Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP Senator admits to knowing of quid pro quo in AUGUST from Gordon Sondland, who told him Ukraine aid was tied to Trump demand for investigation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

It's a shame he didn't have any backbone to, you know, call the President out on it, or otherwise work with the Ukranians.

In an interview, Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) said he learned of a potential quid pro quo from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, who told him that aid to Ukraine was tied to the desire by Mr. Trump and his allies to have Kyiv undertake investigations related to the 2016 U.S. elections.

Mr. Johnson raised the issue with Mr. Trump in a phone call on Aug. 31, shortly before the senator was due to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new investigation by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson, who supports aid to Ukraine and is the chairman of a Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over the region, said Mr. Trump was adamant on the issue. “He said—expletive deleted—‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled. Mr. Johnson told Mr. Trump that he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

Circular firing squad

So this Johnson putz has known about this since August 31 and he’s said nothing? What’s the list of Russipiblican traitors up to on this specific issue? 12?

Sen. Johnson traveled to Ukraine with Sen. Chris Murphy. After the trip Johnson said

Johnson, who was with Murphy and Zelensky, told reporters that he told the Ukrainian president that the "primary rationale" for Trump's decision to withhold aid was lack of investment from other European countries.

"The first question President Zelensky asked was, ‘What's the deal with funding?' and because I had spoken with the president I answered that question, and I gave him as honest an answer as I could," Johnson said.

"The primary rationale [President Trump] gave me was that same idea that Europe was not stepping up to the plate to spend the money they should spend in their own backyard," Johnson explained. "He just thinks we're being played for suckers, and it irritates him."

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/sen-chris-murphy-changes-his-story-on-zelensky-meeting/

So how many different stories is Ron Johnson going to tell?

Yes, someone else beat me to this with a link, but this particular story is a complete fabrication. The EU as a whole as well as separate European countries have contributed hundreds and hundreds of million dollars more to Ukraine than we have.

Trump said the same publicly a few days ago, so why would he not have told Johnson the same thing back then?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP Senator admits to knowing of quid pro quo in AUGUST from Gordon Sondland, who told him Ukraine aid was tied to Trump demand for investigation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

It's a shame he didn't have any backbone to, you know, call the President out on it, or otherwise work with the Ukranians.

In an interview, Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) said he learned of a potential quid pro quo from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, who told him that aid to Ukraine was tied to the desire by Mr. Trump and his allies to have Kyiv undertake investigations related to the 2016 U.S. elections.

Mr. Johnson raised the issue with Mr. Trump in a phone call on Aug. 31, shortly before the senator was due to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new investigation by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson, who supports aid to Ukraine and is the chairman of a Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over the region, said Mr. Trump was adamant on the issue. “He said—expletive deleted—‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled. Mr. Johnson told Mr. Trump that he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

Circular firing squad

So this Johnson putz has known about this since August 31 and he’s said nothing? What’s the list of Russipiblican traitors up to on this specific issue? 12?

Sen. Johnson traveled to Ukraine with Sen. Chris Murphy. After the trip Johnson said

Johnson, who was with Murphy and Zelensky, told reporters that he told the Ukrainian president that the "primary rationale" for Trump's decision to withhold aid was lack of investment from other European countries.

"The first question President Zelensky asked was, ‘What's the deal with funding?' and because I had spoken with the president I answered that question, and I gave him as honest an answer as I could," Johnson said.

"The primary rationale [President Trump] gave me was that same idea that Europe was not stepping up to the plate to spend the money they should spend in their own backyard," Johnson explained. "He just thinks we're being played for suckers, and it irritates him."

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/sen-chris-murphy-changes-his-story-on-zelensky-meeting/

So how many different stories is Ron Johnson going to tell?

Yes, someone else beat me to this with a link, but this particular story is a complete fabrication. The EU as a whole as well as separate European countries have contributed hundreds and hundreds of million dollars more to Ukraine than we have.

