Televised Impeachment Inquiry Nov. 13th. I invite ATS members to utilize this thread

So now tayolor is saying it was ok for ukranians to interfere because trump said things about crimea?

Taylor admits he didnt know what trumps thoughts were.

Yet his entire problem with trumps actiuons were he FEELS it was trump not wanting to investigate corruption, but to help his campaign

Schiff!!! Unbelievable!

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JesperA

I am not familiar with American laws but it is usual to convict someone based on interpretation of what another person "might" think?

Absolutely. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal indictment. If Congress deems that a president has acted inappropriately, and has brought shame on the office, they can impeach on that alone.

Impeachment and removal of a president by an impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors" it is not meant for this lunacy and you know it. Please stop lying to people who are from other countries who are asking and sincerely would like to know the truth, not your leftie "interpretation" of the truth.

WTF
schiff wont allow the witness to answer about ukraine?

omfg

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Now you're just being hyperbolic because you don't have a good response.

If you feel like focusing on my opinion of Trump gives your argument (or rather lack thereof) any weight then I feel like there really isn't much for you and I to discuss.....

The behavior of our politicians is harming our country and it's all based on "feelings". People don't like Donald Trump. So what - get over it. A lot of people didn't like Obama either but Republicans didn't spend 3 years day in, day out, trying to take him out.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: yuppa

Hearsay is part of the admissible evidence. While it alone may not be enough to convict, more solid evidence is (usually) uncovered after a preponderance of hearsay evidence is made available. This is not unusual.

I believe that this called hope. In this case it could be false hope. At least you believe in transparency, there is no doubt about yours.

So the GOP lawyer is asking the witness what another person thought.... does this guy even lawyer?

Taylor

"I dont know the exact nature of President Trumps concerns"

Hahahaha!

His entire testimony is he knows trump only wanted an investigation to benefit himself politically.

originally posted by: Pyle
So the GOP lawyer is asking the witness what another person thought.... does this guy even lawyer?

why not
it is all they had to offer all morning

why change now?

a reply to: Wayfarer

Funny story, it wasn’t the FBI that got Capone but the IRS.

Even funnier, tax evasion is not an impeachable offense for the POTUS.

Neither are most crimes of personal enrichment unless they negatively impact the country. But most people don’t know that. At least 207 pretended they didn’t.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

It has nothing to do with feelings, despite your insistence/failed attempt to link my opinion via some silly voodoo to Trump's malfeasance.

Your 'feeling' excuse is just a misdirection because a more substiantiative argument you could make is rather vacuous.

oops
now he doesn't know the appropriateness

wow

imagine that

Taylor

"I dont know the appropriateness of this conversation"

Hahahahahaha!

Again, his entire case was it was inappropriate for trump to ask Zelensky for cooperation in investigations.

Now he admits he doesnt know

Fantastic!

a reply to: Ahabstar

Coercive behavior leveraging US funds for personal gain in an election is just about as 'textbook' as one can get regarding crimes of personal enrichment that harm the country.

Just because you as a 'true believer' think that Trump is our savior and nothing he does for himself is anything but good for the country doesn't make it good for the country.

originally posted by: Pyle
So the GOP lawyer is asking the witness what another person thought.... does this guy even lawyer?

The entire case against trump, including Taylor and Kents claims, are what what trumps thoughts were into why he wanted an investigation in Burisma and 2016 election interference.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Ahabstar

Coercive behavior leveraging US funds for personal gain in an election is just about as 'textbook' as one can get regarding crimes of personal enrichment that harm the country.

Just because you as a 'true believer' think that Trump is our savior and nothing he does for himself is anything but good for the country doesn't make it good for the country.

Biden and Obama leveraged US funds to gain in an election by burying a case into Hiunter Bidens company before the 2016 election.

I have just as much proof as my claims of biden and Obamas motivation as you do about trump.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Pyle
So the GOP lawyer is asking the witness what another person thought.... does this guy even lawyer?

The entire case against trump, including Taylor and Kents claims, are what what trumps thoughts were into why he wanted an investigation in Burisma and 2016 election interference.

do they even understand their own case?
if there is any legitimate reason for investigations it is over

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

It has nothing to do with feelings, despite your insistence/failed attempt to link my opinion via some silly voodoo to Trump's malfeasance.

Your 'feeling' excuse is just a misdirection because a more substiantiative argument you could make is rather vacuous.

You're calling it misdirection why, because you don't agree with my statement? Fine, have it your way. I don't want to insult your sensibilities.

a reply to: Grambler

In fact you don't. A hearing of 'Grambler's' personal reporting of how you know of this don't hold nearly as much weight as the preponderance of reports from the hundreds of state dept people involved stating that everything Biden did was above water.