Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:51
Subject: Re:Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:holy crap
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/a/4/a4a91fab-99cd-4eb9-9c6c-ec1c586494b9/621801458E982E9903839ABC7404A917.chairmen-letter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf
the text messages are attached.
Forgive me if this has already been posted.
Very interesting, thanks.
My question: did Volker hope to avoid jail by resigning and cooperating with the investigation?
All the participants in these texts are clearly implicated, even Bill Taylor who texted his misgivings and wrote that it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
These texts are the smoking gun.
And what disgusting liars those GOP Congressmen are to come out after the hearing and say that it's a nothingburger.
They are truly destroying our country.
This is a smoking gun against Trump?
yes, it is. that last text is an absolutely hysterical and canonical example of CYA. Anyone who can read and who has ever been remotely involved in tricky political situations can see that.
(also note the 5 hour time gap as Sonland goes offline to consult with his lawyers to figure out how to get out of the hole that Taylor has exposed.)
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:51
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Lots of spinners at it again this morning.
What Trump did was impeachable. At its core, this is a President abusing his office to win an election. That is not acceptable, and you should not accept this from any President of any political party. It's funny how much clarity you'd have on this if the President was not of your party
Whether he will be removed from office depends on whether public opinion is willing to let it slide, again, as they let many, many things slide since he started his campaign. The GOP Senators will not act unless their seats are in danger.
If he is not removed from office, I hope the people will remove him at the ballot box.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:50
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Sure he can. He can remove any and all ambassadors, good ones and bad ones. Should he? Well, he's the president. He's supposed to have sense and wisdom and, where he's lacking those, good advisors.
But he removed an experienced career ambassador because Giuliani didn't like her, because she was obstructing his efforts to ... make Ukraine investigate Biden for political campaign purposes.
Volker's testimony and texts/emails + all of the public and published facts of the spring and summer = BAD.
Just because she’s a career diplomat doesn’t mean she should keep her job.
I’m amazed at the outrage over Trump asking Ukraine to get to the bottom of whether or not Biden’s son was in the job as a favor to Biden, given the Steele dossier, and the FISA warrants that resulted from that. I’m also amazed that you believe that the texts - where it explicitly says that Trump said no quid-pro-quo, is a smoking gun.
If Pelosi and Schiff are so sure of what they have, open the investigation process to a vote and let the Rs participate.
This.
Sounds to me like another crazy witch hunt.
Another? There *never has been* a crazy witch hunt. There was a legitimate investigation into Russian meddling in our last presidential election that Trump managed to make about himself. The findings of that investigation should be disturbing to all Americans. Now we have another legitimate investigation of obvious wrongdoing.
It is unfortunate that you lack any moral compass and deceive yourself in this way in order to prop up your false hope in this worthless POTUS.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:50
Subject: Re:Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:holy crap
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/a/4/a4a91fab-99cd-4eb9-9c6c-ec1c586494b9/621801458E982E9903839ABC7404A917.chairmen-letter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf
the text messages are attached.
Forgive me if this has already been posted.
Very interesting, thanks.
My question: did Volker hope to avoid jail by resigning and cooperating with the investigation?
All the participants in these texts are clearly implicated, even Bill Taylor who texted his misgivings and wrote that it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
These texts are the smoking gun.
And what disgusting liars those GOP Congressmen are to come out after the hearing and say that it's a nothingburger.
They are truly destroying our country.
This is a smoking gun against Trump?
yes, it is. that last text is an absolutely hysterical and canonical example of CYA. Anyone who can read and who has ever been remotely involved in tricky political situations can see that.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:50
Subject: Re:Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:holy crap
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/a/4/a4a91fab-99cd-4eb9-9c6c-ec1c586494b9/621801458E982E9903839ABC7404A917.chairmen-letter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf
the text messages are attached.
Forgive me if this has already been posted.
Very interesting, thanks.
My question: did Volker hope to avoid jail by resigning and cooperating with the investigation?
