What America thinks of the impeachment

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because what he (WJC) did actually happened. Trump released the transcript. Do you want Trump to replay the call? I am not sure what more you get out of Trump when you have his verbiage in black an white.

Clinton lied about consensual sex.
He deserved impeachment but not removal.
Trump lied about extorting a foreign leader for help in an upcoming US election; he deserves impeachment and conviction and worse.

Trump's Ukraine phone call, annotated

"The President (cont.)

"The former ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me."

As I understand it and I was 18 at the time, he lied and asked others to lie for him. Tough to garner if "consensual" as he was the most powerful man in the world and she was an impressionable intern. But the act happened. The lie happened. No ifs, ands or buts. In this case it is based on opinion. Was there or was there not a QPQ and given 100% partisan decision and two people disagreed (one changed parties) this cannot happen.

Sen. Jim Inhofe: Dems have no case, just want to drag out impeachment ahead of election

 

[Zorro!]

Because what he (WJC) did actually happened. Trump released the transcript. Do you want Trump to replay the call? I am not sure what more you get out of Trump when you have his verbiage in black an white.

Clinton lied about consensual sex.
He deserved impeachment but not removal.
Trump lied about extorting a foreign leader for help in an upcoming US election; he deserves impeachment and conviction and worse.

Trump's Ukraine phone call, annotated

"The President (cont.)

"The former ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me."

As I understand it and I was 18 at the time, he lied and asked others to lie for him. Tough to garner if "consensual" as he was the most powerful man in the world and she was an impressionable intern. But the act happened. The lie happened. No ifs, ands or buts. In this case it is based on opinion. Was there or was there not a QPQ and given 100% partisan decision and two people disagreed (one changed parties) this cannot happen.

Sen. Jim Inhofe: Dems have no case, just want to drag out impeachment ahead of election

Well, and that's a good point. It's an election year, and clearly there is nothing here worth taking the decision out of the hands of the voters, other than the Left hates the fact that WE rather than THEY pick the President. But, Mittens is setting up a vote for witnesses, and Trump is going to invoke privilege if they do, so this could end up unresolved throughout the election season.

 

[georgephillip]

No one has ESP. If he says it, I believe him.

Trump's a proven pathological liar, so why would you believe anything he says?

Commentary: I study liars. I’ve never seen one like Donald Trump.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

No one has ESP. If he says it, I believe him.

Trump's a proven pathological liar, so why would you believe anything he says?

Commentary: I study liars. I’ve never seen one like Donald Trump.

I am talking about Zelensky. He said there was no QPQ.

You're a biased Leftist. Why would I believe you and your biased sources?

 

[georgephillip]

Because what he (WJC) did actually happened. Trump released the transcript. Do you want Trump to replay the call? I am not sure what more you get out of Trump when you have his verbiage in black an white.

Clinton lied about consensual sex.
He deserved impeachment but not removal.
Trump lied about extorting a foreign leader for help in an upcoming US election; he deserves impeachment and conviction and worse.

Trump's Ukraine phone call, annotated

"The President (cont.)

"The former ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me."

As I understand it and I was 18 at the time, he lied and asked others to lie for him. Tough to garner if "consensual" as he was the most powerful man in the world and she was an impressionable intern. But the act happened. The lie happened. No ifs, ands or buts. In this case it is based on opinion. Was there or was there not a QPQ and given 100% partisan decision and two people disagreed (one changed parties) this cannot happen.

Sen. Jim Inhofe: Dems have no case, just want to drag out impeachment ahead of election

Fox News poll finds independents want the Senate to convict and remove Trump by 19-point margin

 

[iceberg]

Let them speak: Most Americans want witnesses in Trump impeachment trial - Reuters/Ipsos poll

"A bipartisan majority of Americans want to see new witnesses testify in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, and the public appears to be largely following the proceedings even after a bruising congressional inquiry that lasted several months, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling released Wednesday...."

"About 72% agreed that the trial 'should allow witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the impeachment charges to testify,' including 84% of Democrats and 69% of Republicans. And 70% of the public, including 80% of Democrats and 73% of Republicans, said senators should 'act as impartial jurors” during the trial.'"

Maybe Trump will testify and clear everything up?

They wanted Witnesses in the house too but did they get them

They wanted Witnesses in the house too but did they get them

How did that work out?

"President Trump appeared to admit Wednesday that he is comfortable with how his impeachment trial is playing out in the Senate—because the White House is withholding evidence about his dealings with Ukraine."

Trump Admits to Withholding Evidence From Impeachment Inquiry

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because what he (WJC) did actually happened. Trump released the transcript. Do you want Trump to replay the call? I am not sure what more you get out of Trump when you have his verbiage in black an white.

Clinton lied about consensual sex.
He deserved impeachment but not removal.
Trump lied about extorting a foreign leader for help in an upcoming US election; he deserves impeachment and conviction and worse.

