygate materials went a similar route. In Sept 2018, President Trump ordered certain documents declassified. The DOJ told him his request was being processed. In reality, they didn't budge..and still haven't.