John Solomon refutes Vindmans testimony his reporting was innaccurate

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: JBurns
Actually there is a treaty and it refutes your claim that the president, over the phone, is the right channel.

You opinion on the legal end isn't going to be taken into account.

Oh you mean the treaty DJT was following to continue with the investigation in the Ukraine of the huge network of corruption. And to see if we could give aid for the law enforcement cases and get aid if it was true the Americans used the Ukrainian gov for political gain in 2015-16 or thereabout. So , you got it partly right there is a treaty. Therefor the part where "I want nothing, no quid quo pro", "Just do the right thing" is where you should have studied more carefully. You won't but you MIGHT come up with a witty response that I will gladly star too so fire away.

a reply to: Justoneman

Oh you mean the treaty DJT was following to continue with the investigation in the Ukraine of the huge network of corruption.

I think he means the treaty which requires a certain paper trail and does not involve the president but specific actions by the DOJ. But I might be wrong.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Justoneman

Oh you mean the treaty DJT was following to continue with the investigation in the Ukraine of the huge network of corruption.

I think he means the treaty which requires a certain paper trail and does not involve the president but specific actions by the DOJ. But I might be wrong.

Indeed you might be.

a reply to: Justoneman
In that case, do you know which treaty he was referring to?

Trump wasn't after corruption. Leave the Bull#ing to the lawyers. He may be able to play that defense, but only an idiot would actually believe that crap.

a reply to: Grambler

Thanks for the link. Good stuff.

I feel like a dinosaur wanting to see data/evidence/sourcing/etc. before I am inclined to consider it.

These days all you have to do is say something and it's all good. Why bother with work trying to dig down. Just say it over and over and that makes it true. We didn't even get past page one of this thread and practitioners were busy at it.

a reply to: Justoneman

I meant the one mentioned on page 2.
PDF of "TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND UKRAINE ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS

Which states:

Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central Authorities and defines Central Authorities for purposes of the Treaty. For the United States, the Central Authority shall be the Attorney General.

and

Article 4 prescribes the form and content of written requests under the Treaty, specifying in detail the information required in each request. The article permits other forms of requests in emergency situations but requires written confirmation within ten days thereafter unless the Central Authority of the Requested State agrees otherwise.

So not the president and not on the phone, unless it was an emergency situation.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Vindman and "Ciaramello"'s true allegiences finally show through

Makes sense dems support those hoaxers, they support every other country except the United States. Also makes sense since they aren't Americans.

a reply to: daskakik

So not the president and not on the phone, unless it was an emergency situation.

The AG is merely acting directly under the President's authority at all times, however.

Besides, this is an emergency. Where have you been? There is an active self-described and provable coup attempt on-going that must be crushed to ensure our legitimacy & sovereignty is upheld. This is treason and a national security threat of the highest possible magnitude and needs to be handled accordingly

No time to lose.

a reply to: JBurns

The AG is merely acting directly under the President's authority at all times, however.

What action did the AG take?

originally posted by: JBurns
The AG is merely acting directly under the President's authority at all times, however.

Still doesn't change the wording of the treaty.

Besides, this is an emergency. Where have you been? There is an active self-described and provable coup attempt on-going that must be crushed to ensure our legitimacy & sovereignty is upheld. This is treason and a national security threat of the highest possible magnitude and needs to be handled accordingly

No time to lose.

Save it. Playing chicken little doesn't make it a real emergency.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: daskakik

So not the president and not on the phone, unless it was an emergency situation.

The AG is merely acting directly under the President's authority at all times, however.

Besides, this is an emergency. Where have you been? There is an active self-described and provable coup attempt on-going that must be crushed to ensure our legitimacy & sovereignty is upheld. This is treason and a national security threat of the highest possible magnitude and needs to be handled accordingly

No time to lose.

It has gotten serious there is no doubt you're right. This isn't like having an order for a wire tapping at a hotel or Trump Tower. This is actual money laundering to the children of prominent Politicians on both sides of the aisle and it is about time someone like POTUS 45 step up to the plate and legally correct the matter.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JBurns

The AG is merely acting directly under the President's authority at all times, however.

What action did the AG take?

Collection of facts from sources that will make or break some people real soon and you know it even if you won't admit it.

a reply to: Justoneman

You do know that Pelosi, Romney et. al. kids don’t work for Burisma, right?

That’s where the alleged money-laundering took place.

a reply to: Justoneman

The AG has requested an investigation by Ukraine per the terms of the treaty? That's reassuring. Preferable to the president seeking a public announcement that there is an investigation.

There will be a legitimate paper trail then. Good.

Did they work in the Ukraine? I read they did, if that is not true let me know I would appreciate the heads up. I was under the impression they did and billions of the money that their parents approved to go there is missing.
The most corrupt country who the US has been giving billions to for years? Missing billions now.
Just because they were not working for Burisma doesn't mean it looks any better.
I am not saying they are all guilty but it sure looks like something fishy has been going on in the Ukraine.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Justoneman

You do know that Pelosi, Romney et. al. kids don’t work for Burisma, right?

That’s where the alleged money-laundering took place.

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Sounds like you need to do some more research eh?

Will do..... I will start here capitalhill.org...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Sounds like you need to do some more research eh?

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

After that many edits all you have is an article about Pelosi’s son linked to Viscoil and NRGLab when the post you replied to said:

You do know that Pelosi, Romney et. al. kids don’t work for Burisma, right?

Emphasis mine.

So, no Burisma?

Are either of those two companies being investigated, if not, what was the scandal that article was alluding to?

a reply to: Phage

Well first of all, july 25th created no ruckus. The general public wasn't aware of the call until mid september (the 15th was the first public awareness of the complaint IIRC), well after this exchange. There wasn't even a complaint about the call until nearly 3 weeks after it happened (and that complaint wasn't even formal until nearly 6 weeks after).

The date of this exchange was sept 9th.