Trump's Ukraine phone call, annotated

"The President (cont.)

"The former ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me."

As I understand it and I was 18 at the time, he lied and asked others to lie for him. Tough to garner if "consensual" as he was the most powerful man in the world and she was an impressionable intern. But the act happened. The lie happened. No ifs, ands or buts. In this case it is based on opinion. Was there or was there not a QPQ and given 100% partisan decision and two people disagreed (one changed parties) this cannot happen.

Sen. Jim Inhofe: Dems have no case, just want to drag out impeachment ahead of election

Fox News poll finds independents want the Senate to convict and remove Trump by 19-point margin

I have seen this before and I do not believe any polls. Plus why would you do a poll before the defense has a chance to speak? Illogical. I believe the voters should decide and based on all the negatives DJT has (according to you) he will lose badly in 2020. So what are you worried about?

 

[georgephillip]

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

The link you objected to claimed Trump admitted to withholding evidence from congress; are you saying he hasn't done so?

trump admits withhoulding evidence - Google Search

 

[froggy]

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

The link you objected to claimed Trump admitted to withholding evidence from congress; are you saying he hasn't done so?

trump admits withhoulding evidence - Google Search

Sounds just like the Democrats reporting when they left out the word appeared

 

[froggy]

The opinion that there was a quid pro quo. It is impossible to prove intent I think this matter. The House did not go about asking for the witnesses correctly and Trump’s attorneys followed the law.

Trump refused to provide congress with any evidence, documents or witnesses; that has never happened before.

Four Republicans can decide to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial; if they refuse, they will become complicit in the cover up.

Here's the Proof that Trump's "No Quid Pro Quo" Call Never Happened

• "During a July 10, 2019 meeting at the White House, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union told Ukrainians officials that there would be a 'pre-requisite of investigations' before any White House meeting would occur. (Sondland Opening Statement, Nov. 20, 2019, at 10; Hill Depo. at 27; Vindman Depo. at 29)
• "During a July 25, 2019 phone call, President Trump asked President Zelenskyy for the 'favor' of an investigation into Joe Biden and the false, Russian-backed claims that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. (Memcon of Trump-Zelenskyy Call, July 25, 2019)
• "Following a July 26, 2019 meeting between the Ambassador to the EU and Ukrainians officials, President Trump asked the ambassador, 'So [Zelenskyy is] going to do the investigation?', to which the ambassador replied, 'He’s going to do it.' (Holmes Depo. at 24; Sondland Testimony on Nov. 20, 2019)"

We've never had a president like Trump before one who doesn't follow the trends

 

[Zorro!]

The opinion that there was a quid pro quo. It is impossible to prove intent I think this matter. The House did not go about asking for the witnesses correctly and Trump’s attorneys followed the law.

Trump refused to provide congress with any evidence, documents or witnesses; that has never happened before.

Four Republicans can decide to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial; if they refuse, they will become complicit in the cover up.

Here's the Proof that Trump's "No Quid Pro Quo" Call Never Happened

• "During a July 10, 2019 meeting at the White House, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union told Ukrainians officials that there would be a 'pre-requisite of investigations' before any White House meeting would occur. (Sondland Opening Statement, Nov. 20, 2019, at 10; Hill Depo. at 27; Vindman Depo. at 29)
• "During a July 25, 2019 phone call, President Trump asked President Zelenskyy for the 'favor' of an investigation into Joe Biden and the false, Russian-backed claims that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. (Memcon of Trump-Zelenskyy Call, July 25, 2019)
• "Following a July 26, 2019 meeting between the Ambassador to the EU and Ukrainians officials, President Trump asked the ambassador, 'So [Zelenskyy is] going to do the investigation?', to which the ambassador replied, 'He’s going to do it.' (Holmes Depo. at 24; Sondland Testimony on Nov. 20, 2019)"

We've never had a president like Trump before one who doesn't follow the trends

Trump's a keeper!

 

[basquebromance]

unless sober-minded people are prepared to help rebuild faith in Trump and also in Congress, then democracy itself will be put at risk.

there's a lot at stake here, my friends!

 

[froggy]

The opinion that there was a quid pro quo. It is impossible to prove intent I think this matter. The House did not go about asking for the witnesses correctly and Trump’s attorneys followed the law.

Trump refused to provide congress with any evidence, documents or witnesses; that has never happened before.

Four Republicans can decide to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial; if they refuse, they will become complicit in the cover up.

