• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Female Ambassadors ?

no wonder no one respects America anymore.
High time Trump had her replaced with someone like Sondland ...
 
Upchurch said:
It's a claim. What is the evidence?
Click to expand...

It's reported in the Financial Times, an highly reputable magazine, and it was not disputed (to my knowledge, and I have looked) when reported. It really honestly seems to me like the idea that it was all false and that somehow never came out is a pretty outlandish idea.

Do you want the link? If you haven't gotten/seen the link yet or the screenshots of the article, and you just stumbled into the page whatever we're at now without having seen it previously, then I'll find it, and I completely understand being skeptical and wanting to scope it all out. I sure did when I first ran across it.

If you're making the case "Why should we trust just any old reporter/magazine/editorial staff" then that's a different, though very worthy discussion.
 
kellyb said:
Is this statement below true or false?

"The prospect of Mr Trump, who has praised Ukraine’s arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country’s biggest ally has spurred not just Mr Leshchenko but Kiev’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a US election."
Click to expand...

“However indirectly” makes this a nonsense statement.
US interests kind of matched-up with Ukrainian interests at a particular time. Ukraine pursuing its own national interests is so indirectly connected to the election that there is, in fact, no evidence that any actions Ukraine took were in any way done, except in post-hoc opinion articles, to intervene in the election in the US.
 
Belz... said:
No one said anything about lying except you. Constantly.



For ****'s sake, Kelly, how dishonest can you be? I've given you precise and honest answers to every question and points you've made. You, on the other hand, have declined to indicate how and why you disagree with me, so it's a bit rich that you try to gaslight the thread into thinking that I'm the one doing this. You do know they can read the exchange, right?
Click to expand...

Why do we bother talking to each other when every time it goes south like this?
We should just ignore each other. You and I are oil and water, man.
 
autumn1971 said:
“However indirectly” makes this a nonsense statement.
US interests kind of matched-up with Ukrainian interests at a particular time. Ukraine pursuing its own national interests is so indirectly connected to the election that there is, in fact, no evidence that any actions Ukraine took were in any way done, except in post-hoc opinion articles, to intervene in the election in the US.
Click to expand...

Huh. That is theoretically possible, I guess. I can see how that could happen.

I'm not convinced it IS what happened, but if someone who would be in a position to actually know said that was probably closer to what happened, that it was a near-serendipity type of event, I'd stop caring about the reality of the matter, to be quite honest. It would just become one of those "I guess we'll never truly know, and also, it doesn't even matter" things.
 
GlennB said:
"Fox News anchors described the testimony of Maria Yovanovitch as a “turning point” in the impeachment inquiry against Trump.

Anchor Bret Baier predicted that Trump’s tweet smearing Yovanovitch’s reputation as the longtime diplomat testified would lead to a new article of impeachment against the president."

Oops.

Hope the link works.
Click to expand...


Schiff referred to the Tweet as witness intimidation and Rep. Justin Amash indicated that witness tampering may be added to the articles as a result.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Giuliani: "Master! You could use Ukraine!"
Trump: "My crane? For what?"
Click to expand...

“I love cranes. I love trucks of all types. Even when I was a little boy at 4 years old my mother would say, ‘you love trucks.’ I do. I always loved trucks. I still do. Nothing changes. Sometimes, you know, you might become president, but nothing changes. I still love trucks, especially when I look at the largest crane in the world. That’s very cool.” - Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America.
 
kellyb said:
Why do we bother talking to each other when every time it goes south like this?
We should just ignore each other. You and I are oil and water, man.
Click to expand...

I don't accept any of the blame. I've made a great deal of effort to try to clarify things for you and all you've done is repeat an irrelevant quote over and over and refused to make your own case when you noted our disagreement over said quote.

If it bothers you so much you can put me on ignore. All that means is that my comments will go unanswered by you.
 
If every thread I participated in turned into the same wrangle I'd eventually start to begin considering the possibility of perhaps initiating a thought of maybe wondering if it was me.
 
I'm not saying Trump is trying to break the record of the most impeachable things during literally during your impeachment proceeding, I'm just saying someone explain to me what would be different if he was?
 
FWIW: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...sador-testifies-in-public-impeachment-hearing

Yovanovitch said Russian President Vladimir Putin deliberately promoted conspiracy theories about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election to sow confusion, a move she said was "classic for an intelligence officer."

While she said there have been “rumors out there” about such interference, she agreed with Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman that there was “nothing based in fact” to support them.

Goldman showed Yovanovitch a February 2017 quote in which Putin claimed the Ukrainian government, as well as “certain oligarchs,” adopted a “unilateral position” in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Asked how it would serve Putin’s interests to promote the idea of Ukrainian interference, Yovanovitch responded that “President Putin was aware there were concerns in the U.S. about Russian meddling in the 2016 election … classic for an intelligence officer to try to throw off the scent and create an alternative narrative that might get picked up and get some credence.”
Click to expand...
 
TragicMonkey said:
If every thread I participated in turned into the same wrangle I'd eventually start to begin considering the possibility of perhaps initiating a thought of maybe wondering if it was me.
Click to expand...

You are also free to put me on ignore.

ETA: And contrary to your assumption, I've actually done a lot of that thinking.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
FWIW: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...sador-testifies-in-public-impeachment-hearing
Click to expand...

Yovanovitch said Russian President Vladimir Putin deliberately promoted conspiracy theories about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election to sow confusion, a move she said was "classic for an intelligence officer."

While she said there have been “rumors out there” about such interference, she agreed with Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman that there was “nothing based in fact” to support them.
Click to expand...

Well, she's clearly lying.
 
The Democrats are being really, really rude to make the Hunter Biden Impeachment Proceedings all about Trump. I mean the nerve.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I'm not saying Trump is trying to break the record of the most impeachable things during literally during your impeachment proceeding, I'm just saying someone explain to me what would be different if he was?
Click to expand...

I've wondered a few times if he was going to use as defense "that phone call was perfectly innocent, it was another phone call at another time that I told them to investigate Biden!"
 
TragicMonkey said:
I've wondered a few times if he was going to use as defense "that phone call was perfectly innocent, it was another phone call at another time that I told them to investigate Biden!"
Click to expand...

He really is the "I have an airtight alibi for that bank robbery, at that time my illegal bookie was watching me beat a hooker to death" of Presidents.
 
TragicMonkey said:
If every thread I participated in turned into the same wrangle I'd eventually start to begin considering the possibility of perhaps initiating a thought of maybe wondering if it was me.
Click to expand...

In the fullness of time and after due pondering? Me too.

For others it gets wearisome scrolling through endless pages of squabblage.
 
In a very different universe I would almost feel some pity for the Republicans since Trump seems so insistent on doing something right after they claim he'll never do it.

Republican in front of Congress: "Trump never agreed to a Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine."

*Trump's mouthpiece walks out and literally says he did exactly that.*

Republican "Okay well he's not gonna start intimidating witness... oh the President just tweeted something let me read it... okay never mind. Well it's not like he gonna have Stone Cold Steve Austin run in and hit me with the stunner.." *GLASS BREAKING SOUND, PYRO GOES OFF* "Oh come on!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom