The Left Make Giuliani & POTUS Trump Guilty with Campaign Finance Violation Before Facts are Known.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
However, Biden CLEARLY, and from his own mouth, admitted to having withheld over $1 billion U.S.D. unless the former Ukranians fired the prosecutor whom was about to indict Hunter Biden...

Nowhere in the transcript does POTUS Trump used the language used by Biden...

The fact that so many of you don't acknowledge the difference between the POTUS phone call with the Ukranian President, and the bribery/coercion/blackmail that Biden used just to get his kid out of trouble, speaks volumes about whom is being honest here.

Sigh.....

Literally, the only evidence of wrongdoing anyone can provide in the Biden case is that speech. Do you really think he is so stupid that he would just brag about a felony out loud? I know Trump does it, but usually crooks are smarter than that.

Plus, the evidence doesn't add up. Here is a quick fact sheet about the Biden situation

• Burisma was NOT under investigation at the time of Biden’s actions however, Shokin had suggested he was going to investigate Burisma but never did.
  
• The investigation in Burisma would not have involved any actions by Hunter Biden, it would have been for the time period 2010-2012 before Hunter joined the board.
  
• Shokin (Ukrainian Prosecutor) was widely thought to be corrupt within Ukraine and without.
  
• There were protests and at least one assassination attempt against Shokin due to him NOT dealing with rampant corruption within the country
  
• Multiple countries, the IMF, and even Republicans supported the firing of Shokin in 2016
  
• Hunter being on the board of Burisma is not illegal
  

If you are interested here is more information on the Biden/Ukraine situation.

LINK

a reply to: Gorgonite

One of the more ironic claims I've seen bandied about is that Zelensky denied that he had been coerced and that's held by Trump supporters as holy writ. Forget that President Zelensky said it after the funds had been released and he had gotten his visit to Washington, to sit next to Trump.

a reply to: Gorgonite

There's plenty of evidence that demonstrates that the United States and the EU were putting the same pressures on the removal of Shokin for MONTHS at the time. Biden is bragging about it as if he accomplished it himself, which is typical Biden.

I've posted the links to that evidence; not many folks seem to care.

Poor President Zelensky, labeled a liar because his description does not match the bs narrative of the left.

new guy
newly elected
no evidence of his character being suspect
but because orange man bad he is a liar

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Poor President Zelensky, labeled a liar because his description does not match the bs narrative of the left.

new guy
newly elected
no evidence of his character being suspect
but because orange man bad he is a liar

LOL. Nope, Zelensky got the terms of what they were asking for a) aid released and b) trip to Washington. I said nothing about Zelensky being a liar or any of the remainder of the Trump tropes in your post.

ATS is still a conspiracy site right? Since when do we take anything ANY politician does at face value?

a reply to: Gryphon66
wow
he was inaugurated may 20.2019
so what you are suggesting is most likely not true as for as he being up to speed on all of the foreign relations of his government

as to the left suggesting he is lying
he flat out stated he was under no pressure to do anything

so when we have a material witness to a crime tell us there was no crime, there likely was no crime

also as he was inaugurated on may 20,2019; the investigation re-opened into the biden situation in february of 2019 had nothing to do with zelensky nor trump

asking another foreign leader for the status of matters involving american citizens in their nation is in no way illegal
no matter how much you post it is

a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm suggesting that politicians do things for political reasons. That's all.

a reply to: Gryphon66
and the TRUTH is the material witness to the "crime" the president is accused of by congress says no such crime took place

sorry the truth is not aligned with the current bs narrative

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
and the TRUTH is the material witness to the "crime" the president is accused of by congress says no such crime took place

sorry the truth is not aligned with the current bs narrative

I wouldn't take the words coming out of any politicians mouth to be the truth without secondary confirmation.

Besides that, Trump has told the American public that he asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. Is Trump lying?

Even the highly edited "transcript" makes it clear that Trump posed it as a quid pro quo.

Why deny that? A better argument would be whether that is deserving of impeachment, or, as even the Democrats are saying, there have been multiple whistleblowers claiming that this is not the first time Trump has tried to handle things as a fast-and-loose CEO might instead of the President of the United States ... and for those who are not Trump zealots, that points to a serious security problem.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I wouldn't take the words coming out of any politicians mouth to be the truth without secondary confirmation.

alrighty then
we can 86 the "impeachment inquiry" then in your opinion?

Besides that, Trump has told the American public that he asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. Is Trump lying?

you got a source for that?
all I heard was the call was "perfect"?

Even the highly edited "transcript" makes it clear that Trump posed it as a quid pro quo.

not imo
he asked about crowdstrike then about the biden mess
he actually didnt ask anyone to open anything

Why deny that?

because words actually matter

A better argument would be whether that is deserving of impeachment

sure
if it is "treason, bribery, high crimes or misdomeanors"
imo it is no where near there

your mileage may vary

a reply to: shooterbrody

In rough order of your presentation:

Sure. Why don't you call Nancy and tell her, LOL.

