Why didn't House Democrats follow normal protocol to call impeachment witnesses?

[Mac-7]

What you call "coercion" Boo is what EVERY President does when handing out foreign aid!

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

https://nypost.com/2019/11/15/obama-administration-knew-hunter-biden-was-shady-witness-admits/

In Congressional testimony Friday, former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch confirmed for Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), that in 2016 the Obama State Department privately ran her through a series of practice questions and answers to prepare Yovanovitch for her Senate confirmation hearing.

Stefanik confirmed that one specific question Yovanovitch was asked to prepare for was, “What can you tell us about Hunter Biden’s being named to the board of Burisma?” Incredibly, Yovanovitch later testified that the State Department told her to deflect any questions she might get about Hunter Biden and Burisma by referring Senators’ questions to the vice president’s office.

This admission regarding her senate confirmation prep session was startling, and it flatly contradicted a prior statement Yovanovitch had made in the hearing: “Although I have met former vice president several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.”

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Did you want to then claim that Trump is the first President to hold up aid to someone because they wanted something from them?

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

 

[Oldstyle]

What you call "coercion" Boo is what EVERY President does when handing out foreign aid!

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

It's "made up" that Hunter Biden was being paid large sums of money for a job he had zero qualifications for other than being the son of the man who was in charge of the Ukraine for the US Government? With all due respect, Hutch...you don't have to make that look "nefarious" because it's rather obvious what Burisma was up to.

 

[jc456]

They issued a subpoena to Mulvaney, who refused to comply. Clearly, Executive Privilege could be used as the reason. But Trump's attorneys argue that the subpoena was invalid because the underlying reason for issuing it was the "impeachment inquiry", but the problem with that is Nazi Pelousy never held the required vote to implement an impeachment inquiry.

The reason for refusing to comply doesn't matter. Normal protocol when a subpoena is denied is to take it to the courts to get a ruling.

Why didn't Nazi and her House Clowns follow normal protocol? The withdrew the Muclvaney subpeona and did not go to court. Instead, they rushed a vote and are now over at the Senate begging jurors to conduct an investigation that was their responsibility.

Board Dimwingers refuse to acknowledge the responsibility for not having the witnesses they now claim is crucial to their "overwhelming" case is on the House Clowns. Not Trump. Not the Senate.

Once again, don't argue whether or not the reason for challenging the subpoena is valid. That will get nothing done here. That's is now a question for the courts. Dimwingers refused to go to the courts.

So stop trying to blame Trump and the Senate for the failures of your House Clowns to do their job.

The impeachment inquiry was an investigation to see if there was evidence to move to formal impeachment.

Why would they open formal impeachment proceedings before knowing the circumstances of the president's actions and whether impeachment was even warranted?

Oversight and supoena authority still exist in the absence of formal impeachment proceedings.

well wait, didn't the prosecutors bring sworn testimony from 13 witnesses to the floor? The Trump side had no witnesses. didn't need them. what's so unusual about that at a trial? you're truly messed in the head confused dude.

 

[Oldstyle]

Did you want to then claim that Trump is the first President to hold up aid to someone because they wanted something from them?

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

Bullshit! The Obama Administration made sure that the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for...the Steele dossiers...were made public BEFORE the election! Claiming it came after the election is an outright lie!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Democrats have to prove that Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption was solely for Trump's own benefit.

In the call the only things he mention to Zelensky by name was the Biden and the DNC Server/Crowdstrike nonsense. Maybe he was speaking some kind of code or something, like Don Corleone, but he never said to investigate corruption generally, but specifically mentioned those two. Furthermore, the specifics of the statements required by Trump had to include references to the Bidens.

So if uncovering corruption that so happened to involve Biden or his son in this case somehow helped Trump, that would still be incidental.

Coincidentally, one of the two items specifically brought up by Trump on the perfect call?

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now? And the real benefit of uncovering corruption by Biden IF there was any,... would be to the people who voted for Biden.
Why do you only believe uncovering corruption only benefits Trump?... and here lies the problem for Democrats. They are simply making up motive by Trump as they go along.If you ask me, Trump had no incentive to "DIG UP DIRT" on Biden. Trump has him beat hands down in an election without any help. Democrats also know their platform is so weak that impeachment is the only way they can beat him. Information on Biden is not needed. If we are going to assume motive (WHICH IS WHAT THE DEMS ARE DOING), then i am going to assume Trump's motive in his perhaps clumsy way was only to bring transparency now that there was a new President in Ukraine.

