Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what does “personal gain” for Trump means in this story? We know Biden have not done anything wrong. If Ukrainian government going to confirm this, as they should on Trumps request, what is the personal gain for Trump? It seems that it will make Biden’s position much stronger, right? Does Trump wants Biden nomination over Warren? Is this the personal gain? Or I am missing something?

No, we don't.

Sure we do. Whether Trump thinks Biden did something wrong or knows that he didn't (and there's no telling what Trump knows or thinks anymore), he's asking Ukraine to "find" dirt and give it to him. He wants Ukraine to make up some dirt and give it to him. That's his personal gain.

But this is not what he asked. He asked to investigate. The investigation would probably result in finding no illegal activity on the part of Biden. Why all Democrats and liberal media call Biden’s activities a dirt? It’s like finding him guilty before the investigation?

Maybe it is because we all know the investigation into the company happened two years before Hunter joined the board and there was no finding of wrongdoing. Maybe we also understand that the world was happy that the US - Biden was the messenger - led the way on getting a bad special prosecutor out of the way so Ukraine could further reform. GOP senators were universally happy about this at the time. There was never any sens of wrong doing, Hunter's involvement was clear by White House and other ethics attornies, and the whole thing is simply manufactured to muddy the 2020 waters. The tell is that team Trump is using the exact same tactics as they did with Trump-Russia, only this time, the public has already seen it and knows it is a smokescreen.

Investigation into Burisma started two years before Hunter joined the company and was put on hold when Shokin was fired on Biden’s advise. So no, we don’t know if there were any wrong-doing by Hunter, since he never was investigated.We know that the investigation is not dormant like all media trying to pertain now. In fact, the charges were bright against the owner of Burisma, Zlochevsky, who fled to London. In addition, last week Ukrainian government confirmed that there are theee charges pending against the company, one of them is money laundering.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what does “personal gain” for Trump means in this story? We know Biden have not done anything wrong. If Ukrainian government going to confirm this, as they should on Trumps request, what is the personal gain for Trump? It seems that it will make Biden’s position much stronger, right? Does Trump wants Biden nomination over Warren? Is this the personal gain? Or I am missing something?

No, we don't.

Sure we do. Whether Trump thinks Biden did something wrong or knows that he didn't (and there's no telling what Trump knows or thinks anymore), he's asking Ukraine to "find" dirt and give it to him. He wants Ukraine to make up some dirt and give it to him. That's his personal gain.

But this is not what he asked. He asked to investigate. The investigation would probably result in finding no illegal activity on the part of Biden. Why all Democrats and liberal media call Biden’s activities a dirt? It’s like finding him guilty before the investigation?

Maybe it is because we all know the investigation into the company happened two years before Hunter joined the board and there was no finding of wrongdoing. Maybe we also understand that the world was happy that the US - Biden was the messenger - led the way on getting a bad special prosecutor out of the way so Ukraine could further reform. GOP senators were universally happy about this at the time. There was never any sens of wrong doing, Hunter's involvement was clear by White House and other ethics attornies, and the whole thing is simply manufactured to muddy the 2020 waters. The tell is that team Trump is using the exact same tactics as they did with Trump-Russia, only this time, the public has already seen it and knows it is a smokescreen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what does “personal gain” for Trump means in this story? We know Biden have not done anything wrong. If Ukrainian government going to confirm this, as they should on Trumps request, what is the personal gain for Trump? It seems that it will make Biden’s position much stronger, right? Does Trump wants Biden nomination over Warren? Is this the personal gain? Or I am missing something?

No, we don't.

Sure we do. Whether Trump thinks Biden did something wrong or knows that he didn't (and there's no telling what Trump knows or thinks anymore), he's asking Ukraine to "find" dirt and give it to him. He wants Ukraine to make up some dirt and give it to him. That's his personal gain.

But this is not what he asked. He asked to investigate. The investigation would probably result in finding no illegal activity on the part of Biden. Why all Democrats and liberal media call Biden’s activities a dirt? It’s like finding him guilty before the investigation?

Maybe it is because we all know the investigation into the company happened two years before Hunter joined the board and there was no finding of wrongdoing. Maybe we also understand that the world was happy that the US - Biden was the messenger - led the way on getting a bad special prosecutor out of the way so Ukraine could further reform. GOP senators were universally happy about this at the time. There was never any sens of wrong doing, Hunter's involvement was clear by White House and other ethics attornies, and the whole thing is simply manufactured to muddy the 2020 waters. The tell is that team Trump is using the exact same tactics as they did with Trump-Russia, only this time, the public has already seen it and knows it is a smokescreen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The house judiciary committee took a vote on the impeachment inquiry already, so you all can shut up about forcing a vote.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/12/politics/impeachment-investigation-vote-house-judiciary-committee/index.html

That’s a party line vote, idiot, not a whole house vote.

As the PP said, I am sure most of the GOP are just as happy to have not had a full vote. Personally, I wish she had.

Dear LORD!

It would benefit the GOP to have been part of the vote

Hardly, the majority of Americans favor an impeachment inquire. Purple state GOP reps would not want to be on the record as opposing a bona fide investigation. You don't hear GOP Reps complaining about this point. It only seems to be a Trump talking point.

They would, however, get more of a say in the process. If you're telling me this is all political and not criminal, I agree. Schiff held onto the information so that Pelosi could change the whistleblower rules. Gross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The house judiciary committee took a vote on the impeachment inquiry already, so you all can shut up about forcing a vote.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/12/politics/impeachment-investigation-vote-house-judiciary-committee/index.html

That’s a party line vote, idiot, not a whole house vote.

