As Sondland testified, a misleading Ukraine story spread among conservatives on social media

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Boadicea

How did Ukraine meddle in the 2016 election?

A quick synopsis of what you mean when you say that ... I really do want to understand where you guys are coming from.

Let me preface my answer to say that I am/have been addressing general corruption allegations in Ukraine and with Ukraine, pertaining to the impeachment inquiry against Trump, as opposed to the other allegation of election interference.

But my understanding is that the claims of election interference has to do with any Ukraine involvement in the Crowdstrike server (hence protecting Hillary from whatever truths and facts could be found and implicate her in wrongdoing), and the information released from Ukraine regarding Manafort's wrongdoing (thus implicating Trump in wrongdoing). This is from December 2018: Ukraine Court Rules Manafort Disclosure Caused ‘Meddling’ in U.S. Election

I'm not ignoring or discounting the allegations about Crowdstrike and the server, but neither am I concerned about it at this point. Without a proper and thorough investigation -- or even just some quality investigative journalism -- I really don't know what to think about it. It could just be a rumor started to throw folks off the truth of its location.

The old Gaurd were just not able to adjust to a new approach and could only see it all as bad or wrong.
To call it a drug deal sounds very extreme to me.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Gryphon66

Also, from Fiona Hill's testimony this morning.

Hill said Bolton advised her to contact Eisenberg after a July 10 meeting with senior Ukrainian officials in which Sondland brought up the issue of investigations, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Bolton told her he wasn't part of "whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up,"

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So not a first hand witness and no information on what deal if any was being done. From the quote you posted, why would I care? We got first hand witness testimony, every last one of them said there was nothing wrong.

Thank you for that Boadicea.
I would say that confirms the meddling Gryphon asked to see.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Boadicea

How did Ukraine meddle in the 2016 election?

A quick synopsis of what you mean when you say that ... I really do want to understand where you guys are coming from.

Let me preface my answer to say that I am/have been addressing general corruption allegations in Ukraine and with Ukraine, pertaining to the impeachment inquiry against Trump, as opposed to the other allegation of election interference.

But my understanding is that the claims of election interference has to do with any Ukraine involvement in the Crowdstrike server (hence protecting Hillary from whatever truths and facts could be found and implicate her in wrongdoing), and the information released from Ukraine regarding Manafort's wrongdoing (thus implicating Trump in wrongdoing). This is from December 2018: Ukraine Court Rules Manafort Disclosure Caused ‘Meddling’ in U.S. Election

I'm not ignoring or discounting the allegations about Crowdstrike and the server, but neither am I concerned about it at this point. Without a proper and thorough investigation -- or even just some quality investigative journalism -- I really don't know what to think about it. It could just be a rumor started to throw folks off the truth of its location.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: Gryphon66

... but it didn't hurt the Trump Campaign at the time, it has been used after Trump became President, correct?

Use some common sense. UKrainians released Manafort's 2012 ledgers in August 2016 and Ukraine PROSECUTED these people for interference. You think they would have imprisoned them for election interference if it was released long after the election was over?

If I'm not mistaken, that black ledger was released in cooperation with the Mueller investigation, into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Later Poroshenko order his government to STOP cooperating with Mueller's investigation. www.newsweek.com...

That's only because you have no defense for Biden.

Biden didn't do what Trump is saying he did..."stop the prosecution".

Are you saying that if Hunter Biden is guilty of influence peddling, that would justify Trump's extortion scheme?

a reply to: Boadicea

Right. They definitely burned Manafort.

There is a theory going around certain right-wing publications that the DNC server is actually in Ukraine, because the owner of Crowdstrike is Russian, and thus, to some, it seems logical that the actual server is in Ukraine.

That's the extent of it as far as I know. I'm not sure we can call that election interference ... unless we are trying to justify what the President did, which really, requires no justifcation.

a reply to: ErEhWoN
Your source is NBC = propaganda = fake news.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Sookiechacha

So not a first hand witness and no information on what deal if any was being done. From the quote you posted, why would I care? We got first hand witness testimony, every last one of them said there was nothing wrong.