The fact that Democrats wanted to Impeach Trump... people like Nadler... from the very beginning of his Administration reeks of partisanship and corruption to me, and it's just not something I can forget or get away from.

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now?

Derp....
LOL...
All you dopes believe it based soley on Trump's suggestion. You are all pushing that narrative and have even let Trump off the hook over it.
Biden continues to be smeared by it.

How does that not benefit Trump?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What you call "coercion" Boo is what EVERY President does when handing out foreign aid!

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

https://nypost.com/2019/11/15/obama-administration-knew-hunter-biden-was-shady-witness-admits/

In Congressional testimony Friday, former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch confirmed for Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), that in 2016 the Obama State Department privately ran her through a series of practice questions and answers to prepare Yovanovitch for her Senate confirmation hearing.

Stefanik confirmed that one specific question Yovanovitch was asked to prepare for was, “What can you tell us about Hunter Biden’s being named to the board of Burisma?” Incredibly, Yovanovitch later testified that the State Department told her to deflect any questions she might get about Hunter Biden and Burisma by referring Senators’ questions to the vice president’s office.

This admission regarding her senate confirmation prep session was startling, and it flatly contradicted a prior statement Yovanovitch had made in the hearing: “Although I have met former vice president several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.”

Your point?

Where's the investigations?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What you call "coercion" Boo is what EVERY President does when handing out foreign aid!

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

It's "made up" that Hunter Biden was being paid large sums of money for a job he had zero qualifications for other than being the son of the man who was in charge of the Ukraine for the US Government? With all due respect, Hutch...you don't have to make that look "nefarious" because it's rather obvious what Burisma was up to.

You're making accusations based on supposition.
You still have yet to show corruption.

 

[Oldstyle]

Democrats have to prove that Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption was solely for Trump's own benefit.

In the call the only things he mention to Zelensky by name was the Biden and the DNC Server/Crowdstrike nonsense. Maybe he was speaking some kind of code or something, like Don Corleone, but he never said to investigate corruption generally, but specifically mentioned those two. Furthermore, the specifics of the statements required by Trump had to include references to the Bidens.

So if uncovering corruption that so happened to involve Biden or his son in this case somehow helped Trump, that would still be incidental.

Coincidentally, one of the two items specifically brought up by Trump on the perfect call?

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now? And the real benefit of uncovering corruption by Biden IF there was any,... would be to the people who voted for Biden.
Why do you only believe uncovering corruption only benefits Trump?... and here lies the problem for Democrats. They are simply making up motive by Trump as they go along.If you ask me, Trump had no incentive to "DIG UP DIRT" on Biden. Trump has him beat hands down in an election without any help. Democrats also know their platform is so weak that impeachment is the only way they can beat him. Information on Biden is not needed. If we are going to assume motive (WHICH IS WHAT THE DEMS ARE DOING), then i am going to assume Trump's motive in his perhaps clumsy way was only to bring transparency now that there was a new President in Ukraine.

The fact that Democrats wanted to Impeach Trump... people like Nadler... from the very beginning of his Administration reeks of partisanship and corruption to me, and it's just not something I can forget or get away from.

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now?

Derp....
LOL...
All you dopes believe it based soley on Trump's suggestion. You are all pushing that narrative and have even let Trump off the hook over it.
Biden continues to be smeared by it.

How does that not benefit Trump?

In what way is Biden being "smeared"? Did his son NOT take large sums of money from a Ukrainian company with a history of corruption for a job that he was in no way qualified for? Let's be honest here, Hutch...Joe Biden isn't some political neophyte who wouldn't understand how the game was played! He's been a politician his entire adult life! He can CLAIM that there was no quid pro quo in play but anyone with even a dollop of common sense knows that's a crock! Bottom line? Joe Biden should have told his son not to take the money because it's an obvious pay off. He didn't...which means Joe Biden OWNS that!

 

[The Original Tree]

Did you want to then claim that Trump is the first President to hold up aid to someone because they wanted something from them?

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

Everything I don't agree with is either Russian Collusion or Nonsense.

Democrats: "Constitution and Other Nonsense"

Mike Bloomberg with save them!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They issued a subpoena to Mulvaney, who refused to comply. Clearly, Executive Privilege could be used as the reason. But Trump's attorneys argue that the subpoena was invalid because the underlying reason for issuing it was the "impeachment inquiry", but the problem with that is Nazi Pelousy never held the required vote to implement an impeachment inquiry.

