Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry

[Anonymous]

The transcripts of this interview should be most informative.
Will Nancy release them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The transcripts of this interview should be most informative.
Will Nancy release them?

I am guessing they will be public in time, but if you want to root out the corruption, you have to hold some things back until you can get others on the record. For example, there are a bunch of people named in these texts - Taylor, "S," Bolton etc - so you want to get them on the record before there is full disclosure, so as to text veracity.

I will say this, we need a firm understanding of what Pompeo knew, and when. He can either take responsibility for this policy agenda, or he can point fingers at Trump and Pence.

[Anonymous]

Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

[Anonymous]

Then VP Candidate Pence in a 10/4/16 debate:

"Now, you all need to know out there, this is
basic stuff. Foreign donors, and certainly foreign governments, cannot participate in the American political process"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Is WhatsApp a government-approved way to exchange sensitive information? Asking for a friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Karmic retribution that State Department emails will take down Trump and Pompeo.

Only feds so far with the balls/ovaries to explicitly push back on the record.

No institution is more aware of how unique and precious our constitutional democracy really is...

[Anonymous]

I’m betting the whistleblower is not just one person, or that other people knew exactly what the web was doing. My bets are on Volker, Taylor, Bolton (and others) working in tandem. Probably one person ultimately has to have a name attached, but maybe they drew straws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

Bye, Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

As Politico says this morning:

HERE’S WHAT WE CAN SAY DEFINITIVELY: President DONALD TRUMP is bending the machinations of the U.S. government toward taking down JOE BIDEN. Senate and House Republicans are helping him by sticking by his side. That’s not an opinion; it’s a fact. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2019/10/04/the-smoking-texts-485280

That's not what our Founding Fathers envisioned when they wrote the Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting the whistleblower is not just one person, or that other people knew exactly what the web was doing. My bets are on Volker, Taylor, Bolton (and others) working in tandem. Probably one person ultimately has to have a name attached, but maybe they drew straws.

The way the complaint is worded, it's pretty clear that this is a group of whistleblowers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting the whistleblower is not just one person, or that other people knew exactly what the web was doing. My bets are on Volker, Taylor, Bolton (and others) working in tandem. Probably one person ultimately has to have a name attached, but maybe they drew straws.

None of them are with the CIA.

But to your point, I am confident there are scores, if not hundreds of witnesses to the various crimes committed by this Administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

Asking a foreign government for aid in a domestic election is a crime.
Withholding federal funds to extort a country is a crime.
The cover-up is a crime.
Obstruction of justice is a crime.

There are 4 right there, and that is just the surface.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

Asking a foreign government for aid in a domestic election is a crime.
Withholding federal funds to extort a country is a crime.
The cover-up is a crime.
Obstruction of justice is a crime.

There are 4 right there, and that is just the surface.

1. We have a treaty with Ukraine regarding Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Just because Biden happens to be a candidate, doesn't mean he is immune from investigation.
2. The transcript from yesterday will prove you wrong on this claim.
3. There is no cover up - this administration has released more documents regarding this "scandal" than the Dems expected.
4. There is no obstruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else appreciate the irony that it is State Department electronic communications exposing these crimes?

Crimes?

LOL. No "crimes" have been "exposed."

Asking a foreign government for aid in a domestic election is a crime.
Withholding federal funds to extort a country is a crime.
The cover-up is a crime.
Obstruction of justice is a crime.

There are 4 right there, and that is just the surface.

1. We have a treaty with Ukraine regarding Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Just because Biden happens to be a candidate, doesn't mean he is immune from investigation.
2. The transcript from yesterday will prove you wrong on this claim.
3. There is no cover up - this administration has released more documents regarding this "scandal" than the Dems expected.
4. There is no obstruction.

+ a million.