New Impeachment Transcripts Released Today

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Was the investigation into Burisma regarding actions during the years that Hunter Biden was there?

Or was the investigation into matters between 2010-2012 before Biden joined the Board in 2014?

Again, why would that be relevant?

If bursima closed, did hunter biden stand to lose $80000 a month?

Could a parent be interested in preventing their child from losing $80000 a month?

Could Obama and Biden, who were calling Burismas owner corrupt, been embarrassed and sought to keep an investigation that showed the VP's son went top work for a guy they were calling corrupt, who was making near 100 thousand a month for basically nothing, silent?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Was the investigation into Burisma regarding actions during the years that Hunter Biden was there?

Or was the investigation into matters between 2010-2012 before Biden joined the Board in 2014?

Again, why would that be relevant?

If bursima closed, did hunter biden stand to lose $80000 a month?

Could a parent be interested in preventing their child from losing $80000 a month?

Could Obama and Biden, who were calling Burismas owner corrupt, been embarrassed and sought to keep an investigation that showed the VP's son went top work for a guy they were calling corrupt, who was making near 100 thousand a month for basically nothing, silent?

Why would that be relevant??? LOL.

Because of the fundamental idea that Hunter Biden did something wrong? That Joe covered up? Isn’t that the alleged basis of all this wailing and gnashing of teeth?

Wow, Hunter’s salary just keeps going up with each telling of the tale, right? First it was $50K now it’s a hundred?

Doesn’t matter anyway. DOJ is on it. You guys can stop worrying ... right? Investigation underway.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Was the investigation into Burisma regarding actions during the years that Hunter Biden was there?

Or was the investigation into matters between 2010-2012 before Biden joined the Board in 2014?

Again, why would that be relevant?

If bursima closed, did hunter biden stand to lose $80000 a month?

Could a parent be interested in preventing their child from losing $80000 a month?

Could Obama and Biden, who were calling Burismas owner corrupt, been embarrassed and sought to keep an investigation that showed the VP's son went top work for a guy they were calling corrupt, who was making near 100 thousand a month for basically nothing, silent?

Why would that be relevant??? LOL.

Because of the fundamental idea that Hunter Biden did something wrong? That Joe covered up? Isn’t that the alleged basis of all this wailing and gnashing of teeth?

Wow, Hunter’s salary just keeps going up with each telling of the tale, right? First it was $50K now it’s a hundred?

Doesn’t matter anyway. DOJ is on it. You guys can stop worrying ... right? Investigation underway.

You keep asking what did Hujnter do illegal, as if thats someone a prerequisite for it being improper for his dad to use tax payer money to force the firing of the prosecutor looking into his sons company.

I have showed you many times, Hunter Biden need not have committed any crime for it to have been improper for his dad (and obama) to do this.

If there is reason to investigate then there is no case to impeach trump. he, much as Obama did, is allowed to ask foriegn governme ts to cooperate into investigations ongoing in the US.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Bloodworth

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Bloodworth

Biden a few years ago is on tape boasting how he has the power to withhold money if his son was not cleared of prosecution .

This is exactly where you go wrong. Biden never said anything like that.
His son was not part of anything. It had nothing to do with his son.
He and the international money fund and the erupean union all wanted that prosecutor gone because he was NOT investigating corruption. Not because he was investigating his son. His son was never under any kind of investigation of any kind. The company he worked for was... years before Hunter worked for them.
These are inarguable facts that are easily checked.
This story is dead gone goodbye.

Bidens words were you ain't getting the money unless that prosecutor is fired....
How is that not pay for play?

Maybe ask the guy calling the shots, you know, Barack Obama?

The guy with the extraordinary diplomatic powers to make such decisions?

Kinda like your guy, Mr. Trump?

Yep.

I dont get it? Hussein Obama? Trump.

Let's stick with Biden holding responsibility for his own words and his sons own. Words in his last interview about probably not being at the ukranian company it it were not for his name.

Biden almost talking slang says you ain't getting no money unless that prosecutor is fired.

Can get anymore straight forward then that

Then on the other side you have people trying to spin and interpret trump's calls.

Its weird and delusion at its finest...

a reply to: Grambler

Well, yeah I do keep asking that because if there needs to be an investigation, there needs to be a reason to have one.

Usually, that’s a crime or at least a suspicion of a crime, either on Hunter’s part or on Joe’s part.

You always seem in these discussions to be advocating for what is basically a fishing expedition, usually directly related to what you feel has been done to President Trump illegitimately. You haven’t “shown” me anything. Your arguments are always side-stepping the actual assertions.

Oh, it’s “improper” now? That’s a long way from Racketeering which is what someone else wants above.

The Bidens must have done something wrong ... because ... Biden. That’s not at all a convincing argument.

BUT ... DOJ is investigating the Bidens, so all is good now.