The reason for refusing to comply doesn't matter. Normal protocol when a subpoena is denied is to take it to the courts to get a ruling.

Why didn't Nazi and her House Clowns follow normal protocol? The withdrew the Muclvaney subpeona and did not go to court. Instead, they rushed a vote and are now over at the Senate begging jurors to conduct an investigation that was their responsibility.

Board Dimwingers refuse to acknowledge the responsibility for not having the witnesses they now claim is crucial to their "overwhelming" case is on the House Clowns. Not Trump. Not the Senate.

Once again, don't argue whether or not the reason for challenging the subpoena is valid. That will get nothing done here. That's is now a question for the courts. Dimwingers refused to go to the courts.

So stop trying to blame Trump and the Senate for the failures of your House Clowns to do their job.

The impeachment inquiry was an investigation to see if there was evidence to move to formal impeachment.

Why would they open formal impeachment proceedings before knowing the circumstances of the president's actions and whether impeachment was even warranted?

Oversight and supoena authority still exist in the absence of formal impeachment proceedings.

well wait, didn't the prosecutors bring sworn testimony from 13 witnesses to the floor? The Trump side had no witnesses. didn't need them. what's so unusual about that at a trial? you're truly messed in the head confused dude.

Wha?

 

[Oldstyle]

What you call "coercion" Boo is what EVERY President does when handing out foreign aid!

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

It's "made up" that Hunter Biden was being paid large sums of money for a job he had zero qualifications for other than being the son of the man who was in charge of the Ukraine for the US Government? With all due respect, Hutch...you don't have to make that look "nefarious" because it's rather obvious what Burisma was up to.

You're making accusations based on suppisition.
You still have yet to show corruption.

The corruption is obvious. Just because it isn't illegal doesn't make it any less corrupt.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Did you want to then claim that Trump is the first President to hold up aid to someone because they wanted something from them?

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

Bullshit! The Obama Administration made sure that the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for...the Steele dossiers...were made public BEFORE the election! Claiming it came after the election is an outright lie!

Comey confirmed Trump was under investigation for the first time in Mar 2017.
The administration made no such announcements.

You're confusing reporting with announcements.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Democrats have to prove that Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption was solely for Trump's own benefit.

In the call the only things he mention to Zelensky by name was the Biden and the DNC Server/Crowdstrike nonsense. Maybe he was speaking some kind of code or something, like Don Corleone, but he never said to investigate corruption generally, but specifically mentioned those two. Furthermore, the specifics of the statements required by Trump had to include references to the Bidens.

So if uncovering corruption that so happened to involve Biden or his son in this case somehow helped Trump, that would still be incidental.

Coincidentally, one of the two items specifically brought up by Trump on the perfect call?

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now? And the real benefit of uncovering corruption by Biden IF there was any,... would be to the people who voted for Biden.
Why do you only believe uncovering corruption only benefits Trump?... and here lies the problem for Democrats. They are simply making up motive by Trump as they go along.If you ask me, Trump had no incentive to "DIG UP DIRT" on Biden. Trump has him beat hands down in an election without any help. Democrats also know their platform is so weak that impeachment is the only way they can beat him. Information on Biden is not needed. If we are going to assume motive (WHICH IS WHAT THE DEMS ARE DOING), then i am going to assume Trump's motive in his perhaps clumsy way was only to bring transparency now that there was a new President in Ukraine.

The fact that Democrats wanted to Impeach Trump... people like Nadler... from the very beginning of his Administration reeks of partisanship and corruption to me, and it's just not something I can forget or get away from.

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now?

Derp....
LOL...
All you dopes believe it based soley on Trump's suggestion. You are all pushing that narrative and have even let Trump off the hook over it.
Biden continues to be smeared by it.

How does that not benefit Trump?

In what way is Biden being "smeared"? Did his son NOT take large sums of money from a Ukrainian company with a history of corruption for a job that he was in no way qualified for? Let's be honest here, Hutch...Joe Biden isn't some political neophyte who wouldn't understand how the game was played! He's been a politician his entire adult life! He can CLAIM that there was no quid pro quo in play but anyone with even a dollop of common sense knows that's a crock! Bottom line? Joe Biden should have told his son not to take the money because it's an obvious pay off. He didn't...which means Joe Biden OWNS that!

In what way is Biden being "smeared"?

Seriously?
Unfounded allegations of corruption aren't smears?

This isn't a smear?