All the participants in these texts are clearly implicated, even Bill Taylor who texted his misgivings and wrote that it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
These texts are the smoking gun.
And what disgusting liars those GOP Congressmen are to come out after the hearing and say that it's a nothingburger.
They are truly destroying our country.
This is a smoking gun against Trump?
I really really hate Trump but this has too much of a bow on it. Bill Taylor seems like he was trying to set someone up with the comment. The other guy was smart to take it off text.
I need to read the rest of the texts but I am looking forward to Bill Taylor coming in front of Congress - he seems like he may have some stories to tell.
Hah. Taylor knew what was going on, so did Sondland.
So do we.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:48
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Sure he can. He can remove any and all ambassadors, good ones and bad ones. Should he? Well, he's the president. He's supposed to have sense and wisdom and, where he's lacking those, good advisors.
But he removed an experienced career ambassador because Giuliani didn't like her, because she was obstructing his efforts to ... make Ukraine investigate Biden for political campaign purposes.
Volker's testimony and texts/emails + all of the public and published facts of the spring and summer = BAD.
Just because she’s a career diplomat doesn’t mean she should keep her job.
I’m amazed at the outrage over Trump asking Ukraine to get to the bottom of whether or not Biden’s son was in the job as a favor to Biden, given the Steele dossier, and the FISA warrants that resulted from that. I’m also amazed that you believe that the texts - where it explicitly says that Trump said no quid-pro-quo, is a smoking gun.
If Pelosi and Schiff are so sure of what they have, open the investigation process to a vote and let the Rs participate.
Comparing Giuliani to Steele -- you've lost it.
I'd say you should have another coffee but it probably wouldn't hlep.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:46
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote: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.
1. What criminal matter has the United States opened into former VP Joe Biden or his son, Hunter? That is what the treaty refers to. Also, if there were such a legal matter, it's not the President's job to get help, nor should he, considering Biden may be his 2020 opponent.
2. We don't need a transcript when we have the texts. And these texts are crystal clear.
3. There's evidence of a cover-up in the texts. Pompeo lied on national TV to cover up. Pence is trying to play dumb to cover up.
4. The White House and State Dept are refusing to turn over documents and make witnesses available for a legitimate Congressional impeachment inquiry. That's obstruction.
1. So, Joe Biden and his son, Hunter are off limits. As Kamala said, "leave Joe alone." LOL
2. Yes, the texts are crystal clear that there was no quid pro quo and that the effort was to ensure transparency and reforms on the part of Ukraine.
3. No evidence of cover up. Pompeo did not lie. Pence? LOL. Now, if you want to talk about Schiff and his lies..... he did get 4 Pinocchios.
4. NOPE. It is only "official" if there is a vote. Nancy can take a vote if she wants the docs.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:46
Subject: Re:Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:holy crap
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/a/4/a4a91fab-99cd-4eb9-9c6c-ec1c586494b9/621801458E982E9903839ABC7404A917.chairmen-letter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf
the text messages are attached.
Forgive me if this has already been posted.
Very interesting, thanks.
My question: did Volker hope to avoid jail by resigning and cooperating with the investigation?
All the participants in these texts are clearly implicated, even Bill Taylor who texted his misgivings and wrote that it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
These texts are the smoking gun.
And what disgusting liars those GOP Congressmen are to come out after the hearing and say that it's a nothingburger.
They are truly destroying our country.
This is a smoking gun against Trump?
I really really hate Trump but this has too much of a bow on it. Bill Taylor seems like he was trying to set someone up with the comment. The other guy was smart to take it off text.
I need to read the rest of the texts but I am looking forward to Bill Taylor coming in front of Congress - he seems like he may have some stories to tell.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:45
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Sure he can. He can remove any and all ambassadors, good ones and bad ones. Should he? Well, he's the president. He's supposed to have sense and wisdom and, where he's lacking those, good advisors.
