Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is the idiot saying the transcript is clean? That's pretty freaking blatant.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/25/us/politics/trump-ukraine-transcript.html?module=inline

Blatant !!! He did what the democrats senators did and nothing more.

And hunter Biden must be brought to justice.

So by your logic, if Biden needs to be brought to justice, then so does Trump.

1. The Democrats did not do this.

2. Trump did, and it's against the law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's gone. The transcript proves that he made U.S. policy toward Ukraine contingent on an investigation of Biden.

So this is Pence's doing? Great, we get Pence for Pres!

I understand the people considering the DC area has a lot of people who do not like Trump. I think people here think he should be impeached and have from day one despite the crimes or lack thereof. But, please make a logical case for why you think 2/3 of the Senate will support this? What you may want and reality are different things. If he is impeached and not removed it provides support that it was an unfounded cheap political attack that he becomes a victim. I think if the evidence of a crime were clearly presented beyond a reasonable doubt, the majority of American would support impeachment and removal along with 2/3 of the Senate.

If he is impeached and the evidence is sound, and the Senate chooses not to remove, then it shows the American people that certain Senators who are up for re-election, do not stand for the rule of law.

One step at a time. Congress doesn't even have the whistleblower complaint yet (or what's left of it, after it gets Sharpied).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is the idiot saying the transcript is clean? That's pretty freaking blatant.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/25/us/politics/trump-ukraine-transcript.html?module=inline

Blatant !!! He did what the democrats senators did and nothing more.

And hunter Biden must be brought to justice.

So by your logic, if Biden needs to be brought to justice, then so does Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:read the WAPO summary of the phone call, not enough there to impeach. - lib

It's a critical piece of information, where the President asks another country's leader to investigate a political opponent. The other part of the puzzle is Trump's order to withhold aid before the call.
Put the two together and you have an impeachable offense.

Nope.

And, what the president did in relation to an investigation is NO DIFFERENT than what several Senators did - in a letter.
Are we going after them too?

The Senators are not running for the Presidency and Biden is not their direct political rival for the Presidency. Your equivalency is false.

Oh, please. Your reasoning is a stretch.
We can also go back to the whole Russia investigation - an effort by the DNC and Hillary Clinton to seek info from a foreign source to impact the election.

As we have said several times..... the Democrats accuse the opposition of everything they are guilty of.

Exactly.

Show us where Trump says "you'll get your money when you investigate Biden's son".

Until then....Womp Womp.

No need to show anything like that. The threat was implicit by withholding aid.

There doesn't need to be a threat. You can't ask a foreign government to help your political campaign by investigating your opponent, and you REALLY can't do that as president. Holy crap.

It's equivalent to inviting foreign intervention in an election.

So no foreign government can investigate your children if you're running for President as a Democrat, got it. But Democrats are free to ask that same foreign government for aid in investigating the U.S. President. Makes sense.

A president can't ask a foreign government to provide aid to his election campaign. This isn't difficult.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transcript is clean! Egg on face of Nancy!

Try winning an election. Warren is a fabulous candidate!

Is this seriously your takeaway?

Ignore, it's a troll. They've been blanketing DCUM Political Forum since last night.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's gone. The transcript proves that he made U.S. policy toward Ukraine contingent on an investigation of Biden.

So this is Pence's doing? Great, we get Pence for Pres!

I understand the people considering the DC area has a lot of people who do not like Trump. I think people here think he should be impeached and have from day one despite the crimes or lack thereof. But, please make a logical case for why you think 2/3 of the Senate will support this? What you may want and reality are different things. If he is impeached and not removed it provides support that it was an unfounded cheap political attack that he becomes a victim. I think if the evidence of a crime were clearly presented beyond a reasonable doubt, the majority of American would support impeachment and removal along with 2/3 of the Senate.

If he is impeached and the evidence is sound, and the Senate chooses not to remove, then it shows the American people that certain Senators who are up for re-election, do not stand for the rule of law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:read the WAPO summary of the phone call, not enough there to impeach. - lib

It's a critical piece of information, where the President asks another country's leader to investigate a political opponent. The other part of the puzzle is Trump's order to withhold aid before the call.
Put the two together and you have an impeachable offense.

Nope.

And, what the president did in relation to an investigation is NO DIFFERENT than what several Senators did - in a letter.
Are we going after them too?

The Senators are not running for the Presidency and Biden is not their direct political rival for the Presidency. Your equivalency is false.