As Joe Biden competes for a win in Iowa, one GOP senator is already talking about impeaching him

 

[Oldstyle]

Did you want to then claim that Trump is the first President to hold up aid to someone because they wanted something from them?

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

Bullshit! The Obama Administration made sure that the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for...the Steele dossiers...were made public BEFORE the election! Claiming it came after the election is an outright lie!

Comey confirmed Trump was under investigation for the first time in Mar 2017.
The administration made no such announcements.

You're confusing reporting with announcements.

Did you want to claim that the Obama Administration wasn't working behind the scenes to help put out the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid to have created? You seem to think that because they didn't make an official announcement that they weren't doing all they could to smear Trump.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yes they do. However, this is the first time a President tried to coerced a foreign nation into announcing investigations into his domestic political rivals with our foreign aid.

It's corruption. Trumpublicans apparently accept that type of corruption.

That's okay Democrats accept the corruption of lying about getting a blow job so........it's all equal, right?

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

It's "made up" that Hunter Biden was being paid large sums of money for a job he had zero qualifications for other than being the son of the man who was in charge of the Ukraine for the US Government? With all due respect, Hutch...you don't have to make that look "nefarious" because it's rather obvious what Burisma was up to.

You're making accusations based on suppisition.
You still have yet to show corruption.

The corruption is obvious. Just because it isn't illegal doesn't make it any less corrupt.

Your allegations are obvious. There actually is no evidence of corruption.

 

[Oldstyle]

Democrats have to prove that Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption was solely for Trump's own benefit.

In the call the only things he mention to Zelensky by name was the Biden and the DNC Server/Crowdstrike nonsense. Maybe he was speaking some kind of code or something, like Don Corleone, but he never said to investigate corruption generally, but specifically mentioned those two. Furthermore, the specifics of the statements required by Trump had to include references to the Bidens.

So if uncovering corruption that so happened to involve Biden or his son in this case somehow helped Trump, that would still be incidental.

Coincidentally, one of the two items specifically brought up by Trump on the perfect call?

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now? And the real benefit of uncovering corruption by Biden IF there was any,... would be to the people who voted for Biden.
Why do you only believe uncovering corruption only benefits Trump?... and here lies the problem for Democrats. They are simply making up motive by Trump as they go along.If you ask me, Trump had no incentive to "DIG UP DIRT" on Biden. Trump has him beat hands down in an election without any help. Democrats also know their platform is so weak that impeachment is the only way they can beat him. Information on Biden is not needed. If we are going to assume motive (WHICH IS WHAT THE DEMS ARE DOING), then i am going to assume Trump's motive in his perhaps clumsy way was only to bring transparency now that there was a new President in Ukraine.

The fact that Democrats wanted to Impeach Trump... people like Nadler... from the very beginning of his Administration reeks of partisanship and corruption to me, and it's just not something I can forget or get away from.

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now?

Derp....
LOL...
All you dopes believe it based soley on Trump's suggestion. You are all pushing that narrative and have even let Trump off the hook over it.
Biden continues to be smeared by it.

How does that not benefit Trump?

In what way is Biden being "smeared"? Did his son NOT take large sums of money from a Ukrainian company with a history of corruption for a job that he was in no way qualified for? Let's be honest here, Hutch...Joe Biden isn't some political neophyte who wouldn't understand how the game was played! He's been a politician his entire adult life! He can CLAIM that there was no quid pro quo in play but anyone with even a dollop of common sense knows that's a crock! Bottom line? Joe Biden should have told his son not to take the money because it's an obvious pay off. He didn't...which means Joe Biden OWNS that!

In what way is Biden being "smeared"?

Seriously?
Unfounded allegations of corruption aren't smears?

This isn't a smear?

As Joe Biden competes for a win in Iowa, one GOP senator is already talking about impeaching him

Unfounded? What's unfounded about what the Biden's were doing in the Ukraine? Did they NOT cash in on Joe Biden's position?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Something? What something? Like demanding an announcement of corruption investigations into political rivals. Yeah, I think Trumpybear is the first one to try that shit.

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

The Obama Administration skipped right past the announcement of an investigation...they went right to announcing that there was proof Trump was owned by the Russians! So which is worse...asking for an investigation...or using what you KNOW is a paid for political dirty trick...to smear your political opponent?

Nonsense.
The first public announcement confirming that Trump was under investigation came months after his inauguration.

Bullshit! The Obama Administration made sure that the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for...the Steele dossiers...were made public BEFORE the election! Claiming it came after the election is an outright lie!