A source? Yeah, I heard the President say that with my own ears.

Strange. I heard him. Mandela effect?

I agree, words do matter. True words matter even more, and even more than that, true words that can be backed up with evidence.

In your opinion. Actually, regarding the call to Ukraine, I don't disagree with you. That's the least impeachable thing Mr. Trump has done.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Besides that, Trump has told the American public that he asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. Is Trump lying?

Nope, you are lying. POTUS Trump (c'mon you can say it, say POTUS Trump) asked for a favor from the Ukrainians to investigate ONE SPECIFIC CRIME Biden is involved in... He didn't ask them to investigate everything and everyone whom is tied to Biden without any evidence of wrongdoing...

You seem to be completely oblivious of the difference.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Even the highly edited "transcript" makes it clear that Trump posed it as a quid pro quo.

Highly edited transcript?... LOL... Here is an actual link to the transcript...

www.scribd.com...

OMG IT IS SO "REDACTED!!! ROFLMAO...

You claim this so that you don't have to give evidence for your claim... So how about you PROVE your claim of "quid pro quo" or STFU already with your LIES...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Why deny that? A better argument would be whether that is deserving of impeachment, or, as even the Democrats are saying, there have been multiple whistleblowers claiming that this is not the first time Trump has tried to handle things as a fast-and-loose CEO might instead of the President of the United States ... and for those who are not Trump zealots, that points to a serious security problem.

Nope, it just proves that those like you LOVE to LIE... That's what your false claims proves...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

asked for a favor from the Ukrainians to investigate ONE SPECIFIC CRIME Biden is involved in

What specific crime would that be? Specifically?

originally posted by: Phage

Your source doesn't say anyone, including the president can be impeached after leaving office. Each of the answers is quite vague on the matter. Mostly saying, "what's the point?"

The point is your left-wing candidates know they can't win legally. POTUS Trump has done good for the country and it's people, which none of you in the left can ever admit. Democrats are leaving the democrat/liberal/socialist party in droves for how far left-wing your candidates have become. They know in a FAIR election Trump would be re-elected, so they have to do everything they can to try to dissuade voters.

First the DNC/Hillary/Obama/Comey/McCabe cabal started claiming the Russians wanted Trump and were doing anything to get him elected as POTUS, which is false as the Russians had both pro-Trump and anti-Trump protests. The Russians just wanted to mess with us by creating chaos in making morons believe that they wanted Trump elected.

Second it was the "Trump colluded with Russia" false claim, despite the fact that the DNC/Hillary/the Obama administration and the deep state embedded to this day under the Trump administration used "Russian lies" to try to depose the duly elected POTUS. But the false claims collapsed when not even Mueller and his team of "pro-Clinton democrat lawyers" could find any evidence of collusion, or even obstruction. NO EVIDENCE of either, but of course the pro-Clinton lawyers had to claim "but perhaps impeachment could be done... with NO EVIDENCE..."

Then the left turned again to try to use to this day the claim "the Russians helped Trump get elected." Which again it's a false claim. More so when the contacts used by Steele to make claims about POTUS Trump in his "Steele dossier" are Russian officials whom to this day are top advisers for PUTIN and still work in the Russian government.

Steele Identified Russian Dossier Sources, Notes Reveal

Such Russian contacts used by Steele included such Russian figures like Vyacheslav Trubnikov.

Vyacheslav Ivanovich Trubnikov (Russian: Вячеслав Иванович Трубников; born on April 25, 1944 in Irkutsk, Russia) is a Russian journalist, political scientist, intelligence officer and a diplomat. He has worked as the Director of Foreign Intelligence Service (Russia) and currently is a First Deputy of Foreign Minister of Russia.
...

Vyacheslav Trubnikov

Another of the top Russian contacts used by Steele to make false claims about candidate and then POTUS Trump was Vladislav Surkov,, whom to this day continues to be a top adviser for none other than "Vladimir Putin..."

Vladislav Yuryevich Surkov (Russian: Владислав Юрьевич Сурков; born 21 September 1964)[1] is a Russian businessman and politician of Chechen descent.[2] He was First Deputy Chief of the Russian Presidential Administration from 1999 to 2011, during which time he was widely seen as the main ideologist of the Kremlin who proposed and implemented the concept of sovereign democracy in Russia. From December 2011 until May 2013, Surkov served as the Russian Federation's Deputy Prime Minister.[3][4] After his resignation, Surkov returned to the Presidential Executive Office and became a personal adviser of Vladimir Putin on relationships with Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Ukraine.[5]

Surkov is perceived by many to be a key figure with much power and influence in the administration of Vladimir Putin.[6][7][8] According to The Moscow Times, this perception is not dependent on the official title Surkov might hold at any one time in the Putin government.[9] BBC documentary filmmaker Adam Curtis credits Surkov's blend of theater and politics with keeping Putin, and Putin's chosen successors, in power since 2000.
...

