Whistleblower Indirectly Identified by Schiff and Vindman

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Grambler

Honestly, I don't have time for your spin now. You already admitted Trump was going after a political rival a few pages back where I said you would crack under pressure and give up the goods.

I am listening to live testimony now.

I admitted trump asked about Biden corruption.

Obama did that, the dems are doing that now, what does that prove?

So suddenly, when Obama, or dem senators, or schiff, or comey, or mueller, or strrzk or page, or anyone else wants to investigate trump, thats perfectly fine.

But Trump wanting for good reason to investigate whether or not Biden improperly exorted Ukraine with congressionally approved aid is a crime?

I look forward to you demaninding all of these dems be removed from office for going after political rivals.

Keep in mind, Volker is admitting, prior to Zelensky, the Ukraine was corrupt.

This means that for years of the Obama admin giving billions of dollars and working with Poroshenko, it turns out Obama was giving all of that money and working with a corrupt government.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Still, since we have the “transcript” and it clearly shows that Trump did what they are considering for impeachment,

You must be in possession of the alternative-reality transcript then, because the one that President Trump released in this reality is clean as a whistle...

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Still, since we have the “transcript” and it clearly shows that Trump did what they are considering for impeachment,

You must be in possession of the alternative-reality transcript then, because the one that President Trump released in this reality is clean as a whistle...

Maybe that's the whistle you're blowing past the graveyard, but the "transcript" released by the White House clearly shows that Trump directly responded to Zelensky's request to buy Javelins with a request that the Ukraine investigate the Cloudstrike server (sic) and the Biden deal.

The House seems to think that is bad, or wrong, or illegal. Thus, impeachment proceedings ...

Volker says zelensky thought the call was great, admits he was never involved in bribery or a quid pro quo.

Says he thought it was fine to have Ukraine look into election interference and Burisma.

SHOW ME YOUR WAR FACE!!!

Morrison who heard the call admits there was nothing on the call that concerned him

originally posted by: Grambler
Volker says zelensky thought the call was great, admits he was never involved in bribery or a quid pro quo.

Says he thought it was fine to have Ukraine look into election interference and Burisma.

I'm curious why you offer your summation rather than a quote from Volker.

I can't wait to watch this all blow up in the face of dems....just like Russia Russia Russia and Stormy Avenatti and Blasey Ford and etc.....

The winning is just literally making me giddy, but the ongoing trolling and rheeeeee are priceless.

So opinion and belief are okay when some think it helps their "side"?

Either opinion is wrongly presented in this context or it's fine. Not both.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Oh I think you'll have the chance to review the Mueller Report quite soon.

Then we will see what we see.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler
Volker says zelensky thought the call was great, admits he was never involved in bribery or a quid pro quo.

Says he thought it was fine to have Ukraine look into election interference and Burisma.

I'm curious why you offer your summation rather than a quote from Volker.

Because I am listening live, and dont have a direct transcript.

Are you disputing my post there?

a reply to: Grambler

Question asked and answered.

Thank you kindly.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Question asked and answered.

Thank you kindly.

NP.

If you have a source for quick transcripts, I would appreciate it, as I would like to be as accurate as possible.

Volker just destroyed the impeachment inquiry with his testimony in 3 questions from Mike Turner.

He flat out said the President had no intent of withholding aid to investigate Biden or Burisma or the 2016 elections. He said the President did not say anything about withholding aid and Ukraine never stated that they received the President's intentions as a quid pro quo, which was further corroborated by Morrison.

This is the guy that is the one man between the President and Ukraine.

He single-handedly just deconstructed the entire argument from Schiff and crew.

He asked Morrison if he believes (in his opinion) that there was any "demand" to investigate and Morrison said NO.

Wow.

~Namaste

a reply to: Grambler

Now schiff and the dems entire strategy is putting up witnesses with second hand knoweldge who claim they heard things that troubled them.

To me it looks like they are trying to impeach Trump by an annoymous source denying him his constitutional right to face his accuser.

And Schiff and company are the #'s writing the laws for us to live by.

It's freggin scary.

Volker says trump asking zelensky to cooperate with Barr into investigations into Biden is wrong because its a rival.

So does he also think the 2018 letter to zelensky from three dem senators asking zelensky to cooperate with Barr against trump was inappropriate?

a reply to: neo96

Technically your Republican Senate has to approve those laws.

I'm sure that helps.

Also, why do you guys give a flip about the impeachment? Mitch got the Don's back, right?

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Dims are already getting the first taste of defeat with this circus. Soon comes THE HAMMER.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I trust R's about as much as I do D's.

Not when they're 'trying' to keep their jobs.