It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

republicans got their ass handed to them

page: 9
43
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Vindman also listened:


Vindman called the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy "improper" and testified that he had a "duty" to report the call to White House counsel John Eisenberg.

"Without hesitation, I knew I had to report my concerns to the White House counsel. As I said in my statement, it was improper for the president to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially from a foreign power where there's at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation," Vindman said.


link




posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Regardless of what he said, was aid held for a statement?



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
Vindman also listened:


Vindman called the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy "improper" and testified that he had a "duty" to report the call to White House counsel John Eisenberg.

"Without hesitation, I knew I had to report my concerns to the White House counsel. As I said in my statement, it was improper for the president to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially from a foreign power where there's at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation," Vindman said.


link[/q uote]Too had, he superior didn't see any concerns and neither did Williams ot Volker.

All in all, at the end of the say, No QPQ, Obstruction or Bribery.

It is amusing to see you grasping straws 😂🤭



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Liquesence

Regardless of what he said, was aid held for a statement?


Yes, aid was held. That's the point.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

He can say what sondland said all he wants.

He and volker both testified they never saw anything of bribery from trump, and the ukrainians never interpreted any bribery or pressure whatsoever.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:10 PM
link   
What I find most disgusting about all this is. If I committed a crime. Then run for president. I'm now immune from paying for said crime.

Obama's VP bribed Ukraine. Remove that prosecutor or dont get funding...

Now he's running for president and that comes into light but now because his running. He should be immune.... this not catching dirt on a running mate. This is dirt of a previous administration.... what the hell is wrong with everyone...



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

See it for a farce? Oh, I agree, it's a huge farce but it's serving its purpose pretty well. The Divided States of America.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Vindman later admitted the word "demand" was never used in the transcript. he admitted the transcript was accurate.

we can read for ourselves, there was no demand. Zelensky has said so, Volker said so, Morrison said so.

And most importantly, we can read it and see so for ourselves.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Grambler


the latter two witnesses who both had far more access to trump and zelenskys team said over and over they never saw any evidence aid was conditioned on investigations, or any evidence of a bribe or a quid pro quo.


Incorrect.


“What did Ambassador Sondland tell you that he told Mr. Yermak?” Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman asked Morrison. Morrison replied, “That the Ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted.”


vox
That's too bad, Morrison also said there was nothing concerning with regards to the July 25th call, the epicenter of the whole ordeal.


But he felt the need to express concerns to others about it and that it should not be made public.
Uh Huh, so much so, that he went outside his chain of command because it was a "busy week", auto red flag for any service member, but more importantly, a huge red flag, especially for a verified and known partisan with a questionable history.

Sorry, but you should already know this dude is toast.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Vindman is compromised and is working with Schiff. He lacks the paper trail Eric Ciaramella has of both a long history of doing whatever is needed to get Trump and the personal friendship ties to Schiff, so he's become the face the Left is looking to put out to America, but he is compromised to say the least. His assessment of the phone conversation is infinitely rejectible.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

He explained he was worried it would leak and damage relations with ukraine.

And.... He was right!



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Link and source of the prosecutor making a statement about the Ukraine investigation then 😌



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Liquesence

Regardless of what he said, was aid held for a statement?


Yes, aid was held. That's the point.


The question was aid held for a statement.

Your answer of yes, is inaccurate.

Zelensky never gave that statement, and he received aid.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Was watching Tucker.

I was unaware that Vindman was offered (3 times) a position as Ukrainian Defense Minister.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

It's not their position to say what bribery is or is not, just what they heard/saw.


and the ukrainians never interpreted any bribery or pressure whatsoever.


They did testify the Ukrainians expressed concern about aid being withheld.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

🤦‍♂️ The democrats, are having trouble proving that.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Was watching Tucker.

I was unaware that Vindman was offered (3 times) a position as Ukrainian Defense Minister.


Yep. Isn't it... interesting... that so many on the Attack Trump side have these direct connections to the Ukraine which Team Trump simply lacks, same as was the case with the Russian Collusion narrative which found jack squat and magically went away to be replaced by this latest effort?

Biden, Vindman, Pelosi's son, Biden's son, Schiff himself the accusers are accusing Trump while they stand on a mountain of Ukrainian cash... you'd think even the dullest knife in the Kept Voter drawer could see this plainly, ya?



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


The question was aid held for a statement.


Correct (in part). Aid held for ____.



Zelensky never gave that statement,


No, he didn't. And it's irrelevant to the request.


he received aid.


They did. The receipt is irrelevant to the request.
edit on 19-11-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

concern of aid being withheld is not bribery.

And first hand witnesses who were most involved at the highest level with the ukraine are exactly the people I would want to hear from iabout potential facts of bribery. They saw none at all.

Now with biden, we have and admission of bribery, but somehow its illegal to want to investigate that.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Grambler


The question was aid held for a statement.


Correct. Aid held for ____.



Zelensky never gave that statement,


No, he didn't. And it's irrelevant to the request.


he received aid.


They did. The receipt is irrelevant to the request.


Oh yeah, you were one of those "Asking a legal counsel if something would be illegal is equivalent to obstructing justice" honks in the waning days of the Russian Collusion investigation farce, weren't you? That explains a lot in the context of your arguments here. Save yourself a lot of typing time and just spam this from here on out:
IT'S ILLEGAL BECAUSE I WANT IT TO BE ILLEGAL AND THE NARRATIVE NEEDS IT TO BE ILLEGAL
and save us the read time along the way.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join