Comey confirmed Trump was under investigation for the first time in Mar 2017.
The administration made no such announcements.

You're confusing reporting with announcements.

Did you want to claim that the Obama Administration wasn't working behind the scenes to help put out the narrative that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid to have created? You seem to think that because they didn't make an official announcement that they weren't doing all they could to smear Trump.

Pure speculation.
You have no evidence that any of that is true, dope.

 

[Oldstyle]

I would view it as "corruption" if Trump had asked the Ukrainian President to make up something bad about Joe Biden that he could then use against him in a political race...you know...like the Democrats actually DID to Trump with the Steele dossiers? Trump didn't do that though...did he? He simply asked the Ukrainian President to investigate what the Biden's had been doing. He also asked the Ukrainian President to look into collusion between the Democrats and Ukrainians in that last Presidential election. Once again...he didn't ask them to make up something...Trump simply asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate. That's where the left's narrative of "corruption" simply falls on it's face! Since when is it corrupt to ask for an investigation into apparent corruption?

Allegations surrounding the Bidens are already "made up". Made up by Trump himself. He was simply trying to make it look more true, official and nefarious by having a foreign govt back his narrative.

Where are the investigations?

It's "made up" that Hunter Biden was being paid large sums of money for a job he had zero qualifications for other than being the son of the man who was in charge of the Ukraine for the US Government? With all due respect, Hutch...you don't have to make that look "nefarious" because it's rather obvious what Burisma was up to.

You're making accusations based on suppisition.
You still have yet to show corruption.

The corruption is obvious. Just because it isn't illegal doesn't make it any less corrupt.

Your allegations are obvious. There actually is no evidence of corruption.

If it wasn't corrupt...then why did Hunter Biden give up the position once what was happening was exposed? What you claim now is laughable, Hutch! It's obvious that there was a pay off made by Burisma to buy favor with the Vice President of the United States.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

In the call the only things he mention to Zelensky by name was the Biden and the DNC Server/Crowdstrike nonsense. Maybe he was speaking some kind of code or something, like Don Corleone, but he never said to investigate corruption generally, but specifically mentioned those two. Furthermore, the specifics of the statements required by Trump had to include references to the Bidens.

Coincidentally, one of the two items specifically brought up by Trump on the perfect call?

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now? And the real benefit of uncovering corruption by Biden IF there was any,... would be to the people who voted for Biden.
Why do you only believe uncovering corruption only benefits Trump?... and here lies the problem for Democrats. They are simply making up motive by Trump as they go along.If you ask me, Trump had no incentive to "DIG UP DIRT" on Biden. Trump has him beat hands down in an election without any help. Democrats also know their platform is so weak that impeachment is the only way they can beat him. Information on Biden is not needed. If we are going to assume motive (WHICH IS WHAT THE DEMS ARE DOING), then i am going to assume Trump's motive in his perhaps clumsy way was only to bring transparency now that there was a new President in Ukraine.

The fact that Democrats wanted to Impeach Trump... people like Nadler... from the very beginning of his Administration reeks of partisanship and corruption to me, and it's just not something I can forget or get away from.

Seems to me, if Biden did nothing wrong there would be no benefit to Trump would there now?

Derp....
LOL...
All you dopes believe it based soley on Trump's suggestion. You are all pushing that narrative and have even let Trump off the hook over it.
Biden continues to be smeared by it.

How does that not benefit Trump?

In what way is Biden being "smeared"? Did his son NOT take large sums of money from a Ukrainian company with a history of corruption for a job that he was in no way qualified for? Let's be honest here, Hutch...Joe Biden isn't some political neophyte who wouldn't understand how the game was played! He's been a politician his entire adult life! He can CLAIM that there was no quid pro quo in play but anyone with even a dollop of common sense knows that's a crock! Bottom line? Joe Biden should have told his son not to take the money because it's an obvious pay off. He didn't...which means Joe Biden OWNS that!

In what way is Biden being "smeared"?

Seriously?
Unfounded allegations of corruption aren't smears?

This isn't a smear?

As Joe Biden competes for a win in Iowa, one GOP senator is already talking about impeaching him

Unfounded? What's unfounded about what the Biden's were doing in the Ukraine? Did they NOT cash in on Joe Biden's position?

Yes unfounded. As in no evidence of corruption.
Present your evidence counselor.
Hunter Biden held a paid board position. That is not evidence of anything nefarious.