You see, I don’t think that the Ukraine call is a reason to impeach Trump. I’ve been saying for weeks now that it’s not. You don’t seem to hear me when I say that but that’s alright. Facts are facts.

Joe Biden doing “something wrong” doesn’t expiate the fact that Trump apparently used the power of his office illegitimately. That’s a straight-line argument in your head that doesn’t make sense outside of it.

The President IS under an impeachment investigation. The House is deploying its Constitutional power. Is it legitimate? Time will tell. I don’t believe the Ukraine call is sufficient rationale, but, I’m not a big law and order guy as I get older.

I think of you as a better debater than that. Perhaps you’ll see my point now.

a reply to: Bloodworth

Hmmm ... let’s see if I can make it less complex.

Joe Biden was Vice President of the United States 2009-2017. The VP doesn’t have any powers to set foreign policy, that’s the President, Barack Obama also oddly enough 2009-2017.

Joe Biden did what Obama told him to do and the only authority to do anything was the authority the President gave him, which in this case, was to pressure the Ukraine to come in line with US policy in terms of “corruption.”

That’s the power that a President has ... not unlike the power that Mr. Trump has to hold arms sales up to Ukraine until Zelensky conforms to the current foreign policy set by the current President.

Better?

a reply to: Gryphon66

You’re entire argument hinges on the fact that hunter Biden must have been alleged to have done something illegal on order for it to have been wrong for his dad to use US tax dollars to have the person investigating his sons company fired

That is not the case

Joe Biden’s won statements meet the threshold for investigation

Anytime any executive branch official announces they are using tax payer money to force the firing of a prosecutor looking into a families members business, there should be an investigation

That’s not a fish hunt. Saying “well my son wasn’t under a criminal investigation, only his company that was paying him huge sums of money. Therefore it is legitimate to use tax money to force the prosecutor to be fired” is not a defense

a reply to: Grambler

No, that’s not my argument. That’s what you want my argument to be.

I ask questions. You often seem to take questions as statements.

I do believe that Hunter or Joe should be suspected of something illegal or at least illicit before they’re investigated, unless you are advocating for use of investigations for sheerly political purposes.

None of that matters. The BIdens are being investigated by DOJ and have been for some time.

Why do you keep harping on it? Investigation underway, that’s apparently what Mr. Trump was asking for in his telephone call, right?

You got it tiger.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You say that isnt your argument, and the you immediately admit that it is.

Fine, I will just take your clarifying statement.

I do believe that Hunter or Joe should be suspected of something illegal or at least illicit before they’re investigated, unless you are advocating for use of investigations for sheerly political purposes.

Joe Biden is suspected of forcing the firing of a prosecutor who was looking into his sons company. Biden admitted it. Therefore there should be an investigation

You have said in the past that unless I can prove Hunter biden is suspected of a crime, then Joe Biden should not be investigated. As I showed above, that is not the case. It would be illegal and illicit for biden to take actions to intervene in an investigation that could cost his son money, even if his son is accused of no crimes.

If there is reason to investigate, then Trump asking a foreign government to investigate or cooperate with US investigations is not only not impeachable, but is exactly what the president should be doing.

Just like Obama was expected to ask foreign governments to cooperate into an investigation into trump and his associates.

a reply to: Grambler

Apparently, both Hunter and Joe Biden are currently being investigated by the DOJ.

Apparently, that investigation is what President Trump was asking for assistance with when talking with President Zelensky.

The investigation you think is necessary is underway. What more do you want?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Apparently, both Hunter and Joe Biden are currently being investigated by the DOJ.

Apparently, that investigation is what President Trump was asking for assistance with when talking with President Zelensky.

The investigation you think is necessary is underway. What more do you want?

The democrats and media to claim asking for cooperation into an investigation be a criminal or illicit act that requires impeachment to end.

My entire argument, and many others, has been if there was reason to investigate hjoe biden, then there is no case for impeachment.

I want a system where on party cant investigate their opponent for years, going back looking a decades old crimes, raiding lawyers offices in the middle of the night, asking foriegn governments to cooperate in that investigation; and then claim the first time the other party tries to have an investigation into them it is criminal for them to do so.

In other words, no double standards.

Pretty simple.

originally posted by: Oraculi

“When the president of the United States makes a request for a favor, it certainly seems, I would take it as a demand,” he retorted.

Vindman, a veteran of the Iraq War, then added: “Congressman, as a military officer if my superiors tell me to do something, I take that not as a request , I take that as a demand.”

You do see that he’s making a claim based on his beliefs, not the facts, riiiiight? He’s making an assumption. Assumptions aren’t facts and they don’t hold water in court. It doesn’t matter how “he takes it”, what matters is what happened.

Fail

a reply to: Grambler

President Trump's request was for help from Zelensky with Barrs investigation of Biden.