Fiona Hill was a first hand witness to the conversation, and the reaction of Bolton, her boss, when she conveyed the conversation to him. Yes, first hand witness, Fiona Hill indicts Mick Mulvaney and Gordon Sondland for trying to get Ukraine to push a false narrative in exchange for aid.

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Nope.

2nd line.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Reality isn't a Judgment call
Got 3 minutes ? If not how about 1 minute and a half ?

Skip to 1:30 if your time is short

a reply to: ErEhWoN

He also said that he didn't think they were doing anything wrong. (paraphrase, obviously)
multiple times in his opening statement, did he not?

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
a reply to: ErEhWoN
Your source is NBC = propaganda = fake news.

Damning the source is not a logical argument.

Can you offer counter evidence to the NBC reports?

It makes more sense than that the wildest dreams of right-wing media all came true on one afternoon, doesn't it?

a reply to: MetalThunder

Is what President Obama did through VP Biden wrong?

Is it wrong to withhold aid to another country or not?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Sookiechacha

So not a first hand witness and no information on what deal if any was being done. From the quote you posted, why would I care? We got first hand witness testimony, every last one of them said there was nothing wrong.

Fiona Hill was a first hand witness to the conversation, and the reaction of Bolton, her boss, when she conveyed the conversation to him. Yes, first hand witness, Fiona Hill indicts Mick Mulvaney and Gordon Sondland for trying to Ukraine to push a false narrative in exchange for aid.

Yes, she is a witness to Bolton making a statement which includes nothing illegal being done by anyone. Are you saying Hill listened in on the phone call Trump had with Zelensky? I never saw that testimony can I see it?

a reply to: MetalThunder

I've seen it. Please tell me where, exactly, Biden admits to stopping the prosecution of Burisma or his son Hunter.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

If I'm not mistaken, that black ledger was released in cooperation with the Mueller investigation, into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Come on, people! The whole reason Manafort resigned from the Trump campaign was due to the release of the information in August 2016. Where are you guys getting your faulty information?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MetalThunder

Is what President Obama did through VP Biden wrong?

Is it wrong to withhold aid to another country or not?

Depends on the reason. If the reason is because a criminal investigation will put your son in the crosshairs so you want to allow corruption to continue for personal gain then I would say it's wrong.

If the end goal is to have an investigation to ensure justice prevails then no.

If the end goal is to have a sham investigation and decide the outcome and not let the facts speak for themselves then again, that's wrong.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Biden didn't make the decisions about Obama withholding Ukraininan loan guarantees. Obama did. And we've established that the President has wide-ranging powers in foreign diplomacy and could withhold as he determined was needed.

As Mr. Trump did.

This is a quandry for both the Democrats and Trump supporters. If what Obama did was wrong, then what Trump did is wrong.

If not, there is no wrongdoing and the impeachment effort is a big fat joke concocted by Nancy Pelosi because the American people can't be trusted. The dumb #$@%*.

originally posted by: andy06shake
He's panicking.

No, he's actually not... he's laughing his ass off at these imbeciles who have fallen hook, line and sinker for his trap.

Sondland acknowledged the Ukraine quid pro quo

No, he said he 'presumed' there was one - he even later said he 'guessed' there was one.

and implicated Trump, Pence, Pompeo and many others.

You mean when he said "P[resident Trump never said anything to me about wanting anything, in fact, he said the exact opposite.

In other words... he had nothing but opinion.

Those Tweets were designed to intimidate and discredit Yovanovitch,

No, they were designed to infuriate the demwits, and it worked just as planned.

And it will all out in the end, just wait and see.

On that we completely agree.

Buckle up, Benjamin.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
However, without rummaging through the internet, I can tell you that Lt Col Vidman and Jennifer Williams both listened in on the call and both said Trump's request was impropriate.

Which is merely their opinion, you know what they say about those...