Vladislav Surkov

Why would top Russian officials still working for Putin oust a real "manchurian candidate" as you left-wingers have been claiming? It makes no sense whatsoever. If it was true Putin would not only had fired these, and other Russian officials, but he would have them killed for it. Yet they are still advisors of Putin or work for him.

originally posted by: Phage

What specific crime would that be? Specifically?

The fact that Biden did demand the former Ukrainian administration to fire the prosecutor whom was about to investigate Hunter Biden and his link /knowledge of the corruption in Burisma holdings...

It is part of the office of the President to find whether such cases of corruption are true, more so when Biden admitted withholding over 1 billion U.S.D. unless the prosecutor was fired...

Not to mention the fact as i have pointed out before, that before POTUS Trump had the phone call with the Ukrainian President the Ukrainians wanted to give that evidence and more since 2018.

Again, notice the following article is from 2 month before POTUS Trump had the phone conversation.

By John Solomon, opinion contributor — 04/07/19 07:30 AM EDT
2,547
The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Ukrainian law enforcement officials believe they have evidence of wrongdoing by American Democrats and their allies in Kiev, ranging from 2016 election interference to obstructing criminal probes. But, they say, they’ve been thwarted in trying to get the Trump Justice Department to act.

Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Prosecutor General’s International Legal Cooperation Department, told me he and other senior law enforcement officials tried unsuccessfully since last year to get visas from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev to deliver their evidence to Washington.
...

Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don't you want our evidence on Democrats?

What's more, they even detailed what some of the evidence they had was about.

...
Sworn statements from two Ukrainian officials admitting that their agency tried to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton. The effort included leaking an alleged ledger showing payments to then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort;

Contacts between Democratic figures in Washington and Ukrainian officials that involved passing along dirt on Donald Trump;

Financial records showing a Ukrainian natural gas company routed more than $3 million to American accounts tied to Hunter Biden, younger son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, who managed U.S.-Ukraine relations for the Obama administration. Biden’s son served on the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma Holdings;

Records that Vice President Biden pressured Ukrainian officials in March 2016 to fire the prosecutor who oversaw an investigation of Burisma Holdings and who planned to interview Hunter Biden about the financial transfers;

Correspondence showing members of the State Department and U.S. Embassy in Kiev interfered or applied pressure in criminal cases on Ukrainian soil;

Disbursements of as much as $7 billion in Ukrainian funds that prosecutors believe may have been misappropriated or taken out of the country, including to the United States.
...

Hunter Biden, whom had no experience whatsoever was getting paid $50,000 a month and he was in charge of Burisma Holding's legal team.

Again, the present Ukrainian administration wanted to give all this info FOR FREE since 2018. How does it make sense that POTUS Trump would have to withhold THE SALE of missiles for the info on July 2019 when the Ukrainians have wanted to give the Trump administration this evidence since 2018?...

Not to mention the fact that despite false claims from those of you in the left POTUS Trump did not say "due this or I will withhold the sale of the missiles..." However, Biden admits that he forced the former Ukrainian administration to fire the prosecutor whom was to investigate Hunter Biden and all of a sudden this wasn't quid pro quo?

Biden and former OBAMA officials can claim "but the prosecutor was corrupt" all they want but the fact is Biden had a conflict of interest, and the next agency, which was pro-Clinton pro-Obama, the Ukrainians put in charge of the investigation immediately closed the case and did not investigate... How does it make sense that Biden demanded the firing of Viktor Shokin "because he wasn't investigating the corruption" when the agency that replaced Shokin immediately closed the investigation of the corruption in Burisma Holdings?...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The fact that Biden did demand the former Ukrainian administration to fire the prosecutor

Because he wasn't looking into corruption.

At the heart of Congress' probe into the president's actions is his claim that former Vice President and 2020 Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden strong-armed the Ukrainian government to fire its top prosecutor in order to thwart an investigation into a company tied to his son, Hunter Biden.

It wasn't because Shokin was investigating a natural gas company tied to Biden's son; it was because Shokin wasn't pursuing corruption among the country's politicians, according to a Ukrainian official and four former American officials who specialized in Ukraine and Europe.

Explainer: Biden, allies pushed out Ukrainian prosecutor because he didn't pursue corruption cases

BTW, your link is an opinion piece. Opinion.

originally posted by: Liquesence

Because he wasn't looking into corruption.

Yes he was... Biden's allies can claim whatever the hell they want, but they made that excuse to simply put in charge of the investigation people whom were pro-Clinton and IMMEDIATELY closed the investigation into Burisma and Hunter Biden...

originally posted by: Liquesence
BTW, your link is an opinion piece. Opinion.

What the Ukrainians say, that they have evidence of corruption, isn't an opinion. BTW, the claim made by Biden and his allies is an opinion which they want you to believe is the truth... But again, if it was true Biden wanted a prosecutor that would investigate corruption,, why did Biden/Clinton push for an agency that immediately closed the investigation once they took over?...