But he removed an experienced career ambassador because Giuliani didn't like her, because she was obstructing his efforts to ... make Ukraine investigate Biden for political campaign purposes.
Volker's testimony and texts/emails + all of the public and published facts of the spring and summer = BAD.
Just because she’s a career diplomat doesn’t mean she should keep her job.
I’m amazed at the outrage over Trump asking Ukraine to get to the bottom of whether or not Biden’s son was in the job as a favor to Biden, given the Steele dossier, and the FISA warrants that resulted from that. I’m also amazed that you believe that the texts - where it explicitly says that Trump said no quid-pro-quo, is a smoking gun.
If Pelosi and Schiff are so sure of what they have, open the investigation process to a vote and let the Rs participate.
This.
Sounds to me like another crazy witch hunt.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:44
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Sure he can. He can remove any and all ambassadors, good ones and bad ones. Should he? Well, he's the president. He's supposed to have sense and wisdom and, where he's lacking those, good advisors.
But he removed an experienced career ambassador because Giuliani didn't like her, because she was obstructing his efforts to ... make Ukraine investigate Biden for political campaign purposes.
Volker's testimony and texts/emails + all of the public and published facts of the spring and summer = BAD.
Just because she’s a career diplomat doesn’t mean she should keep her job.
I’m amazed at the outrage over Trump asking Ukraine to get to the bottom of whether or not Biden’s son was in the job as a favor to Biden, given the Steele dossier, and the FISA warrants that resulted from that. I’m also amazed that you believe that the texts - where it explicitly says that Trump said no quid-pro-quo, is a smoking gun.
If Pelosi and Schiff are so sure of what they have, open the investigation process to a vote and let the Rs participate.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:38
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Sure he can. He can remove any and all ambassadors, good ones and bad ones. Should he? Well, he's the president. He's supposed to have sense and wisdom and, where he's lacking those, good advisors.
But he removed an experienced career ambassador because Giuliani didn't like her, because she was obstructing his efforts to ... make Ukraine investigate Biden for political campaign purposes.
Volker's testimony and texts/emails + all of the public and published facts of the spring and summer = BAD.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:37
Subject: Re:Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:holy crap
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/a/4/a4a91fab-99cd-4eb9-9c6c-ec1c586494b9/621801458E982E9903839ABC7404A917.chairmen-letter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf
the text messages are attached.
Forgive me if this has already been posted.
Very interesting, thanks.
My question: did Volker hope to avoid jail by resigning and cooperating with the investigation?
All the participants in these texts are clearly implicated, even Bill Taylor who texted his misgivings and wrote that it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
These texts are the smoking gun.
And what disgusting liars those GOP Congressmen are to come out after the hearing and say that it's a nothingburger.
They are truly destroying our country.
This is a smoking gun against Trump?
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:34
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Wall Street Journal exclusive:
Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-ordered-ukraine-ambassador-removed-after-complaints-from-giuliani-others-11570137147?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/2yoTb1G7Ow
WSJ, huh? Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.
The ambassador is part of Trump’s administration. He can remove her if he chooses.
Notice how there has been no vote, as traditional, which would allow Rs to participate in the investigation. That’s very telling. I was wondering why all the speculative threads were at the top of this sub-forum. Now I know why....
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:13
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
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.
1. What criminal matter has the United States opened into former VP Joe Biden or his son, Hunter? That is what the treaty refers to. Also, if there were such a legal matter, it's not the President's job to get help, nor should he, considering Biden may be his 2020 opponent.
2. We don't need a transcript when we have the texts. And these texts are crystal clear.
3. There's evidence of a cover-up in the texts. Pompeo lied on national TV to cover up. Pence is trying to play dumb to cover up.
4. The White House and State Dept are refusing to turn over documents and make witnesses available for a legitimate Congressional impeachment inquiry. That's obstruction.
Anonymous
10/04/2019 08:09
Subject: Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
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.
Are you for real? I really hope you're trolling. I'm afraid you're not.