Here's the Proof that Trump's "No Quid Pro Quo" Call Never Happened

• "During a July 10, 2019 meeting at the White House, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union told Ukrainians officials that there would be a 'pre-requisite of investigations' before any White House meeting would occur. (Sondland Opening Statement, Nov. 20, 2019, at 10; Hill Depo. at 27; Vindman Depo. at 29)
• "During a July 25, 2019 phone call, President Trump asked President Zelenskyy for the 'favor' of an investigation into Joe Biden and the false, Russian-backed claims that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. (Memcon of Trump-Zelenskyy Call, July 25, 2019)
• "Following a July 26, 2019 meeting between the Ambassador to the EU and Ukrainians officials, President Trump asked the ambassador, 'So [Zelenskyy is] going to do the investigation?', to which the ambassador replied, 'He’s going to do it.' (Holmes Depo. at 24; Sondland Testimony on Nov. 20, 2019)"

We've never had a president like Trump before one who doesn't follow the trends

Trump's a keeper!

Four more years four more years

 

[MAGAman]

Because Trump refused to allow any witness with first-hand information to testify. Why hasn't Don the Con offered to testify in his own defense, I wonder?

Exactly Zero subpoenas ruled legal were denied by Trump.

Zero... Zip.. Nadda...

Pelosi and Shiffft can subpoena anyone they want right now. Trump can't stop them.

Feel free to ask if you need to know any th thing else.

 

[iceberg]

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

The link you objected to claimed Trump admitted to withholding evidence from congress; are you saying he hasn't done so?

trump admits withhoulding evidence - Google Search

And only off the wall sites are reporting that.

Give it up.

 

[georgephillip]

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

The link you objected to claimed Trump admitted to withholding evidence from congress; are you saying he hasn't done so?

trump admits withhoulding evidence - Google Search

And only off the wall sites are reporting that.

Give it up.

Trump essentially admitted on live TV to doing the thing he's accused of in the impeachment inquiry

 

[MAGAman]

Trump essentially admitted on live TV to doing the thing he's accused of in the impeachment inquiry

You just "essentially admitted" that you know there is no "actual proof" that Trump did anything wrong,

 

[Redfish]

Of course there is zero proof that any hacking was done by the russian government. But there is proof that the DNC and the hillary campaign paid russians to create a dossier of lies and then release it to the biased US media.

Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election

"The report indicates that Russian hacking may have penetrated further into U.S. voting systems than was previously understood. It states unequivocally in its summary statement that it was Russian military intelligence, specifically the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate, or GRU, that conducted the cyber attacks described in the document:

"Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate actors … executed cyber espionage operations against a named U.S. company in August 2016, evidently to obtain information on elections-related software and hardware solutions. …

"The actors likely used data obtained from that operation to … launch a voter registration-themed spear-phishing campaign targeting U.S. local government organizations."

Why would Hillary and the DNC pay Russians to help Trump?

so its top secret but you have access to it???? sure dude, gotcha

now, tell us exactly how many votes and in which states Russians changed.

 

[Redfish]

yet if I use the daily beat or daily caller, people call me on that. they should.

so this tells. me all I need to know about you.

The link you objected to claimed Trump admitted to withholding evidence from congress; are you saying he hasn't done so?

trump admits withhoulding evidence - Google Search

And only off the wall sites are reporting that.

Give it up.

Trump essentially admitted on live TV to doing the thing he's accused of in the impeachment inquiry

you idiot. He was joking, geez, you libs have to be the dumbest creatures on earth.

 

[Redfish]

The opinion that there was a quid pro quo. It is impossible to prove intent I think this matter. The House did not go about asking for the witnesses correctly and Trump’s attorneys followed the law.

Trump refused to provide congress with any evidence, documents or witnesses; that has never happened before.

Four Republicans can decide to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial; if they refuse, they will become complicit in the cover up.

Here's the Proof that Trump's "No Quid Pro Quo" Call Never Happened

• "During a July 10, 2019 meeting at the White House, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union told Ukrainians officials that there would be a 'pre-requisite of investigations' before any White House meeting would occur. (Sondland Opening Statement, Nov. 20, 2019, at 10; Hill Depo. at 27; Vindman Depo. at 29)
• "During a July 25, 2019 phone call, President Trump asked President Zelenskyy for the 'favor' of an investigation into Joe Biden and the false, Russian-backed claims that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. (Memcon of Trump-Zelenskyy Call, July 25, 2019)
• "Following a July 26, 2019 meeting between the Ambassador to the EU and Ukrainians officials, President Trump asked the ambassador, 'So [Zelenskyy is] going to do the investigation?', to which the ambassador replied, 'He’s going to do it.' (Holmes Depo. at 24; Sondland Testimony on Nov. 20, 2019)"

Even While Criticizing Trump, Ukraine President Slaps Down ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Claim

Your link:

"But, as he’s done consistently, Zelensky rejected any talk of the potential corruption investigations being linked to the U.S. military aid.

"'Look, I never talked to the President from the position of a quid pro quo,' said the Ukrainian president. 'That’s not my thing. … I don’t want us to look like beggars. But you have to understand. We’re at war. If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.'"

Would you really expect Zelensky to bite the hand that feeds him as long as a corrupt crony capitalist occupies the Oval Office?

Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Inquiries He Sought, Bolton Book Says

Bolton's lawyer has gone on record that the NY times story is a lie.