Right?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

President Trump's request was for help from Zelensky with Barrs investigation of Biden.

Right?

He requested cooperation with barr investigating Ukraineian corruption and iterfernce, including Biden forcing shokin to be fired.

Yes.

So if there is legitimate reason to investigate Biden, how is this any fdifferent than Obama, dnc senators, or even mueller asking foriegn agents to cooperate into investigations into trump?

In other words, there is no legitmate impeachment cause into trump.

a reply to: Grambler

But Biden “forced” Shokin to be fired in March April 2016.

Trump became President in January 2017. This all started in the summer of 2019.

So, if there is no investigation, why not? Did “corruption” only become a problem recently?

a reply to: Grambler

There’s no “if” there’s reason to investigate Biden, don’t start waffling now.

There is reason to investigate Biden. President Trump asked President Zelensky for his help for AG Barr’s investigation, right?

I mean, the Ukraine hasn’t asked for either Biden’s extradition, have they? It’s been three years after all.

SO, there has to be an investigation into Biden, and that’s what Trump was asking for help with. RIght?

The Democrats seem to believe that the President abused his power, lied, encouraged others to lie, etc. in the process of holding up the sale of Javelins to Ukraine. Apparently they have witnesses to all that.

I think it’s a dumb hook for impeachment, as I have repeatedly mentioned.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

But Biden “forced” Shokin to be fired in March April 2016.

Trump became President in January 2017. This all started in the summer of 2019.

So, if there is no investigation, why not? Did “corruption” only become a problem recently?

Who knows?

Maybe they wanted to wait until the new anti corruption president won in Ukraine to investigate.

Maybe its like Solomon has reported, and Ukrainians since Zelensky has been elected have been reaching out to the state dept., and ny AG office to give evidence, and it was being refused because they were obama holdovers.

Maybe the doj was incompetent or corrupt.

Why is this relevant?

Either there was a reason to investigate Joe Biden or there wasnt. I think clearly there was a reason, and thus trying to impeach trump fro asking a foreign government to cooperate is ridiculous.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

But Biden “forced” Shokin to be fired in March April 2016.

Trump became President in January 2017. This all started in the summer of 2019.

So, if there is no investigation, why not? Did “corruption” only become a problem recently?

Who knows?

Maybe they wanted to wait until the new anti corruption president won in Ukraine to investigate.

Maybe its like Solomon has reported, and Ukrainians since Zelensky has been elected have been reaching out to the state dept., and ny AG office to give evidence, and it was being refused because they were obama holdovers.

Maybe the doj was incompetent or corrupt.

Why is this relevant?

Either there was a reason to investigate Joe Biden or there wasnt. I think clearly there was a reason, and thus trying to impeach trump fro asking a foreign government to cooperate is ridiculous.

Who knows? Why surely you do! You’ve been harping on the reasons for a Biden investigation for at least a couple of weeks.

Why would they wait to investigate in Ukraine? I mean, Joe Biden was the Vice President of the United States for goddsake! They have all the records of what transacted in the loan guarantees, right? The Trump Administration has access to all those records, and they don’t need the Ukraine to investigate Biden if there is such massive corruption ... do they?

Why would they wait? This is a critical matter!

Yeah, I think it’s a dumb reason to impeach Trump too ... but go figure, it’s the Dems.

You just seem a bit ... unconcerned about this investigation now ... this investigation that has be be ongoing, right?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I dont see how the timing of the investigation is relevant.

I assume you are saying the fact it was only being looked ionto after Biden announced he was running for office is somehow proof this is only political.

But if that was the reason, why not wait until closer into the election, like after Biden won the nomination and the dems couldnt change their candidate?

I gave reasons as to why they may have waited; the former president of the Ukraine was allied with Obama. He fired shokin as a result of the Obama Biden quid pro quo. It would be difficult to trust him for cooperation.

The first phone call trump had with the newly elected anti corruption president of ukraine, they discussed this.

Reports are also out there that Ukraine had been trying to give the US evidence for some time, but Obama holdovers in state refused to grant visas or accept it.

I dont see how the timing is relevant as to whether or not there should be an investigation

a reply to: Grambler

You don’t see how the timing is relevant? You’ve been screaming about a Biden investigation for WEEKS!

Wait until closer to the election? So wait, are you saying the Biden investigation is POLITICAL?

The evidence for what Biden and Obama did is right here in the US. You know, where the Bidens are citizens.

Where the DOJ has jurisdiction ...

I’m starting to think you don’t find the investigation into alleged rampant corruption as important as you’ve been letting on ....

The DOJ has jurisdiction in the US, where Joe BIden lives. Where he was Vice President. If Sessions wasn’t working on this HUUUGE deal ... surely Barr started working on it immediately right?

Unless ... as you are saying, this is just a political stunt by the President ... but I don’t want to believe that.