Oh, please. Your reasoning is a stretch.
We can also go back to the whole Russia investigation - an effort by the DNC and Hillary Clinton to seek info from a foreign source to impact the election.

As we have said several times..... the Democrats accuse the opposition of everything they are guilty of.

Exactly.

Show us where Trump says "you'll get your money when you investigate Biden's son".

Until then....Womp Womp.

No need to show anything like that. The threat was implicit by withholding aid.

There doesn't need to be a threat. You can't ask a foreign government to help your political campaign by investigating your opponent, and you REALLY can't do that as president. Holy crap.

It's equivalent to inviting foreign intervention in an election.

So no foreign government can investigate your children if you're running for President as a Democrat, got it. But Democrats are free to ask that same foreign government for aid in investigating the U.S. President. Makes sense.

They didn't, actually.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:read the WAPO summary of the phone call, not enough there to impeach. - lib

It's a critical piece of information, where the President asks another country's leader to investigate a political opponent. The other part of the puzzle is Trump's order to withhold aid before the call.
Put the two together and you have an impeachable offense.

Nope.

And, what the president did in relation to an investigation is NO DIFFERENT than what several Senators did - in a letter.
Are we going after them too?

The Senators are not running for the Presidency and Biden is not their direct political rival for the Presidency. Your equivalency is false.

Oh, please. Your reasoning is a stretch.
We can also go back to the whole Russia investigation - an effort by the DNC and Hillary Clinton to seek info from a foreign source to impact the election.

As we have said several times..... the Democrats accuse the opposition of everything they are guilty of.

Exactly.

Show us where Trump says "you'll get your money when you investigate Biden's son".

Until then....Womp Womp.

No need to show anything like that. The threat was implicit by withholding aid.

There doesn't need to be a threat. You can't ask a foreign government to help your political campaign by investigating your opponent, and you REALLY can't do that as president. Holy crap.

It's equivalent to inviting foreign intervention in an election.

It's not just equivalent. That's literally what it is, and he did it THE DAY AFTER MUELLER TESTIFIED.

I would like you to do us a favor. Yep, no strings attached.

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are claiming this is nothing. If Trump loses next year, they'll definitely say it was because of this, right?

He may not be running. I'm beginning to doubt that the Senate Republicans will go along with such open and casual depravity - they have their constituents to worry about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

The whole call was Trump demanding actions from Ukraine based on his campaign agenda, not the interests of the United States. What a corrupt idiot.

Sure. Just like the Russian investigation showed that Trump colluded with Russians. LOL!

Clearly, you haven't read the Mueller report.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:read the WAPO summary of the phone call, not enough there to impeach. - lib

It's a critical piece of information, where the President asks another country's leader to investigate a political opponent. The other part of the puzzle is Trump's order to withhold aid before the call.
Put the two together and you have an impeachable offense.

Nope.

And, what the president did in relation to an investigation is NO DIFFERENT than what several Senators did - in a letter.
Are we going after them too?

The Senators are not running for the Presidency and Biden is not their direct political rival for the Presidency. Your equivalency is false.

Oh, please. Your reasoning is a stretch.
We can also go back to the whole Russia investigation - an effort by the DNC and Hillary Clinton to seek info from a foreign source to impact the election.

As we have said several times..... the Democrats accuse the opposition of everything they are guilty of.

Exactly.

Show us where Trump says "you'll get your money when you investigate Biden's son".

Until then....Womp Womp.

No need to show anything like that. The threat was implicit by withholding aid.

There doesn't need to be a threat. You can't ask a foreign government to help your political campaign by investigating your opponent, and you REALLY can't do that as president. Holy crap.

It's equivalent to inviting foreign intervention in an election.

So no foreign government can investigate your children if you're running for President as a Democrat, got it. But Democrats are free to ask that same foreign government for aid in investigating the U.S. President. Makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:Transcript is clean! Egg on face of Nancy!

Try winning an election. Warren is a fabulous candidate!

Is this seriously your takeaway?

Zelensky: “I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.”

Trump: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation..I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

Anonymous wrote:How long did this call last? I saw the assertion that it was a half hour and that, per the "transcript" there were about 2,000 words which would amount to 66 words per minute. Very slow given that Zelensky is fluent in English. Or it's leaving out quite a bit. (Or the call was not 1/2 hour.)

Yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup. The edited summary of the transcript is really really bad. I can only imagine what the actual phone call was like, let alone the rest of the evidence making up the whistleblower complaint.