As the PP said, I am sure most of the GOP are just as happy to have not had a full vote. Personally, I wish she had.

Dear LORD!

It would benefit the GOP to have been part of the vote

Hardly, the majority of Americans favor an impeachment inquire. Purple state GOP reps would not want to be on the record as opposing a bona fide investigation. You don't hear GOP Reps complaining about this point. It only seems to be a Trump talking point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The house judiciary committee took a vote on the impeachment inquiry already, so you all can shut up about forcing a vote.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/12/politics/impeachment-investigation-vote-house-judiciary-committee/index.html

That’s a party line vote, idiot, not a whole house vote.

As the PP said, I am sure most of the GOP are just as happy to have not had a full vote. Personally, I wish she had.

Dear LORD!

It would benefit the GOP to have been part of the vote

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Levin tears into the accusations:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-growls-at-fox-host-asking-if-hes-okay-with-trumps-ukraine-conduct-your-question-is-not-honest/

He has been shredded on Twitter by people more informed in both the law and Intel, than he is.

Sorry you believe a commentator like him.

Yeah, I don't think so. Has Pelosi named a statute yet? Curious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what does “personal gain” for Trump means in this story? We know Biden have not done anything wrong. If Ukrainian government going to confirm this, as they should on Trumps request, what is the personal gain for Trump? It seems that it will make Biden’s position much stronger, right? Does Trump wants Biden nomination over Warren? Is this the personal gain? Or I am missing something?

No, we don't.

Sure we do. Whether Trump thinks Biden did something wrong or knows that he didn't (and there's no telling what Trump knows or thinks anymore), he's asking Ukraine to "find" dirt and give it to him. He wants Ukraine to make up some dirt and give it to him. That's his personal gain.

But this is not what he asked. He asked to investigate. The investigation would probably result in finding no illegal activity on the part of Biden. Why all Democrats and liberal media call Biden’s activities a dirt? It’s like finding him guilty before the investigation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Levin tears into the accusations:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-growls-at-fox-host-asking-if-hes-okay-with-trumps-ukraine-conduct-your-question-is-not-honest/

He has been shredded on Twitter by people more informed in both the law and Intel, than he is.

Sorry you believe a commentator like him.

Yeah, I don't think so. Has Pelosi named a statute yet? Curious.

Are you curious to know the articles of impeachment against Nixon? They were for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and defiance of subpoenas.

Does any of that sound familiar?

Proven. If I remember correctly, there as an incident called Watergate in which there was a lot of actual physical evidence.

Here, let me remind you:

The Watergate scandal began early in the morning of June 17, 1972, when several burglars were arrested in the office of the Democratic National Committee, located in the Watergate complex of buildings in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents. Nixon took aggressive steps to cover up the crimes, but when Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein revealed his role in the conspiracy, Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974.

Giuliani has been bragging about his behavior for days and months. That's evidence. Although Trump isn't exactly been taking aggressive steps to cover it up, he's been saying it's perfect behavior.

I think you meant to say Biden. Please link me to all the video and articles (not behind a paywall) that show Giuliani bragging please.

.

"Of course I did!" Did you miss that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Levin tears into the accusations:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-growls-at-fox-host-asking-if-hes-okay-with-trumps-ukraine-conduct-your-question-is-not-honest/

He has been shredded on Twitter by people more informed in both the law and Intel, than he is.

Sorry you believe a commentator like him.

Yeah, I don't think so. Has Pelosi named a statute yet? Curious.

Are you curious to know the articles of impeachment against Nixon? They were for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and defiance of subpoenas.

Does any of that sound familiar?

Proven. If I remember correctly, there as an incident called Watergate in which there was a lot of actual physical evidence.

Here, let me remind you:

The Watergate scandal began early in the morning of June 17, 1972, when several burglars were arrested in the office of the Democratic National Committee, located in the Watergate complex of buildings in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents. Nixon took aggressive steps to cover up the crimes, but when Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein revealed his role in the conspiracy, Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Levin tears into the accusations:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-growls-at-fox-host-asking-if-hes-okay-with-trumps-ukraine-conduct-your-question-is-not-honest/

He has been shredded on Twitter by people more informed in both the law and Intel, than he is.

Sorry you believe a commentator like him.

Yeah, I don't think so. Has Pelosi named a statute yet? Curious.

Are you curious to know the articles of impeachment against Nixon? They were for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and defiance of subpoenas.

Does any of that sound familiar?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Levin tears into the accusations:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-growls-at-fox-host-asking-if-hes-okay-with-trumps-ukraine-conduct-your-question-is-not-honest/

He has been shredded on Twitter by people more informed in both the law and Intel, than he is.

Sorry you believe a commentator like him.

Yeah, I don't think so. Has Pelosi named a statute yet? Curious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what does “personal gain” for Trump means in this story? We know Biden have not done anything wrong. If Ukrainian government going to confirm this, as they should on Trumps request, what is the personal gain for Trump? It seems that it will make Biden’s position much stronger, right? Does Trump wants Biden nomination over Warren? Is this the personal gain? Or I am missing something?

No, we don't.

Sure we do. Whether Trump thinks Biden did something wrong or knows that he didn't (and there's no telling what Trump knows or thinks anymore), he's asking Ukraine to "find" dirt and give it to him. He wants Ukraine to make up some dirt and give it to him. That's his personal gain.

But this is not what he asked. He asked to investigate. The investigation would probably result in finding no illegal activity on the part of Biden. Why all Democrats and liberal media call Biden’s activities a dirt? It’s like finding him guilty before the investigation?

Suure. Did you know that there are no hidden victims underneath Comet Ping Pong? Is your mind blown?