Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you not see the difference between a candidate doing opposition research and the president of the United States using the power of his office to solicit a criminal investigation of a political opponent from a foreign government?

They can see it. They just ignore it out of convenience.

[Anonymous]

NY Times is reporting there may be a second Ukraine whistleblower coming forward.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/us/politics/second-trump-whistleblower.html

A second intelligence official who was alarmed by President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine is weighing whether to file his own formal whistle-blower complaint and testify to Congress, according to two people briefed on the matter.

The official has more direct information about the events than the first whistle-blower, whose complaint that Mr. Trump was using his power to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals touched off an impeachment inquiry. The second official is among those interviewed by the intelligence community inspector general to corroborate the allegations of the original whistle-blower, one of the people said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NY Times is reporting there may be a second Ukraine whistleblower coming forward.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/us/politics/second-trump-whistleblower.html

A second intelligence official who was alarmed by President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine is weighing whether to file his own formal whistle-blower complaint and testify to Congress, according to two people briefed on the matter.

The official has more direct information about the events than the first whistle-blower, whose complaint that Mr. Trump was using his power to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals touched off an impeachment inquiry. The second official is among those interviewed by the intelligence community inspector general to corroborate the allegations of the original whistle-blower, one of the people said.

Good. The more the merrier.

[Anonymous]

Please people.
Make sure you are clear about what you are saying.
Trump was asking Ukraine to MANUFACTURE A FAKE INVESTIGATION.

when you just write “investigation”, it makes it sound legitimate.
Be clear when you write about this stuff.
Be consistent and clear.

[Anonymous]

This Post article pretty much sums the known facts at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/holding-ukraine-hostage-how-the-president-and-his-allies-chasing-2020-ammunition-fanned-a-political-storm/2019/10/04/100e9868-e6a5-11e9-a331-2df12d56a80b_story.html

[Anonymous]

Pompeo missed the deadline to turn over documents.

[Anonymous]

^^^
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/04/politics/pompeo-subpoena-ukraine-documents/index.html?utm_source=twCNN&utm_term=link&utm_content=2019-10-05T02%3A12%3A59&utm_medium=social&__twitter_impression=true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pompeo missed the deadline to turn over documents.

Strike it up as a count of obstruction for impeachment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This Post article pretty much sums the known facts at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/holding-ukraine-hostage-how-the-president-and-his-allies-chasing-2020-ammunition-fanned-a-political-storm/2019/10/04/100e9868-e6a5-11e9-a331-2df12d56a80b_story.html

LOCK THEM UP!

“Rather than official State Department email, the text exchanges between the diplomats took place over WhatsApp, a U.S. official said.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pompeo missed the deadline to turn over documents.

Are the House Dems ever going to use inherent contempt and arrest these smug busterds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you not see the difference between a candidate doing opposition research and the president of the United States using the power of his office to solicit a criminal investigation of a political opponent from a foreign government?

THIS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This Post article pretty much sums the known facts at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/holding-ukraine-hostage-how-the-president-and-his-allies-chasing-2020-ammunition-fanned-a-political-storm/2019/10/04/100e9868-e6a5-11e9-a331-2df12d56a80b_story.html

LOCK THEM UP!

“Rather than official State Department email, the text exchanges between the diplomats took place over WhatsApp, a U.S. official said.”

Over in the other thread, someone said they’re just exhausted from three years of this. I’d like to plus one that notion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if there was no quid pro quo, why was the money withheld? Why did the Ukranians think there was a quid pro quo?

If agreement wasn’t a prerequisite for aid, that means aid would have been delivered even if they didn’t agree. So why hold up aid to begin with? That doesn’t add up. Trump’s own defense doesn’t make sense without a quid quo pro.

It sounds like some of these deep state bureaucrats were getting too far out over their skis. To put pressure on the Ukrainians, they may have said or implied a quid pro quo. But Trump never instructed them to do that.

These deep state bureaucrats are used to saying whatever they want under the assumption that no one is ever going to know. They could make any kind of threats or promises that they want to get the desired result. That doesn't mean it was ordered by Trump.

No, lack of a quid pro quo doesn't mean aid would have been delivered even if they didn't agree. It means the two things are not linked.

Jeez, man. Get some dignity.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you not see the difference between a candidate doing opposition research and the president of the United States using the power of his office to solicit a criminal investigation of a political opponent from a foreign government?

THIS

Opposition research that includes paying foreign spies and getting false information from Russians? Yes. I see a difference. Especially, when there is some evidence that the political opponent had a strong conflict of interest and it is public information.

Funny. A network reporter (I think it is Richard Engel was in Ukraine tonight investigating the situation. Why didn't the reporters go to Ukraine years ago when it was first reported that Biden's son was getting paid such exorbitant amounts of money from the company? Why didn't they ask Biden about it at the time? Why wasn't this constantly on the front page? Just imagine if Pence's child were doing this. It would be constant front page.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you not see the difference between a candidate doing opposition research and the president of the United States using the power of his office to solicit a criminal investigation of a political opponent from a foreign government?

THIS

Opposition research that includes paying foreign spies and getting false information from Russians? Yes. I see a difference. Especially, when there is some evidence that the political opponent had a strong conflict of interest and it is public information.

Funny. A network reporter (I think it is Richard Engel was in Ukraine tonight investigating the situation. Why didn't the reporters go to Ukraine years ago when it was first reported that Biden's son was getting paid such exorbitant amounts of money from the company? Why didn't they ask Biden about it at the time? Why wasn't this constantly on the front page? Just imagine if Pence's child were doing this. It would be constant front page.

Dp- Because there is a world of difference between snagging a sweet gig through nepotism, and completely undermining our national security and bending over so Putin can f*ck us up the a$$.