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Taylor has his own agenda of some sort. Whenever someone says in a text or email "Don't you remember that conversation we had when you said such and such...." is an attempt by Taylor to create a phoney paper trail of a conversation that never occurred. Lawyers pull this stuff, or try to, all the time. They'll send correspondence "documenting" a conversation that never occurred. Then, if the correspondence is overlooked, or the recipient doesn't respond to set the record straight, the false documentation of a conversation which never occurred becomes the "default record." That's why Sondland jumped all over Taylor, immediately, completely refuting his phoney recollection of a conversation that never occurred.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP Senator admits to knowing of quid pro quo in AUGUST from Gordon Sondland, who told him Ukraine aid was tied to Trump demand for investigation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

It's a shame he didn't have any backbone to, you know, call the President out on it, or otherwise work with the Ukranians.

In an interview, Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) said he learned of a potential quid pro quo from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, who told him that aid to Ukraine was tied to the desire by Mr. Trump and his allies to have Kyiv undertake investigations related to the 2016 U.S. elections.

Mr. Johnson raised the issue with Mr. Trump in a phone call on Aug. 31, shortly before the senator was due to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new investigation by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson, who supports aid to Ukraine and is the chairman of a Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over the region, said Mr. Trump was adamant on the issue. “He said—expletive deleted—‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled. Mr. Johnson told Mr. Trump that he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

Circular firing squad

So this Johnson putz has known about this since August 31 and he’s said nothing? What’s the list of Russipiblican traitors up to on this specific issue? 12?

Sen. Johnson traveled to Ukraine with Sen. Chris Murphy. After the trip Johnson said

Johnson, who was with Murphy and Zelensky, told reporters that he told the Ukrainian president that the "primary rationale" for Trump's decision to withhold aid was lack of investment from other European countries.

"The first question President Zelensky asked was, ‘What's the deal with funding?' and because I had spoken with the president I answered that question, and I gave him as honest an answer as I could," Johnson said.

"The primary rationale [President Trump] gave me was that same idea that Europe was not stepping up to the plate to spend the money they should spend in their own backyard," Johnson explained. "He just thinks we're being played for suckers, and it irritates him."

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/sen-chris-murphy-changes-his-story-on-zelensky-meeting/

So how many different stories is Ron Johnson going to tell?

Yes, someone else beat me to this with a link, but this particular story is a complete fabrication. The EU as a whole as well as separate European countries have contributed hundreds and hundreds of million dollars more to Ukraine than we have.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of speculation here. Not a lot of facts. I wish people would stop speculating what Taylor meant and what Volker meant. Ridiculous

No need to speculate, Trump today publically asked Ukraine and China to investigate Biden. Do you think it's okay for a President to use the power of his office to get dirt on political opponents? If this is okay with you, what will you say when a Democrat is President and does that?

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Taylor has his own agenda of some sort. Whenever someone says in a text or email "Don't you remember that conversation we had when you said such and such...." is an attempt by Taylor to create a phoney paper trail of a conversation that never occurred. Lawyers pull this stuff, or try to, all the time. They'll send correspondence "documenting" a conversation that never occurred. Then, if the correspondence is overlooked, or the recipient doesn't respond to set the record straight, the false documentation of a conversation which never occurred becomes the "default record." That's why Sondland jumped all over Taylor, immediately, completely refuting his phoney recollection of a conversation that never occurred.

Anonymous wrote:Lots of speculation here. Not a lot of facts. I wish people would stop speculating what Taylor meant and what Volker meant. Ridiculous

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Taylor has his own agenda of some sort. Whenever someone says in a text or email "Don't you remember that conversation we had when you said such and such...." is an attempt by Taylor to create a phoney paper trail of a conversation that never occurred. Lawyers pull this stuff, or try to, all the time. They'll send correspondence "documenting" a conversation that never occurred. Then, if the correspondence is overlooked, or the recipient doesn't respond to set the record straight, the false documentation of a conversation which never occurred becomes the "default record." That's why Sondland jumped all over Taylor, immediately, completely refuting his phoney recollection of a conversation that never occurred.

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Taylor has his own agenda of some sort. Whenever someone says in a text or email "Don't you remember that conversation we had when you said such and such...." is an attempt by Taylor to create a phoney paper trail of a conversation that never occurred. Lawyers pull this stuff, or try to, all the time. They'll send correspondence "documenting" a conversation that never occurred. Then, if the correspondence is overlooked, or the recipient doesn't respond to set the record straight, the false documentation of a conversation which never occurred becomes the "default record." That's why Sondland jumped all over Taylor, immediately, completely refuting his phoney recollection of a conversation that never occurred.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP Senator admits to knowing of quid pro quo in AUGUST from Gordon Sondland, who told him Ukraine aid was tied to Trump demand for investigation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

It's a shame he didn't have any backbone to, you know, call the President out on it, or otherwise work with the Ukranians.

In an interview, Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) said he learned of a potential quid pro quo from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, who told him that aid to Ukraine was tied to the desire by Mr. Trump and his allies to have Kyiv undertake investigations related to the 2016 U.S. elections.

Mr. Johnson raised the issue with Mr. Trump in a phone call on Aug. 31, shortly before the senator was due to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new investigation by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson, who supports aid to Ukraine and is the chairman of a Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over the region, said Mr. Trump was adamant on the issue. “He said—expletive deleted—‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled. Mr. Johnson told Mr. Trump that he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

Circular firing squad

So this Johnson putz has known about this since August 31 and he’s said nothing? What’s the list of Russipiblican traitors up to on this specific issue? 12?

Sen. Johnson traveled to Ukraine with Sen. Chris Murphy. After the trip Johnson said

Johnson, who was with Murphy and Zelensky, told reporters that he told the Ukrainian president that the "primary rationale" for Trump's decision to withhold aid was lack of investment from other European countries.

"The first question President Zelensky asked was, ‘What's the deal with funding?' and because I had spoken with the president I answered that question, and I gave him as honest an answer as I could," Johnson said.

"The primary rationale [President Trump] gave me was that same idea that Europe was not stepping up to the plate to spend the money they should spend in their own backyard," Johnson explained. "He just thinks we're being played for suckers, and it irritates him."

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/sen-chris-murphy-changes-his-story-on-zelensky-meeting/

So how many different stories is Ron Johnson going to tell?

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Taylor has his own agenda of some sort. Whenever someone says in a text or email "Don't you remember that conversation we had when you said such and such...." is an attempt by Taylor to create a phoney paper trail of a conversation that never occurred. Lawyers pull this stuff, or try to, all the time. They'll send correspondence "documenting" a conversation that never occurred. Then, if the correspondence is overlooked, or the recipient doesn't respond to set the record straight, the false documentation of a conversation which never occurred becomes the "default record." That's why Sondland jumped all over Taylor, immediately, completely refuting his phoney recollection of a conversation that never occurred.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP Senator admits to knowing of quid pro quo in AUGUST from Gordon Sondland, who told him Ukraine aid was tied to Trump demand for investigation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

It's a shame he didn't have any backbone to, you know, call the President out on it, or otherwise work with the Ukranians.

In an interview, Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) said he learned of a potential quid pro quo from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, who told him that aid to Ukraine was tied to the desire by Mr. Trump and his allies to have Kyiv undertake investigations related to the 2016 U.S. elections.

Mr. Johnson raised the issue with Mr. Trump in a phone call on Aug. 31, shortly before the senator was due to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new investigation by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

Mr. Johnson, who supports aid to Ukraine and is the chairman of a Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over the region, said Mr. Trump was adamant on the issue. “He said—expletive deleted—‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled. Mr. Johnson told Mr. Trump that he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

Circular firing squad

Of course, donor-diplomat Sondland patronizingly told career-diplomat Taylor in a series of text exchanges that Taylor was incorrect in seeing a link between aid and investigation. Sondland said that he believed Trump was delaying the aid until he was comfortable that the new government would make anti-corruption strides.